Case Studies

[plumedsnake]

Hi, I thought, if anyone's interested, that we could do weekly case studies on famous or historical personalities and studying their birth charts. Basically we all discuss how different aspects of their charts influence their biographies.

For example we could start off with Sir Isaac Newton born on 25 december in 1642 of the Gregorian calendar:

http://www.astro.com/cgi/chart.cgi?rs=3;btyp=w2gw;cid=hw1filei2C9jV-u1157545605&nhor=1

What I could say straight off is that the Capricorn influence leads him to seek to understand the laws and the structures underlining reality.
Further more, Saturn is in pisces which gives it a bit of a dreamy mystical bent. He was also an astrologer and an alchemist (same difference, I know). In fact a lot of his ideas where developed from occult subjects. The pisces influence would make him kind of reticent too, so he wasn't the kind of scientist to blow his trumpet about his discoveries. In fact he was so secretive that he didn't tell anyone about his discovery of calculus until 30 years after he'd developed it. He often didn't publicise anything he discovered unless it looked like someone else was about to discover it and get all the credit and then he would hurriedly release a paper with just enough information to ensure that he got the credit for it.
JUpiter in pisces accentuates the mystical bent.
Funny enough, mercury in sagittarius would confer a certain garrulousness yet i think that the squares to pisces would have helped to check this influence.
A good example of the changeable nature of Capricorn is that when he went to university rather than study ARistotle which was the traditional authority on science, he opted instead to follow closely this new fad coming from France started by a guy called Descartes. I guess the strong Aquarius influence would have helped there too.

Does anyone else have anything else to say about his chart?. Sorry I don't know what time he was born.

Would you say that my assessments so far were correct?

[Fluffmeister]

Sorry, but there's a bit of a problem. Newton was not born on Christmas Day in the Gregorian calendar, but on Christmas Day in the Julian calendar. As a Protestant country, England did not switch until the 18th century. His Sun was at 13 Capricorn, not 3 Capricorn.

We do also have a tentative birth time for him, according to Astrodatabank:

Arthur Blackwell quotes F. Manuel, "A Portrait of Isaac Newton," 1968, "born an hour or two after midnight." (December 25, 1642 OS)

(Ebertin gave "between 1:00 and 2:00 AM." Astrology Journal 3/1962 gives 1:00 AM. Blackwell rectified to 1:38:00 GMT.)

(Data Plus UK April 1998 quotes biographer Michael White, "Isaac Newton: The Last Sorceror," 4th Estate Publications,1997, which states that the birth took place "sometime soon after 2am" (on Jan 4, 1643 NS in Woolsthorpe, near Market Overton, Lincolnshire, England.)

So we're looking at an early morning birthtime - 01:38GMT sounds as good as any (there's very little difference between GMT and LMT at this location, which is 0W40 - if Blackwell rectified to 01:38GMT I'll stick with that). Even if the birth was as late as 02:00, this still gives us Libra rising (albeit very late Libra).

[plumedsnake]

Sorry, but there's a bit of a problem. Newton was not born on Christmas Day in the Gregorian calendar, but on Christmas Day in the Julian calendar. As a Protestant country, England did not switch until the 18th century. His Sun was at 13 Capricorn, not 3 Capricorn.

We do also have a tentative birth time for him, according to Astrodatabank:

Arthur Blackwell quotes F. Manuel, "A Portrait of Isaac Newton," 1968, "born an hour or two after midnight." (December 25, 1642 OS)

(Ebertin gave "between 1:00 and 2:00 AM." Astrology Journal 3/1962 gives 1:00 AM. Blackwell rectified to 1:38:00 GMT.)

(Data Plus UK April 1998 quotes biographer Michael White, "Isaac Newton: The Last Sorceror," 4th Estate Publications,1997, which states that the birth took place "sometime soon after 2am" (on Jan 4, 1643 NS in Woolsthorpe, near Market Overton, Lincolnshire, England.)

So we're looking at an early morning birthtime - 01:38GMT sounds as good as any (there's very little difference between GMT and LMT at this location, which is 0W40 - if Blackwell rectified to 01:38GMT I'll stick with that). Even if the birth was as late as 02:00, this still gives us Libra rising (albeit very late Libra).

Thanks for that. I always get confused by the change of calenders. Shame we don't know the birth time for sure too.

Have you got any insights into any connections between the chart and the biography?

[Fluffmeister]

Thanks for that. I always get confused by the change of calenders. Shame we don't know the birth time for sure too.

Have you got any insights into any connections between the chart and the biography?

Actually, I find his chart a bit puzzling. Mercury in detriment afflicted by Saturn - doesn't look like the signature of someone whose book was one of the most influential and who came to be known as a great scientist.

Mind you, the ruler of the second house (Mars) is conjunct the POF and angular, even though he's in detriment, and his chart ruler is also the ruler of the 8th house of other people's money. Not a bad signature for someone who became master of the Royal Mint!

[plumedsnake]

Actually, I find his chart a bit puzzling. Mercury in detriment afflicted by Saturn - doesn't look like the signature of someone whose book was one of the most influential and who came to be known as a great scientist.

Mind you, the ruler of the second house (Mars) is conjunct the POF and angular, even though he's in detriment, and his chart ruler is also the ruler of the 8th house of other people's money. Not a bad signature for someone who became master of the Royal Mint!

It is cases like these that I find so helpful in busting myths. This is a very common situation in people that have excelled themselves in one way or another. They have a lot of squares. Mythbuster: squares are likely to drive you to excellence in the fields of endeavour they are involved in. Some people try to explain it by saying that it is the challenges presented by the square that forces people to break new ground as they try to overcome it. I don't know how it works but what I do know is that people with lots of squares are more likely to achieve greatness than people with lots of trines. In fact trines tend to lead to a very unspectacular life.

If mercury which confers inventiveness and curiousity is linked to Saturn which confers an ability to frame things within a structure and provide a theory that explains why stuff works the way it does and further more the link is a square, then that would explain Newton to me.

Not only was he the master of the Royal Mint, a position of public office, but he was also a member of the Royal Society (the top man i seem to remember) and if the conspiracy theorists are right, a member of some secret sects and societies too. This would fit with the Aquarius influence while saturn (aquarius' ruler) in pisces would fit in with the secret societies.

I can't figure out why he didn't really have any romantic relationships though. The most passionate relationship that he had with anyone was with a man who lived in Europe but we are not sure if it was sexual. It was just intensely emotional. Perhaps Mars the ruler of the 7th house in detriment in taurus (and thus in conflict with Venus in aquarius) could be the culprit, but for me the jury is still out on that. Any ideas?

[plumedsnake]

Just bumping this