USA, a North American republic containing now 50 states, declared its independence from British Empire on July 4, 1776. But, specifying the astrological birth time of this country is still an enigma, for there is not a consensus on a certain moment. Although the widely accepted date is July 4, 1776, there are four other notable opinions, which are not giving much importance to the declaration of independence. Before examining the independence declaration time, I would like to point out some concepts related to these four dates.

Helen Boyd (1975) suggests that on July 6, 1775, through a declaration of war, the United Colonies became an independent state, severing all political and governmental ties with Great Britain. David Solte (1993) believes that on November 15, 1777, when the Articles of Confederation became effective, the independent states declared a unity under one government, which constitutes the core of the United States. Ron Grimes (1996) emphasizes that the ratification of the Articles of Confederation on March 1, 1781 is the official declaration of the formation of a nation. Finally, the date September 17, 1787 was proposed by several independent astrologers, on which the present U.S. Constitution was approved.

First of all, declaration of war to the sovereign power does not confirm the independence of the Colonies. If it were the case, they would not need to declare their independency afterwards, for a second time. Declaration of war denotes a conflict between the two parties. Here, the Colonies renounced a former allegiance by doing so, and in political sense it was a rebellion until the outcome of the war. Therefore, Ms. Boyd was wrong in considering warfare as independency. On the other hand, Articles of Confederation was a written agreement ratified in 1781 by the thirteen original states, as a legal symbol of their union, disabling the central government to exercise any coercive power over the states or their citizens. Solte and Grimes were emphasizing several internal affairs while referring to different stages of this agreement. Because, during both the formation and the ratification of the Articles, there was an independent body and its representatives.

Articles of Confederation was a product of an independent body, as well as the Constitution as a reformation of it. Therefore, all debates, agreements, and proclamations after the secured independence should be regarded as internal affairs of that independent body. Because, when a political body is free from external control and constraint, all developments or formations within that body become domestic issues, which are resolved by the elements of that independent body. If the developmental stage until the ratification of the Articles is to be seen as a transient period of incertitude, confusion and disorder; then we must regard the end of the Civil War as the true re-birth of this nation. Besides, naming the period between the declaration of independence and ratification of the Articles or of Constitution as a chaos-like transition, is simply denying the historical facts.

Fourth or Second of July?

In brief, the inhabitants of northern America, who were named collectively Americans afterwards, rebelled against the sovereignty of an abroad power, and declared their independency after expelling the influence of that power from their land. And, what they have done after declaring their independence, became their own domestic issue. It is like cutting off the umbilical cord, which separates the child and makes it an individual.

Now we need to check the time line of events:

The clearest call for independence up to the summer of 1776 came in Philadelphia on June 7, when Richard Henry Lee, a delegate from Virginia, read a resolution before the Continental Congress, pointing out the independency of United Colonies. On June 11, 1776, consideration of the Lee Resolution was postponed, and the Committee of Five was appointed to draft a statement presenting to the world the colonies’ case for independence. Between June 11 - July 1, 1776, Congress recessed for three weeks. During this period the Committee of Five (John Adams, Roger Sherman, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Livingston, and Thomas Jefferson) drafted the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson drafted it; Adams and Franklin made changes to it. Congress reconvened on July 1, 1776. On July 2, 1776, the Lee resolution was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies (New York did not vote). Immediately afterward, Congress began to consider the Declaration. Congress made some alterations and deletions to it on July 2, 3, and the morning of the 4th. Late in the afternoon of July 4, 1776, the Declaration was officially adopted, and the Committee of Five took the manuscript copy of the document to John Dunlap, official printer to the Congress. On the morning of July 5, 1776, copies printed by John Dunlap were dispatched by members of Congress to various committees, assemblies, and to the commanders of the Continental troops. On July 19, 1776, Congress ordered that the Declaration be "fairly engrossed on parchment, with the title and stile of The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America and that the same, when engrossed, be signed by every member of Congress." The document was signed by most of the members on August 2. George Wythe signed on August 27. On September 4, Richard Henry Lee, Elbridge Gerry, and Oliver Wilcott signed. Matthew Thornton signed on November 19, and Thomas McKean signed in 1781.

Jefferson's account reflects three stages in the life of the Declaration: the document originally written by Jefferson; the changes to that document made by Franklin and Adams, resulting in the version that was submitted by the Committee of Five to the Congress; and the version that was eventually adopted.

On July 1, 1776, Congress reconvened. The following day, the Lee Resolution for independence was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies, New York not voting. Immediately afterward, the Congress began to consider the Declaration. Adams and Franklin had made only a few changes before the committee submitted the document. The discussion in Congress resulted in some alterations and deletions, but the basic document remained Jefferson's. The process of revision continued through all of July 3 and into the late afternoon of July 4. Then, at last, church bells rang out over Philadelphia; the Declaration had been officially adopted.

Although Congress had adopted the Declaration submitted by the Committee of Five, the committee's task was not yet completed. Congress had also directed that the committee supervise the printing of the adopted document. The first printed copies of the Declaration of Independence were turned out from the shop of John Dunlap, official printer to the Congress. After the Declaration had been adopted, the committee took to Dunlap the manuscript document, possibly Jefferson's fair copy of his rough draft. On the morning of July 5, copies were dispatched by members of Congress to various assemblies, conventions, and committees of safety as well as to the commanders of Continental troops. Also on July 5, a copy of the printed version of the approved Declaration was inserted into the rough journal of the Continental Congress for July 4. The text was followed by the words "Signed by Order and in Behalf of the Congress, John Hancock, President. Attest. Charles Thomson, Secretary." It is not known how many copies John Dunlap printed on his busy night of July 4. There are 24 copies known to exist of what is commonly referred to as the Dunlap broadside.

On July 9 the action of Congress was officially approved by the New York Convention. All 13 colonies had now signified their approval. On July 19, therefore, Congress was able to order that the Declaration be "fairly engrossed on parchment, with the title and stile of The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America, and that the same, when engrossed, be signed by every member of Congress." Engrossing is the process of preparing an official document in a large, clear hand. Timothy Matlack was probably the engrosser of the Declaration. Matlack set to work with pen, ink, parchment, and practiced hand, and finally, on August 2, the journal of the Continental Congress records that "The declaration of independence being engrossed and compared at the table was signed." One of the most widely held misconceptions about the Declaration is that it was signed on July 4, 1776, by all the delegates in attendance.

Source: US National Archives & Records Administration (NARA)

The summary of all these events is that on July 2, 1776, the members of the Second Continental Congress voted in favor of independence, and on July 4, 1776, the delegates then held a second vote and approved the Declaration of Independence. At this point, Julian Armistead was right on judging the July 2, 1776 as the historical true date of conclusive voting and adoption of independence. But, despite even what John Adams, a leading historical figure of those days, wrote about the importance of July 2, American people used to celebrate the independence on the fourth of July, not the second. Perhaps, the emphasize lies in the declaration process, which is the announcement of what has been affirmed.

Ebenezer Sibly's Peculiar Chart

First known erected horoscope for the Declaration of Independence is the -perhaps- symbolic one, which takes place as a small part of an engraving in Ebenezer Sibly's book The Celestial Science of Astrology, published in 1780 and afterwards. The engraving in general depicts the Revolution of America, as stated at the bottom of it. At the top of this engraving, an angel on dark clouds holds a chart. Although this chart is a small detail of the engraving, it has a significant value for the astrologers, as it is seen here:

It is expected to be erected for the 4th of July 1776, 22:10, as stated on the chart. But, the name of the place is not mentioned. The title is America Independance, which supposed to be American Independence, like other errors produced by the artist, gives a good clue for the reliability of the figures engraved.

The horoscope structure, disregarding the ecliptic longitude values and placing of the bodies, must be erected for London. More precisely, the cusps are referring to 21:53:17 UT for 13°12' Sag MC on Greenwich meridian, and 51°31'31" N for 19°49' Aqu ASC, which corresponds to London. If the specified time 10h10m p.m. is to be understood as local time, then the longitude of the supposed place shifts 04°11'23" to west, somewhere in Gower peninsula, Wales. You may extend it to 72°15'22" W with local time 22:10, but the latitude of the place remains the same to keep the same meridian, sending you somewhere in the waste tracts of Quebec province. Therefore, it is plausible to assume that Sibly meant London, with Greenwich meridian. Because, omitting the seconds of arc makes it possible to place the geographical latitude between 51°31'09" and 51°31'53", for 19°49' Aqu ASC, which is good enough to refer to London. Also, the allowance for the given MC is between 21:53:15 and 21:53:19 UT.

The cuspidal formation of the chart is Placidean, without any doubt, as the table above shows. The only interesting feature is the engraver's error with the 12th house value, which should be 20°00' Cap in accordance with the tabulation of others. The author disregards the minutes of arc, but places zero instead. 3rd and 9th cusp values should be 22°00', but they are still acceptable because of the usage of ready-made tables.

The only remaining problem is the computation of the position of bodies. First of all, the synchronicity is failing. The accuracy of the ephemerides of time was not that bad, particularly in regard to the positions of Sun and Moon. Here is the table showing the possible time periods in which the bodies may be as the engraving suggests.

Possible time values on this table are with the assumption that the given data by Sibly are supposed to be correct. I have given two corrections, namely one for the position of the Moon and one for Mercury. Sibly's minute of arc value for the position of the Moon may be confused with the 12th house cusp by the engraver, and I have reasons for it to describe later. Mercury's position, although retrograde at the time, cannot be miscalculated that far, and the number supposed to be 24 instead of inscribed 22. Again, the placement of Mercury seems not correct in the 5th, which should be in the 6th. Computation errors with Jupiter and Saturn positions are acceptable for the time.

Planetary figures versus 10h 10m P.M.

If the 10h10m p.m. of the engraving is Greenwich time, we should see here at least some close values. But, none of them confirms this possibility. If these values are for the local time at Philadelphia, then the event should take place around noon time there, which may be quite irrelevant to 10h10m p.m. timing of the engraving. On the other hand, temporal distribution of Sibly's values are consistent, promising the possibility of a common time base for all these calculations within the error limits of the ephemeris used by Sibly.

Possibility of a crucial error with the position of the Sun is very unlikely. Because, the computations of that time are based on the position of the Sun. Sibly's value 13°08' is between 13°07'30" and 13°08'30", which denotes a time between 17:11:30 and 17:36:41 UT. Again, the 10h10m p.m. definition of the engraving is possibly for London, Greenwich meridian, which refers to 17:09:30 - 17:10:30 LST or 17:08:54 - 17:09:54 LMT of Philadelphia. Now, what if our celebrated Ebenezer the Freemason astro-philosopher -as he presented himself- did make an oddity by calculating the planetary positions for another time? Well, my opinion is that he did really such oddness, and thus created a dilemma for his future colleagues. Now, let's compare the values, both for 17:10 GMT and 22:10 GMT:

Total absolute difference is given in two values; first one is with the supposed figures, and the next one in brackets with the original figures. Comparison shows that relative divergence ratio is 1:12.4 (1:2.4), in favor of 17:10 UT. On the other hand, synchronizing the 24°00' Aqu position of the Moon with 13°08' Can Sun is not possible within the limits assigned by both figures. But, if we take the exceptional 10' figure just above the Moon's position adjusted to the 12th house cusp, where the 6th does not have it, neither the other cusps are containing digits for minute of arc, then we can assume that the misplaced 10' was due to sloppy work of the artist. Therefore, Moon with 24°10' is plausible. Again, placing of Mercury on the engraving seems also not a fortunate one. Instead of the 6th, Mercury was affixed to the corner of the 5th with a crooked style, and possibly the careless artist was not attentive to the value. To achieve a 22°21' cannot be possible even with the orbital element parameters known at time, but 24°21 is quite possible. Therefore, supposed values are assumed to be identical with the Sibly's, and thus the two defects were set aside. When a search for minimal value of total absolute difference is done, the result will be 00°17'33" for 17:11:31 UT.

Thus, we may say that Sibly's figures on the engraving are consistent, and referring a certain time around 17:11:31 UT, or round 12:12 LT for a place in the vicinity of 75° W longitude. Then, we may suggest that he might have been chosen the local noontime for the calculation of planetary positions. But, the meridian passage of the Sun for the very day could be observed at 12:04:35 from Philadelphia (Independence Hall 39°56.957' N - 75°08.979' W).

Now, we need to step back, and verify the local noon-time hypothesis by applying a different method: If the given values are 13°08 Can for the Sun, and 21°10 Aqu for the Moon, the only possible time interval that is expected to confirm these values can be only between 17:11:30 and 17:12:20 UT. Former is the limit for 13°07'30" Can Sun, and the latter is being the limit for 24°10'30" Aqu Moon, which are based on geocentric astrometry, without parallax and aberration. If the place of the event is Philadelphia, the zone difference becomes round 5 hours, and the only possible time interval in local terms then becomes round 12:12, which denotes practically the noontime at that place.

Deciphering the Location

As a next step, we need to find the geographical longitude limits, which confirm the possibility of the meridian passage of the Sun within above mentioned time interval. Computation shows that 12:11:30 LT can be observed with 76°52'50" W, and 12:12:20 LT with 77°05'22" W longitudes. Here, the narrow longitude band of 13' passes just through the border of densely populated New York - Philadelphia - Baltimore - York area of that time, which is between 74°00' - 76°46' W. Just a reminder: (77°03' W) Washington D.C. emerged some twenty five years later.

In the end, we have enough reason to believe that the cuspidal computation is based on London latitude, and the planetary computation is based on the apparent noontime of the place where the event took place. Perhaps, Sibly had a ground for such an ambiguous combination, but it cannot be astrological. With the jargon of Freemasonry, it is possible to assign a high sophistication to this ambiguity, yet the meaning will be still shallow.

Back to the Local Time

The next step is the adjustment of the time to local reference of the chart. Cuspidal timing gives a value between 21:53:15 - 21:53:19 UT, which corresponds to 16:52:39 - 16:52:43 of Philadelphia local time, when the longitudinal 05:00:36 difference is applied. In round values, it will be 16:55 LT, if the geographical longitude is mistaken for round 74.6° W. But, the engraving gives 10h10m p.m. notation, which seems to have no bearing to these values. If it is for London, then the local time should be 17:09:24 in Philadelphia. Yet, we need to give some more attention to "P.M." part of the notation. It is an abbreviation for post meridiem, and means "after noon." More precisely, p.m. denotes the time passed after the sundial shows the noontime, i.e. after the meridian passage of the Sun. If we remember that the Standard Time was not adopted in 1776, and the Local Mean Time was in use, then P.M. will have certainly a different meaning.

If 10h10m p.m. is to be understood in that meaning, then the corresponding Greenwich time becomes 22:13:57 UT, which is 00:20:40 ahead of the expected. But, if the 10h10m notation would be 10m to 10h, then the standard time would be between 21:53:27 - 21:54:27 UT, which is only 7 - 72 seconds ahead of the expected. Again, Greenwich meridian passage of the Sun was at 12:03:57 on July 4th. To confirm the calculation: The hour angle of the Sun between 09:49:15 - 09:49:20 on that day matches the cuspidal formation of the engraving. Which means that 10m to 10h possibility in terms of the hour angle of the Sun becomes also 10 - 75 seconds of arc ahead of the expected. On the other hand, meridian passage of the Sun was at 12:04:35 in Philadelphia. Then, 10m to 10h after noon for London is 16:53:29 - 16:54:29 local time in Philadelphia. If the notation is hour angle, then, it is 04:48:54 - 04:49:54 for Philadelphia, which gives 16:53:31 - 16:54:31 local time for the same place. In brief, there is a possibility to assume that the time was 16:54 in Philadelphia.

But, since the mean difference is round 00:01:18, we may assume that Sibly's Philadelphia location must be shifted eastward than ours. Computation shows that 09:49:30 hour angle and 21:53:15 UT limits give 74°57'32" W, and 09:50:30 hour angle and 21:53:19 UT limits give 74°41'32" W longitudes, which is 74°49'32" W for the mean value, or round 74°50' W.

Finally, we have theoretical reason to claim that 10h10m p.m. postulation refers to the hour angle 09:50, which is after the noon time, and the conclusion of the subject is obtained by combining this fact with the cuspital timing of the engraving, as given above: Theoretically, the corresponding time match can be 16:54 LT for Philadelphia, with 74°50' W longitude, in round values. A reminder: Throughout the computation results, fractions of seconds are omitted.

In short, the work of Sibly is surely a poor one, with more extras, as explained below.

Who was the timekeeper in Philadelphia?

But, in practice, who was holding the chronometer in Philadelphia on that day is a mystery! If our Ebenezer did point out to the hour angle 09:50, where is his alibi? Can anyone imagine that during such an excitement, a cool timekeeper was lurking in the corner of the Hall, with a chronometer in the hand, and watching for the moment of social climax! It sounds irrational to me. Yet, there is another possibility, and it seems much more reasonable than the timekeeper scenario: Ebenezer Sibly was simply not informed about the exact time of the event. More probably, he was told that the event took place late in the afternoon of that day. But, as an astro-philosopher, he might have felt that he had the liberty to assign a special time to that special event.

Without knowing the time of the event, or nothing more than a "late afternoon" definition, Sibly might have employed a common technique of his day, which is synchronizing the ascending point with an important object. Because, his unusual style of erecting the horoscope, with houses for London but planetary calculations for noon time of the actual location, is revealing the fact that something was missing there, or not very clear to him. If he would know the exact time of the event, why should he prefer such odd combinations? On the other hand, people of those days were not used to talk about the time of an event with precise minutes and seconds, as it is suggested in Sibly's computation.

Antares, the Red King and the Rival of Mars

Late in the afternoon of that day, in Philadelphia, Aldebaran was setting at 16:29:00, Neptune was culminating at 16:40:57, Antares was rising at 16:54:47, and Uranus was setting at 16:57:16, being all values apparent topocentric and LT. For sure, Sibly was not aware of the existence of Uranus and Neptune, like his contemporaries. But, the other two objects, forming one axis of the Four Royal or Cardinal Stars of the Ancients, were highly esteemed in his days. On the other hand, geocentric value of the setting time of Uranus is 16:52:33 LT, but there is no possibility of knowing this at his time. It is just a remarkable coincidence.

When a body is selected to be placed on the horizon line, time appears mostly in fractions of the term. Here, for instance, Antares was not rising at 16:50 or 16:55, but at 16:54:47. Yet, when a daily event is the subject, nobody prefers to say "he called me at 13:57", instead of "at 2 o'clock." Accordingly, we cannot expect somebody to time the Declaration with an unusual 16:54 expression. Therefore, it is plausible that Sibly's reference was not any conveyance of a witness, but a deliberate calculation, namely placing the martial star on the eastern horizon.

The difference between the Sibly's cuspidal timing and the actual rising of Antares is between 02m05s - 02m09s, which is quite acceptable for his day [1]. Difference in terms of altitude is only 20.4 arc minutes below the horizon, if the geographic position was the same with Sibly. To calculate the errors with the geographical position, you may apply this formula to find the exact apparent rising moment of Antares on that day for any given geographical parameters (l°W - b°N) of a certain location in the vicinity of Philadelphia:

LT = 16:54:22.13 - 00:04:00×(75°-l°) - 00:03:30×(40°-b°)

On the other hand, as it can be adapted to basic astrometry formula:

LT = 12:03:59.45 - 00:04:00.02×(75°-l°) + (H.A. of 8)

We get the hour angle relation:

(H.A. of 8) = 04:50:22.68 - 00:03:30×(40°-b°)

By converting it to Sibly's hour angle [10m to 10h] in terms of Greenwich:

09:50:00 ± 00:00:30 = 04:50:22.68 - 00:03:30×(40°-b°) + l/15

We get the equation for geographical limits:

l = 74.9055° ± 0.125° + 0.875°×(40°-b°)

And the result will be:

As it is seen above, with round 5 arc minutes deviation of location parameters, it is possible to claim that Sibly's chart is referring to a fictitious Antares rising horoscope. Total difference is being (Dl + Db).

Is it working?

If this is the case, which I consider to be more likely, there is no need to take Sibly's chart for granted, and to scrutinize it in detail. Since it is a made-up one, it will not be working with the historical facts. Beyond questioning Sibly's timing, the date itself may not be adequate also to comply with history.  Indeed, there are many samples throughout the history of US to confirm this hypothesis, as well as today. For instance, let's check these formations:

What was so extraordinary between Apr. 13 - May 20, 2002, when all these four major configurations were operative? On the other hand, incidents like 9/11 WTC disaster when Jupiter was transiting over the Sun, or Bush's inauguration while the Sun was progressing over the Moon are likely to be contradictory, even at first glance.

What is U.S. today?

It may be difficult to describe the main features of a blended nation like U.S., at first glance. But, it is clear that U.S. is widely known by its short but notorious heritage. It was shaped about two hundred and more years ago by some adventurous people, whose forefathers were nothing but gallows birds escaped mostly from Europe. Their common instinct to destroy anything on their way led them to kill each other also in the Civil War, when they were not satisfied with the Native American Holocaust. After eradicating all Native Americans with enormous brutality rare to see elsewhere, they demonstrated the ugliest samples of torture upon African people by abusing them as slaves for more than a century. Again, they invade Europe during the WW2, and try to destroy the cultural heritage of Europeans, with great enthusiasm, if we can remember how the soldiers were shooting free what they see in Germany, during those days. Again, great massacres decorated further their heritage in Vietnam and Laos. This listing goes on with no end, and it will not be an exaggeration if someone calls this nation a born serial killer.

Another significant feature of this nation is shown in their understanding of Christianity, which has no other sample in the entire world, and also which has no relevance to the genuine teachings of Jesus. In practice, U.S. is not a secular state. Governing elements are strictly bound to a set of churches, which are fed by money holders. And the majority of money holders in the U.S. are Jews, although their community is less than 5 % of the population. Christianity is understood only in heretical terms, and this perversity led many sects to gain power over local communities. There is a scary list of these heretic communities like Mormons, Shakers, Evangelists, Amish sects, etc., and all these sects are manipulated more or less by the head of American Jewish Community.

The overwhelming Jewish influence upon the American culture is deeply rooted, and became indispensable today even in the daily life of an average American. From top to bottom, the U.S. government is under the control of Jewish Community, and it is interesting that to be under the dictate of the Jewish minority is not disturbing the American people today! Although this sneaky intrusion is becoming costly for the American people, like it was during the WTC attack on September 11, 2001, where all the Jews working in the Trade Center suddenly disappeared, nobody wants to rebel against this abuse. Here, we see again the influence of brainwashing propagation through media, which is certainly under the control of the Jewish Community.

Jews were the number one victorious people of the WW2, and the next one in the list were the Americans. They kidnapped all scientists of Europe, and forced them to create a superior technology for themselves. When mingled with urge to kill and to destroy, this technology is directed to create sophisticated weapons, which accordingly made the Americans perfect killing machines of the Jews, to rule the world.

The gun, the car, and the whisky are three essential objects of the American culture, because they like to kill, drive fast, and get drunk. Spiritual values are generally ignored, and materialism is deep down to the throat of each American individual. Obesity is a common disease, because they like to fress fast food. It is now a nation who is indifferent to poverty and hunger of other nations of the world, which are suffering mostly because of the devouring world policy of the U.S. government.

Now, from this perspective, it is not possible to describe a monster with this or that horoscope.

The flat chart below is according to the cuspidal timing of Sibly, which is valid in my eyes only for the event of Declaration, which is a history now:

16:52:41.31 Philadelphia - Independence Hall 75°08.979' W - 39°56.957' N

[1] Nautical Almanac of Royal Observatory for the year 1776 is the best reliable source to see the positional computation parameters of a Scorpii at the time. For this purpose, I checked recently the library of Astronomy Department of Istanbul University, where to my knowledge during early 1980s all almanacs since 1771 had been archived. But, this time I have learned that a few years ago the chancellor of the university ordered to dispose obsolete books in the libraries of all departments, and accordingly the old almanacs were simply thrown away, or sold to second-hand book dealers for a mere song! [back]

Copyright © 2004-2008 Haluk Akcam. All rights reserved.

[back to articles list] [main page] [table of contents]