Advertisement
© by Dr Shepherd Simpson, Astrological Historian
Should we Consider an Alignment between the Galactic Equator and the Sun to be Significant?:
It seems very unlikely.
The Sun's movement through space, as seen from our view point here on Earth, passes across the Galactic Equator once a year. So from our viewpoint this alignment happens every year.
The only thing that's different about the 1997 coincidence of the Sun - as seen from Earth - and the Galactic Equator is that it happens at a particular time, the time of the Winter Solstice. Why should this be significant?
Well.. there is no very good reason. The Maya may [or may not - again I am not qualified to comment on this] have found the Winter Solstice significant, as it marks the Sun's lowest top point in the daytime sky each year as seen from Earth. [Think of how the Sun never seems to get high in the sky in Winter.] But now we know that the Sun's movement in this way is just an optical illusion. It's caused by the tilt of the Earth's axis, with respect to the Ecliptic.
Why would an optical illusion of the Sun's movement have any significance? Answer: no reason at all.
winter solstice 2005-12-21 21h10m alignment of the Sun and Galactic Equator
Sun Alignment with the Galactic Equator in 2005. The Sun can be seen from the viewpoint of Earth to align with the Galactic Equator once every year. The particular example above is for 21 Dec 2005, 21 h 19 m UT. [Winter Solstice times in this and the above figure taken from Planetary and Lunar Coordinates 2000-2020, HM Nautical Almanac Office, and from US Naval Observatory Astronomical Applications Department information.]
Other Maya 'Ages': A number of other authors have published books which contain other end dates, and/or calendars, for the current or recent Maya cycles. However, none of them seem to claim a specific astrological connection, so I'll mention them only very briefly here:
Carl Johan Calleman: in Mayan Calendar: Solving the Greatest Mystery of Our Time [published 2001], gives a date for the end of the current longest cycle of the Maya calendar as 28 October 2011, based on 'the correct tzolkin count and a corrected ending date.' [2] Dr Calleman and Mr Jenkins have had a long and public disagreement on their subject of their two differing ideas [2]. Dr Calleman has published a more recent book, The Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness [published 2004], with a forward by Mr Argüelles.
Jose Argüelles: in The Mayan Factor: Path Beyond Technology [published 1987], produced a version of the Maya calendar, called the Dreamspell. Dr Calleman reports that Mr Jenkins 'exposed the calendar proposed by Jose Argüelles, the Dreamspell, as a calendar that had never been used by the Maya,' in the 'so-called true count debate that was posted on the Internet in 1995.' [2]
Tony Shearer: in Lord of the Dawn: Quetzalcoatl - the Plumed Serpent of Mexico [published 1971] and Beneath the Moon and Under the Sun: A Poetic Reappraisal of the Sacred Calendar and the Prophecies of Ancient Mexico [published 1975] calculated the date of something now called the 'Harmonic Convergence'. This is stated to have occurred in August 16th - 17th, 1987 - though its exact date is now the subject of much debate [2]. The date(s) of the 'Harmonic Convergence' is (are) based on calculating nine of a particular Maya calendar cycle since the arrival of the infamous Spanish conquistador Hernando Cortez on the Yucatan peninsula in AD 1519.
The 'Harmonic Convergence has since been further popularised by Mr Argüelles, who is quoted as saying that it was 'the point at which the counter-spin of history finally comes to a momentary halt, and the still imperceptible spin of post-history commences'. [3] However, as not a lot notably changed in 1987, the 'Harmonic Convergence' now seems to be have been relegated in importance to the start of the build up to the 2012 date discussed above.
Stone bust of Quetzalcoatl, Aztec, AD 1325-1521
Stone bust of Quetzalcoatl. Aztec, AD 1325-1521.
Click on the above to see a larger version.
I can't refrain from commenting on this one... The idea behind Mr Shearer's work seems to be that the Maya god Quetzalcoatl is supposed to have prophesied his own return. After which there would be nine calendar cycles - which are supposed to have now ended. The later Aztecs mistook Cortez for the returning Quetzalcoatl, which Mr Shearer took as providing the start date for these nine cycles.
Er... yes, but surely the important point is that the Aztecs mistook Cortez for Quetzalcoatl - a mistake which Cortez was able to use to great advantage. Quetzalcoatl did not in fact return, and has in fact not returned... Doesn't this rather destroy the argument for a 'Harmonic Convergence'?
[1] www.levity.com/eschaton/Why2012.html. Originally published in the Dec-Jan '95 issue of Mountain Astrologer.
[2] www.diagnosis2012.co.uk. See the discussion between Dr Calleman and Mr Jenkins.
[3] www.thewildrose.net/harmonic...nce.html.
P.S. Does the Age of Aquarius Begin in 2012:
No.
Because of the current concentration on 2012 AD, there's been some confusion between this and the Age of Aquarius start year. The Age of Aquarius begins in about 2600 AD. From the archeological evidence we can safely say that the Maya never used Greek constellations in their view of the heavens; so it's not possible that they could have had an Age of Aquarius concept.
Publishing and Precession after Jung...
6: Publishing and Precession after Jung...
6a: Ancient Egypt and Precession
6b: Ancient Babylonia and Precession
6c: Mithraism and Precession
6d: 2012 and the Maya Calendar
© Dr Shepherd Simpson, Astrological Historian
Should we Consider an Alignment between the Galactic Equator and the Sun to be Significant?:
It seems very unlikely.
The Sun's movement through space, as seen from our view point here on Earth, passes across the Galactic Equator once a year. So from our viewpoint this alignment happens every year.
The only thing that's different about the 1997 coincidence of the Sun - as seen from Earth - and the Galactic Equator is that it happens at a particular time, the time of the Winter Solstice. Why should this be significant?
Well.. there is no very good reason. The Maya may [or may not - again I am not qualified to comment on this] have found the Winter Solstice significant, as it marks the Sun's lowest top point in the daytime sky each year as seen from Earth. [Think of how the Sun never seems to get high in the sky in Winter.] But now we know that the Sun's movement in this way is just an optical illusion. It's caused by the tilt of the Earth's axis, with respect to the Ecliptic.
Why would an optical illusion of the Sun's movement have any significance? Answer: no reason at all.
winter solstice 2005-12-21 21h10m alignment of the Sun and Galactic Equator
Sun Alignment with the Galactic Equator in 2005. The Sun can be seen from the viewpoint of Earth to align with the Galactic Equator once every year. The particular example above is for 21 Dec 2005, 21 h 19 m UT. [Winter Solstice times in this and the above figure taken from Planetary and Lunar Coordinates 2000-2020, HM Nautical Almanac Office, and from US Naval Observatory Astronomical Applications Department information.]
Other Maya 'Ages': A number of other authors have published books which contain other end dates, and/or calendars, for the current or recent Maya cycles. However, none of them seem to claim a specific astrological connection, so I'll mention them only very briefly here:
Carl Johan Calleman: in Mayan Calendar: Solving the Greatest Mystery of Our Time [published 2001], gives a date for the end of the current longest cycle of the Maya calendar as 28 October 2011, based on 'the correct tzolkin count and a corrected ending date.' [2] Dr Calleman and Mr Jenkins have had a long and public disagreement on their subject of their two differing ideas [2]. Dr Calleman has published a more recent book, The Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness [published 2004], with a forward by Mr Argüelles.
Jose Argüelles: in The Mayan Factor: Path Beyond Technology [published 1987], produced a version of the Maya calendar, called the Dreamspell. Dr Calleman reports that Mr Jenkins 'exposed the calendar proposed by Jose Argüelles, the Dreamspell, as a calendar that had never been used by the Maya,' in the 'so-called true count debate that was posted on the Internet in 1995.' [2]
Tony Shearer: in Lord of the Dawn: Quetzalcoatl - the Plumed Serpent of Mexico [published 1971] and Beneath the Moon and Under the Sun: A Poetic Reappraisal of the Sacred Calendar and the Prophecies of Ancient Mexico [published 1975] calculated the date of something now called the 'Harmonic Convergence'. This is stated to have occurred in August 16th - 17th, 1987 - though its exact date is now the subject of much debate [2]. The date(s) of the 'Harmonic Convergence' is (are) based on calculating nine of a particular Maya calendar cycle since the arrival of the infamous Spanish conquistador Hernando Cortez on the Yucatan peninsula in AD 1519.
The 'Harmonic Convergence has since been further popularised by Mr Argüelles, who is quoted as saying that it was 'the point at which the counter-spin of history finally comes to a momentary halt, and the still imperceptible spin of post-history commences'. [3] However, as not a lot notably changed in 1987, the 'Harmonic Convergence' now seems to be have been relegated in importance to the start of the build up to the 2012 date discussed above.
Stone bust of Quetzalcoatl, Aztec, AD 1325-1521
Stone bust of Quetzalcoatl. Aztec, AD 1325-1521.
Click on the above to see a larger version.
I can't refrain from commenting on this one... The idea behind Mr Shearer's work seems to be that the Maya god Quetzalcoatl is supposed to have prophesied his own return. After which there would be nine calendar cycles - which are supposed to have now ended. The later Aztecs mistook Cortez for the returning Quetzalcoatl, which Mr Shearer took as providing the start date for these nine cycles.
Er... yes, but surely the important point is that the Aztecs mistook Cortez for Quetzalcoatl - a mistake which Cortez was able to use to great advantage. Quetzalcoatl did not in fact return, and has in fact not returned... Doesn't this rather destroy the argument for a 'Harmonic Convergence'?
[1] www.levity.com/eschaton/Why2012.html. Originally published in the Dec-Jan '95 issue of Mountain Astrologer.
[2] www.diagnosis2012.co.uk. See the discussion between Dr Calleman and Mr Jenkins.
[3] www.thewildrose.net/harmonic...nce.html.
P.S. Does the Age of Aquarius Begin in 2012:
No.
Because of the current concentration on 2012 AD, there's been some confusion between this and the Age of Aquarius start year. The Age of Aquarius begins in about 2600 AD. From the archeological evidence we can safely say that the Maya never used Greek constellations in their view of the heavens; so it's not possible that they could have had an Age of Aquarius concept.
Publishing and Precession after Jung...
6: Publishing and Precession after Jung...
6a: Ancient Egypt and Precession
6b: Ancient Babylonia and Precession
6c: Mithraism and Precession
6d: 2012 and the Maya Calendar
© Dr Shepherd Simpson, Astrological Historian
Advertisement
Advertisement
