Resistance - 14th Century Style

When The People as a whole feel sufficiently oppressed, reach that mystical thing called the "tipping point" they act. Famous examples of this phenomenon leap out from pages of history books - here's an early example:

Backtracking a century or six:
The Peasants' Revolt in England.

Without the aid of Twitter, Facebook, the Royal Mail, telephone or cellphone, tens of thousands of peasants in England managed to achieve solidarity sufficient to rebel against their noblemen masters, march on England's capital city and cause chaos.

The Black Death, a devastating pandemic, had ravaged England and Europe in 1348/9 greatly reducing the labour force available to the Lords of the Manors and other noblemen of feudal England. Labourers, who were little more than slaves, began to demand improved terms and conditions: higher wages, fewer hours. Some even asked for their freedom from serfdom. The government attempted to curb this by pegging wages and restricting the mobility of labour. Additional cause of resentment was the poll tax ("poll" in this context meant "head") every person was subject to this taxation. The then monarch King Richard II, only 14 years old, was largely "under the thumb" of a corrupt group of officials, possibly the crux of the problem - or maybe not, we have no way of knowing.

Uprisings began in the south and east of England. In early summer of 1381 leaders emerged: Wat Tyler, John Ball and Jack Straw. They led a march of tens of thousands on London arriving on 12 June.

The rebels stormed the Tower of London and executed the Lord Chancellor, Archbishop Simon Sudbury, and the Lord Treasurer. Peasants looted the city and set fire to numerous buildings. Wat Tyler was stabbed to death by the Lord Mayor William Walworth in a confrontation at Smithfield, thus ending the revolt. Nobles quickly re-established their control with the help of a hastily organised militia of 7000. Most other leaders were captured and executed, including John Ball and Jack Straw, who was beheaded.

The Peasants' Revolt did not succeed in its aims, but it did show the nobles that the peasants were dissatisfied and quite capable of wreaking havoc. The Revolt was, eventually, instrumental in bringing an end to serfdom, and in the even longer term, helped to form a radical tradition in British politics.

Wondering about the astrology of it all - a snip from the ephemeris for June 1381:



It's interesting that on 12 June 1381 Moon (representing The People) was in late Aquarius - sign of rebellion; Mars (anger, aggression)was in communicative Gemini, and in harmony with Aquarius Moon.

Final thought from Carl Sandburg's "The People, Yes" (Chapter 75)

Hunger and only hunger changes worlds?
The dictate of the belly
that gnawing under the navel,
this alone is the builder and the pathfinder
sending man into danger and fire
and death by struggle?

Yes and no, no and yes.
The strong win against the weak,
The strong lose against the stronger.

And across the bitter years and the howling winters
the deathless dream will be the stronger,
the dream of equity will win.
There are shadows and bones shot with lights
too strong to be lost.......

Mini Rant and More Thoughts on Scotland

Tomorrow the Scots will have their chance to vote on the issue of Scottish independence from the United Kingdom. I've already said my piece on this, post is HERE. Reading around during the past few days, though, I've been shocked at the naked racism contained in much online commentary. Some commenters seem to assume that it's alright to malign the English in general, as a race - one blatant example from many:
Comment under a piece at Smirking Chimp:
Giving the Sassenachs a Big Scare by Eric Margolis:

from "oldeyank"

Well deserved split.....Fuck the English!
Nasty, vicious, arrogant, pompous ass, condescending, buck-toothed chinless wonders. Serves them right! And, about bloody time.

Would it be acceptable to make comparable comment about African Americans, Native Americans, Jewish people? Of course not. Because it's about the English people it's seen to be okay?
No it's not okay! Do some Americans actually understand what racism is? This reveals that there remains a need to nurture racism in the hearts of certain factions in the USA. When they are pilloried for hating this group of people or that group of people, they turn on a set about whom they know practically nothing and shed their vile hatred upon them with impunity (or so they assume).

I have never seen such a load of arrant bullshit, written by Americans in comment threads, as I've seen on this topic. I did come across one very good observation late yesterday, it's part of a weekly post at Avedon's Sideshow
I hope the blogger, Ms Carol, an American resident in London, will not object to my copying it here.

OK, the reason Scots want independence from Westminster is that Westminster is being run by a load of right-wing scum that seems to take special pleasure from screwing Scotland. (Well, Maggie sure did.) Of course those people are also screwing most of the people in England, which is now a runaway train, thanks in large part to the way the Labour Party membership has allowed their own party to be run by people who may not be capital-C Conservatives but are certainly Tories. Which sounds a lot like American politics, of course, except that there doesn't seem to be much threat of, say, California declaring itself an independent nation and taking it's Democratic votes in the Electoral College with it. A lot of people are fretting that without Scotland, England will be stuck with Conservative governments forever, but that is true only to the extent that everyone is happy to let neoliberal policies keep marching on without an argument. The question, judging from the kinds of arguments some of my friends are having, is whether the answer is a new generation of Labour members banding together to take back their party on behalf of real people, or whether creating a new party is the more feasible path to that end. Again, sounding familiar. In both cases, of course, nothing is going to work unless people are prepared to fight the right-wing rhetoric, as well as the policies, with something more than fevered angst.

Rant over.

Whatever the majority in Scotland decide tomorrow they will have to abide by it. Speaking of majorities, would it not have been a fairer basis to the referendum if a minimum percentage had been made a requirement in the Yes/No result, before a complete break from the UK were possible? I dunno exactly what percentage, but certainly nothing as close as most predict the result is going to be.

I hope the Scots do not forget, as they cast their votes, that the new boss will be "same as the old boss" (as sung long ago by English rock band The Who). As another commenter, elsewhere (edcaryl) observed, "This is Scotland's version of Obama's old "CHANGE" slogan - and "YES WE CAN!" It means all things to all people... and nothing".

I doubt anyone voting tomorrow will be reading this blog. Anyway, an interesting piece I found, written by Ewan Morrison, an award-winning Scottish author and screenwriter, is a good read for general interest. The experiences described can be related to many politically-related issues and attitudes. Something to bear in mind as, in the USA, congressional elections in November approach, and a General election in 2016 is being gambled upon already.
Title: YES: Why I Joined Yes and Why I Changed to No


Last words go to two other commenters from around the net, the first whose screen name I've accidentally lost:

Whether or not Alex Salmond gets his place in history as the man that destroyed the UK, he will still get his place in history as the man who divided and destroyed Scotland, inciting hatred and spite across Scotland and UK. Would hate to be in Scotland when the results come through. Could be a dangerous place to be.

And from "barrybethel", appropriate to a blog where astrology is frequently a topic:

Perhaps it's cyclical also. Students of markets such as Elliott, Kondratiev, Gann etc. have long noted that there are tides in the affairs of men (oh, and the Bard too it seems).

Sometimes we are harmonious, productive and all for closer union - the next, it's all going to hell and divorce and war are on the cards.

Maybe it's just in the stars.

Maybe so!!

Unexcited Brit at Curmudgeon Corner

I find myself this morning at Curmudgeon Corner - I'll probably visit here again the next time something irritates me sufficiently.

I'm not sure whether this current irritant is simply another example of what I see as the American habit of out-of-place hyperbole. This one seemingly has spread across the pond too. Or is it another "meme-ish" copycat thing? Why do some people, when attempting to describe their state of mind when looking forward to an event, or action by them or others, describe themselves as "Being excited to......" whatever, when the circumstance would appear scarcely to even warrant a sincere "I'm looking forward to...."

Devaluing words - again. I've whinged about the use of "hilarious" in the past, when attached to something that is, at best, mildly amusing.

What is going on here though? What causes overstatement? Is it a form of verbal one-upmanship, lack of vocabulary - or what? What'll happen when the next generation or "in-crowd" needs to go even one better than "I'm so excited to..." ?

Perhaps I'm still suffering from after effects of culture shock, being a Brit an' all, and therefore having been more used to understatement than overstatement for most of my life, pre-internet. The British - or perhaps more accurately - the English, have the reputation of being overly polite, self-effacing, and of uttering "thank you" or "sorry" several times at inappropriate moments. There are lots of examples of this in a Twitter feed, "Very British Problems" (@SoVeryBritish), I follow it among a scant handful of Twitterers because its entries almost always raise a chuckle of recognition, so much so that I've ordered the accompanying book. A passing reader might get the general idea from the following samples:


"I'm sure it'll be fine" - Meaning: This can only end in disaster

Being mistaken for a shop assistant and simply assuming the role as best you can

Never feeling more uncomfortable than when instructed to "make yourself at home"

Saying, "It's nothing, really" to indicate you're remarkably close to losing consciousness

Nearly washing the skin off your hands so as not to pressure the person using the hand dryer

Being unable to pay for something with the exact change without saying "I think that's right"

"With all due respect" - Translation: You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about

Ordering one of the specials so the waitress won't have wasted her time reciting them

Debating whether to open the train window or quietly succumb to heatstroke

Being unable to help saying, "At least I hope so!" after telling someone they're on the right train.

Punishing people who don't say thank you by saying "you're welcome" as quietly as possible

Becoming incandescent with rage when Microsoft Word corrects your spelling to American English

More here too.

Rambles on Boundaries and the Edge

Having recently watched both film versions (1944 and 1984) of Somerset Maugham's novel The Razor's Edge, I thought about writing a post on either the films' theme ("finding oneself" and/or the meaning of life) or the relative quality of each film version. The novel's and films' title comes from a verse in the Katha-Upanishad. (The Upanishads are a collection of Vedic texts), and is translated as: "the sharp edge of a razor is difficult to pass over; thus the wise say the path to Salvation is hard."

The Razor's Edge tells the story of an American guy traumatised by experiences in World War I. Back home after the war, he renounces the materialism around him to seek transcendent meaning in his life. Culmination of his search takes him to a monastery high in the mountains of India. I haven't read the novel, but from what I can gather it seems both films omit much detail of the main character's travels and adventures, as well as the way life is proceeding, in his absence, for the circle of friends he left behind. (Photographs: Tyrone Power in the leading role in the 1944 film version; Bill Murray took the lead in the 1984 version).

 Feast Before Altar of Terminus  (Castiglione 1642)

However, when I noticed that tomorrow, 23 February, was the date of yet another Roman festival, Terminalia, in honour of their god Terminus, an oblique detour from my original intentions opened up.

Terminus, Roman god and protector of boundary markers; his name was the Latin word for such a marker, in our world the milestone is the boundary marker's descendant. Sacrifices were performed to sanctify each boundary stone, landowners celebrated "Terminalia" in Terminus' honor each year on February 23, which was also their last day of the Roman year. The Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline Hill was thought to have been built over a shrine to Terminus, and he was occasionally identified as an aspect of Jupiter under the name "Jupiter Terminalis". I've already rattled on about Terminus, by the way, in an old post HERE. (Wikipedia HERE and HERE)


It might not seem so at first glance, but there is a loose link between The Razor's Edge and Terminus, Roman god of boundaries: knife-edge/razor's edge = an extremely narrow boundary.

So.. a ramble around the general topic of boundaries.

First thought was along the lines that all boundaries are man-made, defined by the power-hungry for purposes of profit and control. That's not accurate, of course, nature has her boundaries. Most basic of these: earth's continents are constantly moving due to motions of the tectonic plates, the border between two tectonic plates is called a boundary. All the tectonic plates are constantly moving — very slowly — around the planet, but in many different directions. Some are moving toward each other, some are moving apart, and some are sliding past each other. Because of these differences, tectonic plate boundaries are grouped into three main types......For more see HERE.

Astrologers define boundaries relevant to their profession. "Out-of-bounds planets" are any that have a declination greater than 23 degrees 27’. The declination is the angular distance of a planet north or south of the celestial equator. Out-of-Bounds simply means “outside of the boundary of the ecliptic”. Because of the tilt of the earth’s axis, the sun appears to stay within 23 degrees 27’ north of the equator and 23 degrees 27’ south of the equator. Anything “outside” of that is considered “out-of-bounds”.
More HERE.


Back to the original and more visible earthly boundaries.

An ancient custom of "beating the bounds" is still carried out in parts of England and Wales. Members of a community walk the boundaries of their parish, usually led by the parish priest and church officials. Purpose of this exercise, historically, was to share knowledge of where the boundaries lay, and to pray for protection and blessings for the lands. In the past, knowledge of the limits of each parish needed to be handed down so that such matters as liability to contribute to the repair of the church, and the right to be buried within the churchyard were not disputed. The custom dates from Anglo-Saxon times, it's thought that it may have been derived from the Roman Terminalia, a festival celebrated on February 22 in honour of Terminus, the god of landmarks, to whom cakes and wine were offered, sports and dancing taking place at the boundaries. More HERE.

Combined thoughts of boundaries and English history brings to mind the enclosures of common and waste land on which parishioners had always been free to graze their stock. The enclosure laws sought to enclose common land and reduce and rearrange the long strips of land previously used for growing crops. From the late 16th century onward such change became common, often amid much protest. Under the open field system, several landowners had strips in each large field, probably arranged originally to give everyone a fair share of good and bad land. At enclosure, land was re-apportioned between the various landowners, in general putting land together and swapping it around, so that larger closes were formed within the larger fields to replace the smaller field strips. Wealthy inhabitants were likely to find the changes advantageous, but many of the smallholders and cottagers who had relied on common grazing were forced to move to towns and cities to find work. Enclosure made agriculture more efficient but at huge cost to many living in rural communities. See HERE.

Finally, while I cringe at the very thought of a dog ever being chained, there's this quote from an unfinished novel The Pale King, by David Foster Wallace (born 21 February 1962) . The novel was left unfinished because the author committed suicide in 2008 defining the boundary to his own life. The idea in this sad quotation puts acceptance of boundaries in a rather different light.

 Hat-tip to Wolfer Magic

What he'd do, he'd never go out to the length of the chain. He'd never even get out to where the chain got tight. Even if the mailman pulled up, or a salesman. Out of dignity, this dog pretended like he chose this one area to stay in that just happened to be inside the length of the chain. Nothing outside of that area right there interested him. He just had zero interest. So he never noticed the chain. He didn't hate it. The chain. He just up and made it not relevant. maybe he wasn't pretending--maybe he really up and chose that little circle for his own world. He had a power to him. All of his life on that chain..

Magna Carta and All That

Independence Day is approaching, I shall wish the USA a happy birthday tomorrow by ceremoniously hoisting the Stars and Stripes up our flagpole, but today I'm dipping into English history, to highlight something not totally irrelevant to USA's history.

Pupils in English schools have 1066 (Battle of Hastings and Norman Conquest of England) engraved on their hearts - or did when I was in school long ago. 1066 marked a pivotal event in English history, the native ruling class was replaced by a foreign, French-speaking monarchy, aristocracy, and clerical hierarchy. It's one of few dates to be so well remembered, so much so that a couple of 20th century humourists, W.C. Sellar and R.J. Yeatman wrote a series under the title 1066 and All That for the famous Punch magazine. The series, later developed into a play and a book, is a parody of English history. I'll not go into much detail of the book's content; it truly is an acquired taste, to the uninitiated unused to this type of humour, it'd come over as just silliness. You really had to be there (in England over many years) to "get it". There is a little something which might go down well here though; there's an astrological link too.

Skipping through the years from 1066 to what's known as the Tudor Age, or Middle Ages, we come to King John's reign. He is noted in the book as "An Awful King". During his reign, in 1215, came the Magna Carta, which, in many ways, could be likened to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Magna Carta (Great Charter), the straight version, in a nutshell:

King John was compelled to sign the document by the Barons (members of the nobility/aristocracy, mainly of French descent). It required King John to proclaim certain rights (pertaining to freemen), respect certain legal procedures, and accept that his will could be bound by the law. It explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects, whether free or fettered — and implicitly supported what became the writ of habeas corpus, allowing appeal against unlawful imprisonment.

Magna Carta was arguably the most significant early influence on the extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today in the English speaking world. Magna Carta influenced the development of the common law and many constitutional documents, including the United States Constitution. Many clauses were renewed throughout the Middle Ages, and continued to be renewed as late as the 18th century. By the second half of the 19th century, however, most clauses in their original form had been repealed from English law.

Magna Carta was the first document forced onto an English King by a group of his subjects (the barons) in an attempt to limit his powers by law and protect their privileges. (From HERE)

1066 and All That parodied the intent of Magna Carta in ways that remain relevant even today:

1. That no one was to be put to death, save for some reason - (except the Common People).

2. That everyone should be free - (except the Common People).

3. That everything should be of the same weight and measure throughout the Realm - (except the Common People).

4. That the courts should be stationary, instead of following a very tiresome medieval official known as the King's Person all over the country.

5. That no person should be fined to his utter ruin - (Except the King's Person).

6. That the Barons should not be tried except by a special jury of other Barons who would understand.

Magna Carta was therefore the chief cause of Democracy in England, and thus A Good Thing for everyone (except the Common People).

The Common People in most countries, even nowadays, are still in the category "except for"! And Number 6 sounds eerily familiar too. Things do change, but remain much the same.....as the French are wont to say, but more prettily.

On an astrological note, is there anything in astrology that ties into Magna Carta? This article on Jupiter/Uranus and Saturn/Uranus cycles is interesting. From Astrology for the 21st Century
http://www.astrology21.co.uk/c1humanrights.html

Human Rights: The planetary cycles of human rights

In astrology the development of human rights is often associated with Uranus and Aquarius, and the periods of history that coincide with the rise in awareness of human rights and human wrongs are usually linked with the Jupiter-Uranus and Saturn-Uranus cycles. But does this stand up to scrutiny?

This article examines landmark events in human rights in the UK, the USA and France, as well as major political thinkers/philosophers whose work influenced the way human rights were thought about and practised, and looks for correlations between these and the Jupiter-Uranus and Saturn-Uranus cycles.

Landmark events
These are said to be some of the major landmarks in the development of the current Western thinking on and practice of human rights :

Magna Carta
15th to 19th June 1215
Saturn conjunct Uranus (approaching)


USA - State of Virginia's Declaration of Rights
12th June 1776
Saturn trine Uranus


USA Constitution
4th March 1789
Jupiter conjunct Uranus (the aspect is wide but approaching and growing in strength)

USA Bill of Rights
15th December 1791
Jupiter just past sextile Uranus
Mars on the midpoint of Jupiter/Uranus

(Many other examples are listed.)

MISCELLANY... touching on a Sun Virgo astrologer, fashion police, lifeboat heroes, photography.

Continuing a monthly trawl through astrologers with birthdays in zodiac sign where the sun currently resides: Virgo Sun astrologers proved to be rare. I found only Liz Greene and Louis MacNeice. The latter born 12 September 1907 in Belfast, Northern Ireland was a poet and scholar, rather than an astrologer proper, but he did write a book on the subject. My post on him is HERE .

Liz Greene was born on 4 September 1946 at 1:01 PM in Englewood, New Jersey (see chart at Astrodatabank)

American professional astrologer and author, Jungian psychologist and lecturer; one of the most highly respected astrologers of the 20th century. Greene has been awarded the Regulus Award for Theory and Understanding, 1989, recognizing the work with other disciplines and philosophical models. She relocated to England and then to Switzerland. With Howard Sasportas, she founded the Center for Psychological Astrology in London. Her books include "Saturn, A New Look for an Old Devil," "Star Signs for Lovers," and "The Outer Planets and Their Cycles." After Sasportas died of AIDS, she teamed with Charles Harvey as co-head of the Center.

Does she match the pattern I've been trying to establish (i.e. that best astrologers have Air (mental acuity) and Water (emotional intelligence) prominent in their charts)?
She does: 5 planets in Air signs (Libra and Gemini), a Water sign (Scorpio) rising.




Glancing down the long list of tags on my Blogger dashboard I noticed fascism and fashion adjacent....the fashion police ("never wear white after Labor Day, don't wear socks with sandals, don't wear back bra under pale shirt", etc )come to think of it are really distant cousins to outright fascists!





Among some photos we took during the time husband lived with me in the UK, in Bridlington, on the East Yorkshire coast I noticed this:



We found the gravestones of James Watson (43), David Purdon (38) and Robert Pickering (34) in the grounds of the town's Priory Church; they represent a very sad story of men who sacrificed their lives attempting to save the crew of a brig "Delta". In February of 1871 a terrible storm and gale, often referred to as the most notorious and best remembered of all the gales on the Yorkshire coast, caused the destruction of several vessels and deaths of many seamen and lifeboat crews around Bridlington Bay. A report of events is available at Flamborough Lifeboats website. The gravestones in the photograph commemorate three of the crew of the lifeboat Harbinger, David Purdon, one of the three, had also built the boat, three other crewmen of the Harbinger perished too.


The report of that storm reminded me of the raw courage lifeboatmen everywhere have always displayed, often with little recompense. They, along with firefighters are the TRUE heroes of our times, and of times long past.

A man of courage never wants weapons.
~Author Unknown

Painting by J.T. Allerston, see also HERE.



Words of my husband, aka "anyjazz" on photography:

A friend once described the difference between "taking pictures" and being "a photographer": You have to have the eye.

Taking a picture often catches the moment, a photographer catches the mood, the aura, the personality, the action. A picture shows you Grandma Hattie in her best dress. A photograph shows you how she felt that day. A photographer knows how to use the medium to capture more than the image. The elements.

Think about that: The Elements.

Color, balance, texture, design, rhythm and detail all are parts of most photographs, illustrations or paintings. These are basic elements of visual arts. There are probably others. Start with these.

In some photographs there can be seen action, story, drama, emotion, mood. Some others record a moment, predict an outcome, ask a question, decide an argument, set a course.

In some photographs the subject matter alone can be an element of its beauty or worthiness. In another photograph, there may be no identifiable subject at all but other elements, color, action, mood are there. In a sports photo for instance, the subject can be quite secondary to the excitement, the event, the action.

Sometimes it is just a picture of a baby, sometimes it is a picture of the future of mankind. Both pictures are wonderful but one is just an image of a child while the other is a legend.

Physical elements: Color, balance, texture, design, rhythm and detail. Intangible elements: action, story, drama, emotion and mood.

If a photograph combines several of these elements then it is likely an exceptional photograph.

A website carrying daily doses of all manner of wonderful photographs is Fluidr.com

Below are some of the husband's own work - shots he particularly likes:

"Some years ago I attended a couple Pawnee Powwow celebrations in Pawnee, Oklahoma. This gentleman posed for a picture. He was a distant relative of mine, loosely connected through marriage. A sort of ex-father-in-law from an ex-marriage of an ex-marriage...or something like that. He was a full blood Pawnee, I understand. His name was: Chauncey Gardipe. He and I actually got along rather well to the best of my memory.
This is a scan of an old print. I shot it with my old workhorse Pentax K1000 and some tri-x film. You can now tell how long ago it must have been. 40 years probably."

"I remember this shot very well. I was at Lac Gustav in Northern Quebec. The wind died for a moment and I got a shot in while the water was smooth as a mirror. The logs are the remainder of an old dock that had been replaced with the one next to it. Knowing what it really was kept me from seeing that it was a beautiful optical illusion."

"Bored but Quiet"

The Peasants' Revolt~ sans Twitter, Facebook etc.

Backtracking a century or six: the coming weekend marks the 630th anniversary of The Peasants' Revolt in England. Without the aid of Twitter, Facebook, the Royal Mail, telephone or cellphone, tens of thousands of peasants in England managed to achieve solidarity sufficient to rebel against their nobelmen masters, march on England's capital city and cause chaos.

The Black Death, a devastating pandemic, had ravaged England and Europe in 1348/9 greatly reducing the labour force available to the Lords of the Manors and other noblemen of feudal England. Labourers, who were little more than slaves, began to demand improved terms and conditions: higher wages, fewer hours. Some even asked for their freedom from serfdom. The government attempted to curb this by pegging wages and restricting the mobility of labour. Additional cause of resentment was the poll tax ("poll" in this contect meant "head") every person was subject to this taxation. The then monarch King Richard II, only 14 years old, was largely "under the thumb" of a corrupt group of officials, which might well have been the crux of the problem - or maybe not. Who knows? I shall not accord any quarter at all to a member of royalty!

Uprisings began in the south and east of England. In early summer of 1381 leaders emerged: Wat Tyler, John Ball and Jack Straw. They led a march of tens of thousands on London arriving on 12 June.



The rebels stormed the Tower of London and executed the Lord Chancellor, Archbishop Simon Sudbury, and the Lord Treasurer, peasants looted the city and set fire to numerous buildings. Wat Tyler was stabbed to death by the Lord Mayor William Walworth in a confrontation at Smithfield, thus ending the revolt. Nobles quickly re-established their control with the help of a hastily organised militia of 7000, and most of the other leaders were captured and executed, including John Ball and Jack Straw, who was beheaded.

The Peasants Revolt did not succeed in its aims, but it did show the nobles that the peasants were dissatisfied and quite capable of wreaking havoc. The Revolt was, eventually, instrumental in bringing an end to serfdom, and in the even longer term, helped to form a radical tradition in British politics.

Here's a snip from the ephemeris for June 1381:



It's interesting that on 12 June 1381 Moon was in Aquarius - sign of rebellion, with aggressive Mars in Gemini, in wide trine to Moon.

A MYSTERY STILL NOT RESOLVED: JEANNE D'ARC

BY Guest Blogger GIAN PAUL

The world has no doubt seen fewer women than men having an impact on the course of history. But there were women like Jeanne d'Arc, the "Virgin of Orléans" who did what normally, in the past at least, was reserved for men.

She was born around 1412 in a small village, Domrémy, in Northern France. Her family was engaged in farming, not poor but simple. Very religious, at the age of around 18, Jeanne told her family and subsequently some noblemen that she had "heard voices" giving her instruction to engage herself in the ongoing but difficult war to liberate France from its oppressors, the English, then allied with the Dukes of Burgundy.

Times were extremely difficult, much of Europe was already at war for almost a century (the 100-year war) and and the then King of France, Charles VII was materially and morally exhausted. The English, allied to various noblemen who were contesting the King, were rapidly gaining the upper hand, even controlling Paris.

For more details about the recorded historic facts , Wikipedia gives an ample description.

The aim here is not to investigate history but more to try to understand what happened psychologically to Jeanne, the reasons and consequences of the events that took place. And, if it happened in the 15th century, why not in similar fashion again later on - and even why not today?

I believe in mysteries being just that because no-one managed to clarify them and miracles more or less the same. Not exactly in the way Catholicism tries to deal with these phenomena, but using other input, from Eastern religions and thought, astrology and findings by modern science.

Basically one can observe that fewer mysteries occur in our modern times than was the case in the past. Apparently it's not just that science today helps to debug what formerly might have been a mystery. There is also what one could call a "dilution or diminution of divine intervention" in modern times. A possible explanation being that with society progressing - the mass media, internet, easy travel, modern mode of scientific thinking etc. higher powers (for whom believes that such exist), may have had to adapt their way of steering humans on earth.

The other day I read about a modern "miracle or surprise" (all fabricated but real and the type of thing now occupying people's minds): Oprah announced that she will invite the audience of her show for a free trip to Australia - and their pilot would be John Travolta! With this kind of news in the air, one can estimate that there is not be much room left for news of "divine nature" to have more impact than that. Today's public has gotten used to being manipulated, all the time and would hardly have the necessary mental capacity to distinguish what's fabricated, man-made or "divine".

You may ask what has this publicity - motivated free trip to Australia to do with Jeanne d'Arc?



Quite a lot: In her times, living under a condition of "little news", people tended to give credence to what they heard. As it also was the Middle-Ages, their mode of thinking was very Catholic, uncritical but normal in the then world, and also mixed with other superstitions. Exhausted from 100 years of war, hoping for something better to happen, desperate even (Charles VII, about to loose his kingdom), divine intervention had a "ready-made audience", a terrain easy to operate in. And it happened. Simple from a psychological point of view.

I do not pretend to know how "divine intervention" operates, but I believe it does happen. Also, not having the exact birth date of Jeanne d'Arc, astrology could not help in explaining why she was chosen for being the vector of this intervention. And another point, difficult to rationalize, she was burned and died of a horrible death by the English AFTER the town of Orléans was liberated (under her guidance) and the King was returned firmly back into power.



(Illustration, right
"Entry into Orleans", from The Personal Recollections of Saint Joan of Arc by The Sieur Louis de Conte and translated by Jean Francois Alden and illustrated by F. V. Du Mond, copyright 1903.)











On her having had to die as a martyr, one can think that "up-there" someone thought that to galvanize more then just the military and the noblemen surrounding the King, but the people of France, Jeanne d'Arc had to die as and when she did, at only 19 or 20 years of age. I will not speculate if she died as a virgin, and neither if that whole thematic of her being a virgin was also planned from "above" or whether this were mere "favorable accompanying circumstances".

What is of interest however is that the Catholic Church was for a very long time resisting to recognize Jeanne d'Arc's merits and proceeded in "painful slowness" to declare her a Saint. Her beatification happened in 1909, only under considerable pressure from the French and it took another 11 years for her being declared a Saint, in only 1920, when World War I was over, and the French had won.

Why? Here there was a 24 carat case of a true Christian believer, turned visionary, hero and martyr. Is it that she helped put in place a secular power in France, then under the Kings, but having a tendency(continued after the French Revolution) of the French being French first and secondly only Catholics? When Napoleon was to be crowned by the Pope, he took the crown out of the Pope's hands and put it himself on his head. He also had a law passed, subordinating the Catholic Church in France to the state. Not having the horoscope of Jeanne d'Arc, here the map of Napoleon, so-to-say self appointing himself Emperor of France by an "organized vote" of the French Senate. This happened on May 18, 1804 and has, I think a direct link to the slowness of the canonization of Jeanne d'Arc:


(Click on image to enlarge it)
One notices in this horoscope (for mid-day) that Mars in Aries(Napoleon, the General turned now Emperor) opposes Jupiter (religion). There is also a somewhat by then already distant conjunction of Uranus to Jupiter in this map. But Napoleon was for some time already upsetting the "Catholic applecart" all over Europe. The Sun opposing Neptune at the time of Napoleon being voted Emperor was an indication of this becoming soon an ephemeral dream that could not last very long. But the facts of the French-Vatican-stressed-relationship once more were confirmed.

Back, and to conclude with the "Virgin of Orléans": Most probably the girl had had a "visit by some higher entity" whom she identified mostly as being St. Michael. Psychologically this is not unusual. In Hindu tradition visits by Avatars (higher entities) are quite common. The interested reader may want to look up an intriguing report by Gitta Mallasz, a Hungarian. She and her Jewish friends, during Nazi occupation in Hungary in 1944-45 had some extraordinary encounters with "Angels". It must have been very similar to what Jeanne d'Arc experienced.

We have today mostly lost the sense of such "divine occurrences" being possible. At least in the Western world. But from what one gathers this transformation also is taking place in the East, India, China, Indonesia etc. Consequently a profound new way of operating by "higher entities" may have occurred for them to influence the human race. And this is not being said lightly! It may either be happening, without us (or me at least) realizing, or "they have given up" on us. Hawking, that strange British scientist, believes and says so.

HYPE and JUPITER

Jupiter, biggest planet in our solar system, rules all that is exaggerated, promulgated, published or expanded. Hyperbole, the figure of speech, matches all of those, so I'd say that Jupiter clearly rules hyperbole, and its modern journalistic contraction: hype.

I've found that people in the USA tend to speak and write in a far more hyperbolic fashion than most of my fellow-English folk. The English, those from northern England in particular, tend to shy away from exaggeration. The diverse mix of nationalities that have melded together in the USA, over a couple of centuries, no doubt accounts for what I've noticed in their mode of expression. But could there be an astrological link too?

In astrological charts popularly used as the "birth" charts for the USA - based on 4 July 1776 (or 2 July 1776 which is the one I prefer) both show Sun and Jupiter close together in Cancer: 5 & 13 or 5 & 11 degrees respectively. The 4 July chart linked above also has Sagittarius rising. Sagittarius is the home sign of Jupiter !

In the chart for "birth" of England: 25 December 1066 (I emphasise England as opposed to the UK or Britain, for simplicity), Jupiter lay in discerning Virgo, conjunct Saturn(the limitor and restrictor), but in harmonious trine to Sun in Capricorn, (Capricorn being Saturn's sign of rulership). I'd translate that as indicating a clear limitation on exaggeration, which, though seldom indulged in is well understood.

The English are generally considered to be a phlegmatic race, often possessing a dry wit and a steady demeanor, unlikely to be self-aggrandizing. As national characteristics these are generalisations, of course - as is my feeling that in the USA hyperbole is almost a way of life. My own hyperbole! Simon Cowell on the American Idol judging panel gave the lie to my generalisation about the English. He regularly would pronounce the performance of some hapless vocalist as "the worst I have ever heard". Pure hyperbole. He has obviously been in the States too darn long!

May as well throw in an example of hyperbole I hear or read frequently, and complain about to Himself: the use of "hilarious" to describe something that is, at best, mildly amusing.

Words of wisdom - from an Englishman:

The speaking in perpetual hyperbole is comely in nothing but love
Francis Bacon, Sr. quotes (English Lawyer and Philosopher. 1561-1626)