I was recently reading example charts again from Anthony Louis book on Horary astrology. While I love this book and provides many interesting insights, my eye fell on something on page 24 and 25. It’s the chart for the question “What happened in the past two weeks?”. I quote:

It was on Friday, a Venus day. I turned on the computer and ran off both charts. I was immediately struck by the remarkable similarity between them.

Chart 2A

Chart 2B

While it does not have to undermine the general statement of the chapter, it is however less than remarkable the two charts for this question are similar! If you ask a question at around the same time and around the same place, the signs on the house cusps will be the same for about a month. That’s not a miracle, it’s simple math. It’s also something you need to take note of in the back of your head before assigning great meaning to similar charts! I would however, assign a meaning to it if it was a different place on earth.

Random chart 2C drawn up for the very next day at the same time and place.

The question “What about twins?” in astrology is only half of where your scepticism could come from;) Surely the aspects and the Moon sign would start to differ even within a day, but the slower the planet is the more likely it will turn up in the same house for a week or two if it’s position is early in a house. Does that still give astrology it’s personal tint? Astrologers think so.

I’m sure the Greek (who have created the personalisation of astrology) were not blind to this effect either. Perhaps this is the best mix possible between macro and micro, because it certainly does underline astrology’s validity as a mundane principle. What I personally don’t understand, is that science never grabbed this opportunity to disprove astrology; as I’ve never seen it spelled out anywhere. ‘Because it’s scientifically proven’, should be something to take very lightly in this case.