Page 8

Just before the reversal of movement direction.

This chart is erected for a fraction of a second before the MC/IC-axis and the Asc/Desc-axis coincide, i.e. just before the ascendant becomes stationary and reverse its direction of movement.

The rotation of the earth carries the horizonal plane counter-clockwise, and the intersection between the horizon and ecliptic is moved forward a little bit. At the same time the part of the horizonal plane being below the ecliptic is dipping upwards so much that the point of intersection is moved backwards. At the sidereal time 15:48:18 these movements cancel each other, and the effect of this is that the ascendant is standing still.

The chart looks somewhat strange because the meridan and horizon axis are coinciding.

There is no distance between Asc and MC. So, it seems that for all practical purposes houses 10, 11, and 12 might be regarded as non-existent because their cusps occupy the same point of the zodiac and thus the cover 0°00'00" of the zodiac. The same applies for houses 4, 5, and 6.

Well, this perhaps is a somewhat too cathegorical statement. The chart is a two-dimensionsal simplification of a three-dimensional moving system. Depending on the house system it is perhaps possible for those houses to exist even though it is not possible to show them in a two-dimensional chart. Some systems are defined by geometrical divisions of space, some by divisions of semi-arcs, and some by division of time. I am not sure about this so I play it safe and leave the question open for others to clarify.

Just after the reversal of movement

This chart chart is erected for a fraction of a second after the MC/IC-axis and the Asc/Desc-axis have coincided. 

The part of the horizonal plane being below the ecliptic now is dipping upwards so much that the point of intersection is moving backwards more than the plane is carried forwards by the axial rotation. The net effect of this is that the intersection between the ecliptic and the horizon is moving backwards through the zodiac. The signs now begin to ascend and descend in reversed order.

The point ascending at 15:48:18 was 29°17' Scorpio. It will now begin to slip down under the horizon again. It is no longer ascending and has become the descendant.

On the opposite side 29°17' Taurus was previously descending. That point now starts to ascend and thus becoms the ascendant.

The ascendant no longer is in the south. It is suddenly in the north.

The ascendant has turned retrograde (this will be easier to see in the next chart). The next degree to rise above the horizon is 28° Taurus (not 0° Gemini). The next degree to descend below the horizon will be 28° Scorpio. In the chart the ascendant has "jumped" from 29°17' Scorpio to 29°17' Taurus. 

When deciding where to put MC we run into a dilemma. The point of the zodiac having reached its highest point on the sky is 29°17' Scorpio. This point is to the south. However it is just below the horizon. The opposite point (29°17' Taurus) has reached its lowest point on the sky, but it is above the horizon.  (This will be easier to see on the following pages.) Which one of them is to be considered as MC and IC respectively? Both points are intersections between the meridian circle and the ecliptic.

If we define MC as the culmination of an ecliptic point - thereby disregarding whether it is above or below the horizon - then MC always will be the intersection to the south, in this case  29°17' Scorpio even though it is below the horizon. The chart will look like this:

If we on the other hand define MC as the intersection point above the horizon - disregarding whether that point is culminating or reaching its lowest point - then MC will be to the north when the ascendant is retrograde, in this case  29°17' Taurus despite this point is at its lowest point. In the chart its position has to be flipped from 29°17' Scorpio to 29°17' Taurus, and the order of the houses has to be reversed. The chart will look like this:

I am using this definition on these pages.

< Previous page   Next page >