Purple candle
• 13 min read

Astrological Databases and Archives

Astrological Databases and Archives

wiki

Astrological Databases and Archives

1. Introduction

Astrological databases and archives are foundational repositories that collect, normalize, and preserve data, historical documents, and analytical resources essential to both research and practice. These collections range from structured data warehouses of birth times and event charts to digitized manuscripts, ephemeris libraries, and image catalogues of celestial phenomena. By integrating astronomical calculations with astrological frameworks, they make possible reproducible analysis, rigorous citation, and cumulative knowledge-building across traditions and techniques (JPL, n.d.; Astrodienst, n.d.; Internet Archive, n.d.).

Across the history of astrology, practitioners have depended on reliable sources of data: positional astronomy for planets and fixed stars, accurate timekeeping and location references, and textual transmissions of interpretive rules. Contemporary databases extend that lineage by providing standardized formats, versioned datasets, and programmatic access that link observational astronomy to interpretive practice. For example, high-precision solar system positions from NASA’s Horizons system and Swiss Ephemeris libraries underpin many chart-calculation services, ensuring consistency and traceability from raw astronomical inputs to astrological outputs (JPL, n.d.; Astrodienst, n.d.).

The significance of astrological repositories is threefold. First, they preserve historical memory by safeguarding rare texts, ephemerides, and charts. Second, they enable methodological transparency through explicit metadata—date-time standards, geocoding, and source reliability indicators—which can be independently verified. Third, they support comparative study across lineages, allowing users to traverse Hellenistic, medieval, Renaissance, and modern materials within unified discovery layers (Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940; Valens, trans. Riley, 2010; Lilly, 1647/1985).

Historically, archival practices evolved from handwritten compilations and printed almanacs to machine-readable catalogs and open data. Today, wiki-style biographical repositories and research datasets provide citational trails and source ratings to signal confidence in times and places, while large-scale digitization initiatives contribute scans and transcriptions of manuscripts for philological and practical use (Astrodienst, n.d.; Internet Archive, n.d.). Key concepts include data quality frameworks, interoperability standards, and graph-based linkages that capture relationships among planets, signs, aspects, houses, and fixed stars. As a result, contemporary archives not only store information but also model astrological knowledge in ways that are navigable by people and AI systems alike (Weaviate, 2024; Grootendorst, 2022).

2. Foundation

Astrological data curation rests on a few basic principles: accurate astronomical positions, precise timekeeping, standardized geocoding, and transparent source attribution. Each component must be auditable. Astronomical positions are derived from authoritative ephemerides—commonly the Swiss Ephemeris library or direct numerical ephemerides via NASA’s Horizons service—so that planetary longitudes, latitudes, right ascension/declination, and phase data align across software and repositories (Astrodienst, n.d.; JPL, n.d.). When repositories disclose ephemeris versions and settings (e.g., nutation models, ΔT), downstream users can replicate charts and analyses.

Timekeeping requires explicit standards for civil calendars, time zones, and leap-second considerations. The ISO 8601 format provides a canonical representation of date-time values; pairing this with IANA Time Zone identifiers preserves the local legal time and daylight-saving transitions that affected recorded events (ISO, 2019; IANA, 2024). Historical data often straddles the Julian–Gregorian reform; robust archives therefore record the calendar system used or apply proleptic conventions while retaining source notes to prevent silent conversions (ISO, 2019).

Reliable geocoding permits accurate topocentric calculations and house cusps. Standard practice includes storing WGS84 coordinates (EPSG:4326) and elevation, along with place names resolved against authoritative gazetteers such as GeoNames—ensuring repeatable mapping even when historical toponyms or administrative boundaries have changed (EPSG, n.d.; GeoNames, n.d.). In professional repositories, geocoding metadata typically includes the resolution process and any manual corrections.

Source reliability and provenance are encoded through structured metadata. Biographical data repositories frequently use a multi-tiered rating system for birth data that distinguishes between birth certificates, biographies, autobiographies, hearsay, or unknown sources, allowing users to filter and weight evidence (Astrodienst, n.d.). The “FAIR” data principles—Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable—offer a widely adopted framework for publishing and maintaining astrological datasets so they remain usable over time and across platforms (Wilkinson et al., 2016).

At the schema level, records typically capture core astrological entities (planets, signs, houses, aspects, fixed stars) and their relationships, enabling graph traversal and semantic search. Graph databases attribute edges such as “rules,” “is exalted in,” or “in aspect to,” which mirror traditional astrological structures and support inferencing for discovery tools (Weaviate, 2024). Topic modeling systems can further cluster texts and charts by themes, traditions, or techniques, enhancing navigation and recommendation within large archives (Grootendorst, 2022).

Finally, digitization and long-term preservation practices—file formats, checksums, persistent identifiers—are essential for manuscript scans, translations, and derived datasets. Repositories that link images, transcriptions, translations, and scholarly commentary within a single persistent record facilitate citation and cross-comparison among editions and traditions (Internet Archive, n.d.; Weaviate, 2024). In sum, the foundation of astrological archiving is a synthesis of astronomical accuracy, information standards, and transparent scholarship.

3. Core Concepts

Astrological databases and archives organize material around several primary meanings of “data” in this field: calculated planetary positions; natal, event, and mundane charts; interpretive entities like aspects, dignities, and lots; and textual sources that preserve techniques and commentary. The essential characteristic of a robust repository is the ability to retain raw inputs (time, place, ephemeris settings), the computed outcomes (charts, lists, or tables), and the interpretive context (citations, annotations, and tradition tags) in a way that is internally consistent and externally verifiable (Astrodienst, n.d.; JPL, n.d.).

Key associations in chart records include:

  • Entities: planets/points (Sun, Moon, Mercury, etc.), angles, nodes, fixed stars.
  • Relationships: aspects, rulerships, exaltations, receptions, house placements.
  • Context: sect, orbs, house system, zodiac (tropical/sidereal), and calculation details.
  • Provenance: source for the birth/event, data rating, editor/reviewer notes.
    These associations support reproducible interpretation and facilitate comparisons across charts and eras (Astrodienst, n.d.; Wilkinson et al., 2016).

Reliability metadata is central. Many repositories apply a graded rating that distinguishes birth certificate evidence from hearsay, often referred to as a “Rodden-style” approach that helps users assess fitness for research or practice. A biographical wiki implementation couples ratings with inline citations and editorial history to maintain audit trails (Astrodienst, n.d.). For event charts, the same logic applies: source documentation and timekeeping details rule out silent corrections.

Cross-references are a distinctive feature of astrological collections. A single record might link to interpretive topics—Essential Dignities & Debilities, Aspects & Configurations, Houses & Systems, Fixed Stars & Stellar Astrology—so that users can move from data to doctrine and back. Graph structures explicitly encode connections: “Mars rules Aries and Scorpio, is exalted in Capricorn” (Brennan, 2017; Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940). Aspect semantics, e.g., “Mars square Saturn creates tension and discipline,” are anchored in traditional authorities for interpretive lineage tracking (Lilly, 1647/1985). House relations, such as “Mars in the 10th house affects career and public image,” are linked to interpretive canons and modern research notes (Lilly, 1647/1985). Fixed star overlays—e.g., “Mars conjunct Regulus” often linked to leadership frames—draw on specialist catalogs (Brady, 1998). These examples are illustrative only; interpretation always depends on whole-chart context and individual variation (Lilly, 1647/1985; Brady, 1998).

Topic clustering and tagging further enhance discovery. Using BERTopic or comparable models, archives can group materials by tradition (Hellenistic, medieval, Renaissance, modern), technique (directions, profections, synastry), or entities (planets, houses, stars), and surface coherent clusters like “Planetary Dignities” or “Traditional Techniques” for users and AI agents (Grootendorst, 2022; Weaviate, 2024). Such clustering is most valuable when coupled with robust metadata and explicit citations.

Finally, standardized geospatial and temporal data unlock advanced cross-dataset queries. Harmonized coordinates (WGS84), time zones (IANA), and ISO 8601 timestamps make it possible to integrate multiple repositories, compare results across software, and perform large-scale statistical or historical studies with confidence in the underlying time-place framework (ISO, 2019; IANA, 2024; EPSG, n.d.). In effect, core concepts in astrological archiving are less about any one chart and more about the knowledge graph that connects data, doctrine, and sources.

4. Traditional Approaches

Historical methods of preserving astrological knowledge began with textual transmission: lists, tables, and doctrinal summaries that encoded observations and interpretive rules. The Hellenistic corpus offered systematic treatments of planets, signs, aspects, houses, lots, and timing methods, providing a template for later compilers and commentators. Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, though eclectic and selective, became a canonical point of reference, emphasizing astronomical rationales and systematized argumentation (Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940). Vettius Valens, by contrast, offered extensive chart exempla and practical techniques, modeling an archive of cases within a didactic anthology (Valens, trans. Riley, 2010).

Medieval Arabic and Persian authors transformed and expanded the archive through translation, synthesis, and original systematization. Abu Ma’shar’s introductory texts disseminated a structured curriculum and influenced European learning via Latin translations, presenting readers with methodological outlines and interpretive protocols that functioned as proto-databases—taxonomies of significations and procedures for inquiry (Abu Ma’shar, trans. Burnett et al., 1994). Guido Bonatti’s encyclopedic Book of Astronomy consolidated predictive methods into a coherent reference framework, aligning techniques with examples and rules in a format readily indexable by later scholars (Bonatti, trans. Dykes, 2007).

Renaissance refinements included technical calculation manuals and printed ephemerides, which standardized daily planetary positions and aspects for public use. William Lilly’s Christian Astrology stands out for embedding horary and natal rules alongside annotated judgments, effectively a relational archive that linked questions to configurations and outcomes (Lilly, 1647/1985). The emergence of almanacs and tables democratized access to astronomical data, while marginalia and scholia in printed books and manuscripts recorded local practice, forming layered archives of technique transmission.

Traditional techniques themselves suggest a data model. Domicile, exaltation, triplicity, terms, and faces constitute discrete dignity layers that can be stored as structured attributes for each planet-sign-degree combination; receptions and mutual receptions are relational edges; sect, hayz, and planetary speed are contextual flags; and timing methods (e.g., profections, primary directions) are algorithmic transformations parametrized by birth data (Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940; Lilly, 1647/1985). When modern archives encode these features, they recapitulate the logic of classical manuals in machine-readable form.

Source citation is intrinsic to traditional discourse. Authors frequently quote predecessors, attribute techniques, or debate rulerships, benefic/malefic conditions, and aspect doctrine. Preserving that intertextuality in contemporary databases—by linking specific passages to editions and translations—honors traditional scholarly norms while aiding reproducibility. For instance, domiciles cited to Ptolemy and Valens, the exaltations documented in Hellenistic and medieval sources, and horary judgments exemplified by Lilly can be anchored with precise references and page/section citations where available (Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940; Valens, trans. Riley, 2010; Lilly, 1647/1985; Bonatti, trans. Dykes, 2007).

Traditional archives also encompass star catalogs and paran doctrines. Fixed star material—mythic associations, paran relationships, and interpretive delineations—has long circulated in tables and compendia, culminating in modern syntheses that continue the tradition of catalog-based interpretation (Brady, 1998). Storing fixed star positions (precessed to epoch), magnitude, and mythic attributes in structured fields enables cross-era comparison and precise conjunction studies.

In sum, traditional approaches to archiving astrology are characterized by: systematic codification of doctrine; durable tables and ephemerides; case-based exempla; explicit citational culture; and layered, relational structures implicit in techniques themselves. Modern repositories that model dignities, receptions, lots, and timing within graph or relational schemas are, in effect, extending the classical encyclopedia into a digital knowledge graph, with each edge and attribute traceable to a textual ancestor (Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940; Valens, trans. Riley, 2010; Bonatti, trans. Dykes, 2007; Lilly, 1647/1985).

5. Modern Perspectives

Contemporary astrological databases incorporate advances in data standards, software engineering, and AI-driven discovery while addressing replicability and openness. The FAIR principles articulate best practices for making datasets findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable; applied to astrology, they encourage persistent identifiers for charts and texts, rich metadata, clear licensing, and machine-actionable formats (Wilkinson et al., 2016). ISO 8601, IANA time zones, and WGS84 geodesy provide the technical backbone for interoperable time-place representation (ISO, 2019; IANA, 2024; EPSG, n.d.).

On the astronomical side, repositories commonly rely on Swiss Ephemeris or JPL Horizons to ensure precision and consistency across calculations and epochs. Publishing the chosen ephemeris, nutation model, house system, zodiac reference (tropical or sidereal), and ΔT estimate makes interpretive outputs verifiable and comparable across systems (Astrodienst, n.d.; JPL, n.d.). Where possible, archives expose calculation settings per record to maintain transparency.

Modern applications also reflect the research turn in astrology. Large, well-annotated corpora—biographical collections with documented birth times and event histories—enable statistical exploration, while also supporting qualitative, tradition-informed analysis. Wiki-based implementations combine community editing with strict sourcing policies and data ratings, providing both breadth and editorial accountability for practitioners and scholars (Astrodienst, n.d.). Digitization platforms supply scans and OCR of historical texts, allowing side-by-side comparison of translations, editions, and commentaries (Internet Archive, n.d.).

AI systems augment discovery and synthesis. BERTopic can cluster articles, chart notes, and technical essays by themes such as “sect doctrine,” “primary directions,” or “fixed star parans,” improving navigation across heterogeneous materials (Grootendorst, 2022). Vector search and graph databases model the complex relationships among planets, dignities, houses, aspects, fixed stars, authors, and techniques, enabling queries like “find all charts with Mars in its exaltation making an overcoming square to Saturn, with Regulus on the MC within 1°,” and returning results with full provenance (Weaviate, 2024; Brady, 1998; Brennan, 2017).

Modern perspectives also foreground ethical and methodological clarity. Repositories emphasize the limits of examples, reminding users that delineations depend on the whole chart and that case studies illustrate techniques rather than encode universal rules (Lilly, 1647/1985; Brennan, 2017). They document editorial decisions, version histories, and data lineage so corrections or new evidence can be tracked over time.

Finally, integration across traditions characterizes contemporary curation. Archives link Hellenistic doctrine to medieval developments and Renaissance refinements, while providing pathways to modern psychological and evolutionary interpretations. Cross-referenced entries allow readers to move from a dignity schema to house-based significations, from aspect doctrine to fixed star overlays, and from natal principles to timing techniques, situating each practice within a broader historical graph (Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940; Valens, trans. Riley, 2010; Lilly, 1647/1985; Brady, 1998; Brennan, 2017). In doing so, modern archives honor the diversity of astrological knowledge while equipping both humans and AI with structured, citable foundations for inquiry.

6. Practical Applications

Astrological databases and archives support real-world uses across natal, electional, horary, synastry, and mundane practice. For natal work, a practitioner retrieves a chart record with explicit time-place metadata, confirming the time zone conversion via IANA identifiers and verifying ephemeris settings for reproducibility (IANA, 2024; Astrodienst, n.d.). Chart layers—dignities, house system, aspect sets, lots—can be toggled to focus on the technique at hand, with links to explanatory articles such as Essential Dignities & Debilities, Houses & Systems, and Aspects & Configurations.

Transit analysis requires precise planetary positions and a consistent ΔT model for historical periods. A database integrated with Swiss Ephemeris or JPL Horizons can compute transits, stations, and retrograde cycles, while preserving calculation options within the record. Users can then annotate hits to angles or natal planets, storing observations with timestamps and sources for future review (Astrodienst, n.d.; JPL, n.d.).

Synastry and composite studies rely on accurate natal data for each person and clear documentation of calculation choices. Repositories that support paired records and derived “relationship charts” facilitate systematic comparison and reproducibility. Cross-references to topics like Synastry and composite chart methodology guide interpretation and cite foundational sources.

Electional and horary applications benefit from queryable filters: find intervals in which a significator is in domicile or exaltation, angular by house, unafflicted by malefics, or supported by reception. A well-modeled archive can express conditions like “Venus dignified by domicile, rising, with a waxing Moon applying by trine,” returning candidate windows with location-aware time zone validation (Lilly, 1647/1985; ISO, 2019; IANA, 2024). For horary, linking judgment examples to rules—Lilly’s aphorisms, receptions, perfection by aspect—turns archives into pedagogical companions (Lilly, 1647/1985).

Case records illustrate method while noting their limits. Examples tagged as “illustrative” emphasize that no single configuration guarantees an outcome and that the whole chart governs interpretation. Archives that attach comments, alternative readings, and later follow-ups cultivate a research culture that is transparent and adaptive (Lilly, 1647/1985; Brennan, 2017).

Finally, fixed star overlays and stellar timing can be added by pulling epoch-corrected star positions and parans, mapped to chart angles and planets. Structured connections to catalogs and interpretive references—e.g., Regulus associations—allow researchers to test claims across multiple cases with documented assumptions and orbs (Brady, 1998). In all cases, the best practice is to preserve calculation settings, cite sources, and flag data quality so that others can replicate or challenge findings responsibly (Wilkinson et al., 2016).

7. Advanced Techniques

Specialized archival methods model complex astrological constructs as first-class data. Essential dignities are stored at multiple levels—domicile, exaltation, triplicity, terms, faces—with degree-resolution where applicable, enabling queries such as “planet X has term dignity at degree Y.” Receptions and mutual receptions become directed edges in a graph; sect, speed, and condition (combust, under the beams, cazimi) are computed flags with thresholds exposed for verification (Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940; Lilly, 1647/1985).

Aspect patterns—T-squares, grand trines, yods—are detected algorithmically by scanning for multi-body geometric constraints and orb tolerances defined per tradition. Archives that store both exactitudes and application/separation metadata can support advanced interpretive frameworks and timing correlations. House placement semantics vary by system; therefore, repositories record the house system used (e.g., whole sign, Placidus) and, when helpful, compute multiple systems in parallel for comparative study (Lilly, 1647/1985; Brennan, 2017).

Fixed star conjunctions require careful precession handling and epoch management. Advanced archives store stellar positions at a standard epoch (e.g., J2000) and compute zodiacal projections and parans for the chart’s date and latitude, enabling precise overlays like “Mars conjunct Regulus within 1° ecliptic longitude” or “Regulus rising paran at local latitude” with citations to interpretive sources (Brady, 1998). For planetary phases and stations, high-precision ephemerides provide heliacal phenomena, retrograde stations, and visibility windows that can be saved as time series for each chart (JPL, n.d.; Astrodienst, n.d.).

Timing frameworks such as profections, primary directions, and zodiacal releasing can be modeled as derived timelines attached to natal records. Each technique specifies parameters—e.g., directing key, bounds tables, or releasing lot—and stores outputs with links to interpretive passages ((Valens, trans. Riley, 2010; Brennan, 2017). Integrating vector search and topic modeling further allows users to surface thematically similar cases across large corpora, strengthening hypothesis generation and comparative analysis (Grootendorst, 2022; Weaviate, 2024).

These expert-layer features enable complex, reproducible scenarios, while preserving the scholarly standards—clear settings, explicit sources, and documented assumptions—that make advanced work auditable.

8. Conclusion

Astrological databases and archives unite astronomical precision, historical scholarship, and methodological transparency into durable, navigable collections. By blending ephemeris-based calculations, standardized time-place frameworks, and rich provenance metadata, they support both everyday practice and long-horizon research across traditions and schools (Astrodienst, n.d.; JPL, n.d.; Wilkinson et al., 2016). Graph modeling and topic clustering capture the discipline’s relational nature—rulerships, dignities, aspects, houses, fixed stars—and expose those links for human readers and AI systems alike (Weaviate, 2024; Grootendorst, 2022).

For practitioners, the key takeaways are clear: verify sources and time-place data, disclose calculation settings, and treat examples as illustrative rather than prescriptive. For researchers and archivists, the priorities are FAIR publication, persistent identifiers, and interlinking texts, charts, and techniques with precise citations to classical and modern authorities (Ptolemy, trans. Robbins, 1940; Valens, trans. Riley, 2010; Lilly, 1647/1985; Brennan, 2017; Brady, 1998).

Further study naturally branches to related foundations—Essential Dignities & Debilities, Aspects & Configurations, Houses & Systems, Fixed Stars & Stellar Astrology, and timing frameworks—each of which benefits from careful modeling and transparent metadata. As digitization advances and AI learning systems mature, astrological repositories will continue evolving toward richer knowledge graphs, more interoperable data, and deeper cross-tradition synthesis, ensuring that historical insight and modern innovation remain mutually reinforcing (Wilkinson et al., 2016; Weaviate, 2024).

External resources referenced in this article include Astro-Databank and Swiss Ephemeris (Astrodienst, n.d.): "Essential dignities show the natural strength or weakness of a planet in a given situation.", NASA/JPL Horizons (JPL, n.d.), IANA Time Zone Database (IANA, 2024), ISO 8601 (ISO, 2019), GeoNames (GeoNames, n.d.), Internet Archive (Internet Archive, n.d.), BERTopic (Grootendorst, 2022), and representative classical sources, enabling readers to audit claims and explore the broader archival ecosystem.

Notes: