Rectification in Astrology

The Astrologer Needs To Be Very Careful Using Rectification

Rectification in astrology works this way. For the chart whose accuracy is difficult or impossible to verify, rectification is supposed to be astrology’s answer. But what happens when rectification leads to the  Tower-of-Babel effect? When everyone seems to be speaking a different language, or in the case of astrology, everyone comes up with a different chart for the same person or event?

Rectification in Astrology defined:

Rectification. The process of verification or correction of the birth moment or ascendant degree of the map by reference to known events or characteristics pertaining to the native. This may be necessitated by the inaccuracy of time pieces; the carelessness of those whose business it should be to make a careful record of the moment of birth; or it may consist of a hypothetical determination of a birth hour wholly unknown to the native. The entire subject is a matter of controversy. Some contend that it is unscientific to prove a thesis by altering a premise to fit a conclusion. [my italics] [from Nicholas Devore, Encyclopedia of Astrology(New York: Philosophical Library, 1947) P. 329]

Let’s go to an illustration:

Norris compiled an orthodox documented biography (260 pages at 500 words a page, 250 references) of Sir Winston Churchill, and cross referenced it to a separate delineation….of Churchill’s chart….

…Churchill’s birth time was then unknown and Norris used a chart rigorously rectified (the work extended over several years) by directions and transits involving the Ascendant or MC against over two dozen major events….

However, subsequent to Norris work, the birth time of Churchill was discovered and published. The rectified time was 2 1/2 hours too late; the rectified positions of the Ascendant, MC and Moon were incorrect…

Norris was a respected and accomplished astrologer. Furthermore he was not the only astrologer to have incorrectly rectified Churchill’s chart—at least half a dozen rectifications have been published, none of them identical and all of them wrong. [from Geoffrey Dean and Arthur Mather, eds., Recent Advances in Natal Astrology (Kent England: Bromley, 1977)  pp. 29-30

If I wanted to completely document the speciousness of rectification, I could continue on for several thousand words. The common circumstance is for everyone to accept one chart as rectified and correct, and then to have the truth come out later, as in the example of Churchill, when his family gave out his birth data after his death.

Example, when Saturn conjuncts a politician’s natal Sun, he or she will begin something new or end something old. This gives you a background, a framework within which to judge what is happening. In the use of directions you are never provided with such; you are at sea without a sextant; you are completely lost.

If the time of birth (from a primary source) is accurate down to the minute, then directions may be used and are good for precise measurement. Otherwise they can’t be used.

The Law of Unified Language: In order to have a unified language of history, let no rectifications be accepted.

If astrology follows this law, if it can develop its Saturn side, if it can discipline itself, then it moves into the realm of modem historical research and study; otherwise it will continue to look nonsensical and foolish to those who take their history with a bit more seriousness.

When the historian/astrologer examines a chart, he or she must determine its authenticity. The data, which in this case is the birth time, must be valid. Three kinds of sources can be used—original, from some kind of eyewitness testimony; second-hand, from an account based on eyewitness testimony, perhaps now destroyed; and speculative, from no direct evidence, like the 753 B.C. chart for the founding of Rome.

Almost every collection of historical charts lacks historical discipline. The sources cited for many of these charts are other astrologers, heaven help us. Other sources are old astrology magazines. Some are mere rectifications. In my estimate, many of these dates are wrong. May rectification die a good permanent death.

Mircea Eliade, a famous writer on spiritual subjects, was born in Bucharest in 1907. His chart has been passed around Europe for decades, and has found its way into several astrological publications in this country. Some astrologers have rectified his chart in order to get it more accurate. No one bothered to do the historical research, which in this case meant going to a good university library to find out when he was born.

It turns out that his mother so wanted him to be born on a certain holy day that she lied about his birthday, a fact that Eliade himself never knew until the scholarly research was done. Not an astrologer in the world had his correct chart. [from Mac Linscott rickets, Mircea Eliade: the Romanian Roots, 1907-45. New York: the Columbia University Press, 1988. p.9. His birth is given: March 13, 1907, N.S., 5:00 am]

Every historical chart needs to be researched and verified.

I am looking right now at a rectified chart of Dwight Eisenhower that places his Sun in the 6^th house, and his powerful Neptune/Pluto in the 2^nd; yet we have a primary source on Eisenhower, his mother, who says he was born “a little before three in the morning”. [from Kenneth Davis, General Eisenhower, Soldier of Democracy (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co., 1952 ed.) P. 43.]

Many astrologers accept this Eisenhower Babel chart and use it as the accurate one. While we may not have the precise minute of his birth, we can at least place his planets accurately in quadrants, most likely in houses.