The Fall of Constantinople
SeaGtGruff
here in case anyone is interested. I'm crossposting only my own posts, not the
other ones in the thread.
====================
Subject: Re: Q: Astrological configurations in 1543
From: seagt...@aol.com (SeaGtGruff)
Date: Thu, Mar 25, 1999 01:10 EST
Message-id: <19990325011043...@ng-da1.aol.com>
Theo Mora (theo...@math.fsu.edu) wrote:
> For a story draft, we would need to study the astrological
> configuration at the fall of Costanipole (may 1543)
> Is there some free software in the net which allows to do
> that?
> Thanks for your help
You can download the freeware program, Astrolog, from www.astrolog.org; it can
do what you're looking for. You'll need to download some of the separate
ephemeris files for the greatest accuracy; the ones you'll need are LRZ5_22,
CPJV_22, and CHI_22. You really need only the LRZ5_22 file if you're
interested in only the Sun, Moon, and planets; the CPJV_22 file is for the
asteroids Ceres, Pallas, Juno, and Vesta, and the CHI_22 file is for Chiron.
According to something I was just reading on the web, your date is mixed up.
The Fall of Constantinople was in May of 1453, not 1543
(http://www.greece.org/Romiosini/fall.html). I was trying to find the actual
day, and it seems that the fall was on May 29, 1453. The final assault began
after midnight, and the city fell at about dawn or shortly after. The
following positions are for 4:31 a.m. LMT (local sunrise), May 29, 1453:
Sun - 15 Gemini 55
Moon - 0 Pisces 27
Mercury - 3 Cancer 32
Venus - 22 Taurus 55
Mars - 24 Cancer 23
Jupiter - 9 Aries 10
Saturn - 24 Libra 29 Retrograde
Uranus - 28 Cancer 12
Neptune - 1 Libra 50 Retrograde
Pluto - 7 Leo 12
North Node - 16 Sagittarius 12
Chiron - 3 Aquarius 58 Retrograde
The most striking aspect at that time (in my opinion) was Mars square Saturn,
which was exact at about 7:54 a.m. LMT. Mars was in its fall in Cancer, and
Saturn was in its exaltation in Libra (although it was retrograde). The Sun
was conjunct the South Node a little later that morning, which means there were
a couple of eclipses before and after May 29, 1453.
There was a Lunar Eclipse a week before, at about 7:05 p.m. LMT on May 22,
1453. The Sun was at 9 Gemini 48, and the Moon was at 9 Sagittarius 48, with
Saturn retrograde at 24 Libra 43, in an almost exact sesquisquare with the Sun,
and an almost exact semisquare with the Moon (only 5 minutes from exact-- very
close indeed).
Likewise, there was a Solar Eclipse a week later, at about 7:56 a.m. LMT on
June 7, 1453. The Sun was at 24 Gemini 38, and the Moon was at 24 Gemini 38,
with Saturn retrograde at 24 Libra 15, in an almost exact trine with the Solar
Eclipse.
Note that Saturn was slowing down; it went stationary direct at 24 Libra 08 on
about June 18, 1453. It's interesting that Saturn closely aspected both
eclipses, and the degree of Saturn's station was closely aspecting both
eclipses. The square of Mars and Saturn was likewise in close aspect to both
eclipses, Mars being sesquisquare the Lunar Eclipse and semisextile the Solar
Eclipse.
If you're interested in the astrology of this event, I would suggest that you
try to find the birth chart for Constantinople itself-- if possible-- because
you would want to relate the transiting positions to Constantinople's chart.
However, it is interesting that the Lunar Eclipse of May 22, 1453 occurred
right around sunset in Constantinople, so the eclipse was very close to the
horizon. The eclipse started just before sunset and moonrise, but I assume
that it was still occurring when the Moon actually rose. The fact that the
Lunar Eclipse was on the Ascendant in Constantinople might suggest that it had
a "personal" impact on the city. Note that Lunar Eclipses are associated with
culminations of existing conditions, and "the beginning of the end," because a
Lunar Eclipse is a Full Moon, and Full Moons mark the end of the first half of
the lunar cycle, and the beginning of the second half of the lunar cycle.
Michael Rideout, NCGR-II
Co-moderator, alt.astrology.moderated
SeaGtGruff
====================
Subject: Re: Q: Astrological configurations in 1543
From: seagt...@aol.com (SeaGtGruff)
Date: Thu, Mar 25, 1999 02:36 EST
Message-id: <19990325023605...@ng-da1.aol.com>
I wrote:
> If you're interested in the astrology of this event, I would
> suggest that you try to find the birth chart for
> Constantinople itself-- if possible-- because you would want
> to relate the transiting positions to Constantinople's chart.
After surfing the web, I found a date of May 11, 330 given for the founding(?)
of Constantinople. Of course, the city itself was around for many centuries
before that, as "Byzantium," but it didn't become "Constantinople" until 330.
The positions for noon LMT on May 11, 330 are as follows:
Sun - 19 Taurus 57
Moon - 9 Leo 14
Mercury - 13 Gemini 18
Venus - 5 Cancer 04
Mars - 15 Gemini 17
Jupiter - 6 Cancer 26
Saturn - 24 Leo 04
Uranus - 9 Pisces 25
Neptune - 22 Scorpio 43 Retrograde
Pluto - 2 Pisces 42
North Node - 19 Aries 09
Chiron - 18 Cancer 34
It's interesting that on the day Constantinople fell, the transiting Sun was
conjunct "natal" Mars. Also, the transiting Moon conjoined "natal" Pluto that
day, and transiting Pluto may have been conjunct the "natal" Moon. "Natal"
Saturn is at 24 Leo 04, and that degree ties in with the other 24s on the day
of the Fall (transiting Mars and transiting Saturn), as well as the subsequent
Solar Eclipse and Saturn station. And speaking of eclipses, the preceding
Lunar Eclipse was almost exactly square "natal" Uranus.
SeaGtGruff
====================
Subject: Re: Q: Astrological configurations in 1543 (1453!)
From: seagt...@aol.com (SeaGtGruff)
Date: Thu, Mar 25, 1999 13:14 EST
Message-id: <19990325131422...@ng17.aol.com>
Glaeken (mi...@mindspring.com) wrote:
> Keera A. Fox <keer...@usa.net> gasped out...
> >> For a story draft, we would need to study the
> >> astrological configuration at the fall of Costanipole
> >> (may 1543)
>
> Er. 1*4*5*3.
Just to make it clear, Keera didn't write that; she quoted it from someone else
who wrote it, who had typed it wrong.
> (FWIW: a lunar eclipse occurred on May the
> 22nd just before the events of Constantinople's sack - I
> checked that, so I know that these charts aren't tripped up
> by the Julian/Gregorian conversion.)
Yes, Astrolog now automatically converts from the Gregorian to the Julian
calendar, or vice versa, as needed. That is, it assumes that dates before
October 15, 1582 are Julian, and that dates after October 4, 1582 are
Gregorian. You can see this by putting in a date of October whatever, 1582,
and then displaying the calendar. It jumps from Thursday, October 4, 1582
(Julian) to Friday, October 15, 1582 (Gregorian). If you put in a date between
October 5 and October 14, 1582, inclusive, it assumes the date is Julian, so
October 5 and October 15, 1582 give the same positions.
> Sultan Mahmet's (the II) final attack was signaled
> at 1:30 am.
After surfing for a long time, I found a page that said "1 a.m.," but no source
was given. At first I gave the positions for 0:00 LMT (although of course it
should be LAT, or sundial time), because one page had given the final assault
as beginning "after midnight." Then I deleted them, and replaced them with the
positions for local sunrise, because another page said that Giustiniani was
shot at "the first light, before sunrise," and this seemed to be a pivotal
moment which led to the gates being opened, etc.
Thank you for the charts, but Astrodienst gives slightly different coordinates
than you used-- 28E58 instead of 28E55, and 41N01 instead of 41N00, although
these are minor differences. You might want to adjust for the "equation of
time," although I believe it was approximately only 3 minutes, so LMT was about
3 minutes later than LAT, which again is pretty minor.
[charts snipped]
> The walls were breached by 6:00 am, but the full
> breakthrough by the final wave of attackers (Janissaries),
> and the consequent death of Emperor Constantine (XI
> Palaeologus) was at ~7:00 am. (Within the half hour either
> way.)
[snip]
> 'By late afternoon' (which given dawn at 5 am etc.
> I'm placing at ~5 pm) the Sultan Mahmet and his Iman were
> inside the church of St. Sophia, and performed an Islamic
> service there, which converted the church to a mosque.
> (The looting and pillaging were essentially over at this
> point.)
[snip]
What are your sources? Are you getting these times from books, or from the
web? I'm asking because I didn't find anything that detailed on the web,
although there were many thousands of web sites on Constantinople (but not
necessarily on the *fall* of Constantinople), and I had to stop looking after a
while because Yahoo stopped responding for some reason, and Alta Vista wasn't
changing the colors of the links after I visited them (I *hate* that in a
search engine), so I couldn't tell which pages I'd already looked at.
I'm forwarding your post to Theo Mora (theo...@math.fsu.edu), to make sure he
sees it.
Michael Rideout