Hi Jakob,
Practically speaking:
I have been using the Big Three (signs of ascendant, sun and moon) in looking into the characters of natives with certain degree of success but I find it very difficult to do it the other way round. Let me clarify what I mean with this:

1. At one point in my life, I was a personal astrologer to a certain corporate figure in my country and he gave me charts of his C-Suite members (as well as CEOs of other companies that he owns) and I don’t know who is who. I usually look into the Big three to describe their characters and confirm this with my boss before moving on to making predictions. This I have certain degree of success (at least to his satisfaction). I think this is because the client usually does not care if you are describing the characteristics of their sun or ascendant sign so long as you are describing their characters accurately.
2. I find it difficult to do it the other way round… meaning if I have enough exposure time with a stranger, I can predict the two out of the three signs with certain probability (without knowing their birth details) but whether these signs are ascendant + Sun or ascendant + moon or sun + moon; that I cannot be certain of… Well, the probability guessing two out of twelve is certainly greater!!

Modern astrology usually uses a set of distinct character keywords for the 12 signs but it does not really distinguish these keywords for ascendant/sun/moon. Many books try to make unique character description e.g. some give 144 combinations of sun + ascendant or sun + moon, etc. but I still don’t see much difference in the delineation that are going to be useful for us to identify that this native has ascendant in Sag and sun in Cap and that native has ascendant in Cap and sun in Sag…

Theoretically speaking:
When we look into the planets in signs (in our case, the luminaries: Sun and Moon), we can get only very general description as the signs of the planets are applicable to everyone (born at the same UT time) no matter the place of birth.
Specific descriptions/predictions have to include the “earth”. AND, there are three that can be considered namely the hemisphere of the earth, sect of the chart and ascendant. Of all these three, ascendant is (of course) the most distinguished determinant. This is why the ancients say that the ascendant point is the “personal” point of a native (after all, if you have enough information to calculate the signs of planets AND position of the ascendant, you would naturally know the hemisphere and the sect of the chart).

If you look into the sun sign’s description in a combination of sun-moon or sun-ascendant or sun-moon-ascendant, the descriptions of the sun sign have to be modified with the hemisphere of the native’s place. Say you have a native with Sun in Scorpio, the native will have scorpionic characteristics but they will be different for natives born in the northern hemisphere (autumn) and those born in the southern hemesphere (spring) – which is why the season is important in the study of temperament.
In addition, if you read the 144 sun-moon combinations in modern astrology books, sect of the chart should be considered (of course we need to know whether native was born during the day or night). This will tell us which of the two is more “prominent”: those born during the day would be more “sun-like” and those born at night would be more “moon-like”. Some would include gender as well…

Of course, the ascendant is the most important determinant – as the ascendant establishes the house positions of the luminaries (sun and moon). One would expect angular luminary to be more telling than a cadent one…

Back to practically speaking:
Let’s go back to your original query: Sun vs Ascendant.
Examples:
Indira Gandhi (asc in Leo, Sun in Sco, Moon in Cap) and Mata Hari (asc in Sco, Sun in Leo, Moon in Pis).
We could see both Leo and Sco characteristics in both but could we really tell which is which (I mean Leo/Sco asc vs. Leo/Sco sun). Even if we could in these charts, could we really replicate for other charts…to the point that we can work backward and tell that this native has Leo asc and Sco sun and that native has Sco asc and Leo sun? Hmmm...

Looking into Sun-Moon: I would say that Indira Gandhi would be showing more of her Capricorn characteristics as she was born at night with sun close to Nadir whereas Mata Hari will be showing her Leo characteristics as Sun is strong in Leo and high up in the sky when she was born.

Looking into Asc-Sun: I would say that both Indira Gandhi and Mata Hari would portray their Leo characteristics more so to their dealings with others and Sco to the intimate ones but for different reasons. Indira Gandhi: Sun is not main luminary and close to Nadir: so characteristics of asc Leo are shown when dealing with others with Sco when dealing with intimate others. Mata Hari: Sun is main luminary and high up in the chart, hence Leo is shown in her public sphere and Sco in her personal sphere.

I have to go to a wedding… cheerio…

Hello everyone, I find this a very stimulating discussion at Pentecost. The associations with the topic of each individual continue to stimulate, also and especially because they come from different perspectives.

From my point of view so far, the position and the zodiac sign of the sun indicates how we relate to the world, in what way we act.

The Ascendant indicates our history. In the german language, the word for the past comes from the same origin as the word for the character of a thing or a person.

What we are is the consequence of what has happened to us.

My sister, who has the ascendant in the same sign and almost the same degree as me, has developed an increasing resemblance to me, especially in old age. This applies to the outer appearance, but also to the course of life.

While I have 4 planets in the 2nd house, my sister has 7 planets in her 8th house.

Since my sister's husband died 9 years ago, I have been taking care of her affairs and am closer to her life than before.

Our contact is like a kind of therapy for me. Because structurally she experiences the same as me, almost at the same time.

jakob

putting aside the dynamics with your sister, which i will say are interesting from the point of view of sharing the same ascendant degree and which would imply the planets in both your charts fall into the same houses of each others, lets gets back to the title of your thread - "What is the difference between Ascendant and Sun?" astrojin has made some interesting commentary on this... here is another crack at doing this from me..

i was thinking of this on my walk this morning... the ascendant is like a window of perception into the world and a unique one to each of us... all the angles could be defined this way - windows into the world.. whenever a planet or planets are close to the ascendant window, the have great bearing on the appearance of the window and the perception of what is seen out of the window.. it is like a type of lens into the world, or into ourselves depending on which side of the window one is looking from.. it does colour the way others see us as well...some might say having a zodiac sign here also colours it a certain way... having a planet close to the ascendant degree will colour how people see us and how we see others ( it is a window which can been seen from either side).. one could say saturn close to the window will give a more serious, somber and conservative appearance, while jupiter would give a more flamboyant and colourful appearance.. it will also influence the way we look out the window... this will have nothing to do with the sun which may or may not be hidden in some more obscure part of the chart.. if however the sun makes a close aspect to the ascendant degree, it becomes a type of outlet or expression of light out of this same window... it allows for the person to be seen from the angle of their solar intentions which i would characterize as their 'spiritual path' and their way of realizing greater individuality... the ascendant is not capable of doing this, as it is only a conduit for what the planets express via their access to the ascendant, or window... access is made available via the aspects and perhaps the conjunction is the most noticeable and immediate one which comes thru in the appearance of the person.. but other aspects like the square, trine and etc - also are capable of being perceived off the ascendant... it is like a window as it colours our view on the world and towards ourselves too in so far as we are willing to look in either direction... the view from this ( ascendant) window is considered a somewhat subjective view as well...

the same can be said about the descendant angle, however the- descendant is one way for us to be perceived more objectivity - thru relationships and the help from others essentially... but again - planets in the descendant will colour our relationships and our choice of relationships as well..

the ic, or opposite point of the midheaven angle is probably the most private and hidden part of the chart while the midheaven itself is the most visible...

the importance of the sign on these angles is that they will colour the window of perception into the world and oneself... but it is very different then the nature of the sun which as i keep on saying is more our individuality seeking an outlet via these various windows of the chart.. as the center of the solar system, it takes on great importance in showing the way, or direction we are headed.. it is a fountain of creativity which we may or may not be able to objectify.. it is modified and filtered via the aspects it makes to the other planets and moon in the chart, and also in how it aspects or not the angles of the chart.. in the earlier examples you gave of your parents - both of them had their suns hidden from easy access or outlet to their ascendant... so you could clearly see their ascendant characteristics, but their sun energy would have been more hidden - one with sun in the 12th house and the other with sun in the 8th house...

astrojin gives some good first hand examples of how these differences express themselves with specific charts.. thanks astrojin!

one has to factor in all these considerations when trying to understand a natal astrology chart... i like the analogy of a window as a close analogy to the angles of the chart, with the ascendant being the most personal and also fairly subjective in nature too... maybe another analogy might be the ascendant is the pair of glasses you wear to see the world... the sun on the other hand is about our vision for the future and where we would be headed if we were able to express the creativity associated with the sun.... i just don't see the ascendant as having any of these possibilities.. it will channel these possibilities in a unique way, but it is not the driving force behind the chart.. it is really more of a neutral outlet.. of course it is modified significantly by how the planets in the chart connect with it, but it is not the acting force... these are some of the differences between the ascendant and sun as i see it..

on a personal note i have a lot of planets close to the ascendant-descendant axis of my chart - 3 to be specific.. and i have 2 that directly square onto this same axis too... i have spent a lot of time trying to untangle what is what in it all of this and it has taken me a lifetime to recognize what is happening with regard to it all.. i am still interested in self discovery and learning more too... i learn a lot from my interactions with others..

Thank you for your detailed answers, James and astroijin.

The topic is developing well.

Ok, James, let's project your way of thinking onto my situation. The closest planet to my ascendant is Neptune, 28 degrees away. The closest planet to my MC is the moon, 26 degrees away. The closest planet to my IC is Venus at 27 degrees away. The next planet to my descendant is Uranus 76 degrees away.

I like this planet assignment.

You don't have to answer my question, James, if you don't want.

Thank you for your detailed answers, James and astroijin.

The topic is developing well.

Ok, James, let's project your way of thinking onto my situation. The closest planet to my ascendant is Neptune, 28 degrees away. The closest planet to my MC is the moon, 26 degrees away. The closest planet to my IC is Venus at 27 degrees away. The next planet to my descendant is Uranus 76 degrees away.

I like this planet assignment.

You don't have to answer my question, James, if you don't want.

Ptolemy has this to say about the relationship between the ASC, SU and MO

In Tetrabiblos II, 11 Of Bodily Form and Temperament, we read

1) "We must, then, in general observe the eastern horizon and the planets that are upon it or assume its rulership in the way already explained; and in particular also the Moon as well; for it is through the formative power of these two places and of their rulers and through the mixture of the two kinds, and furthermore through the forms of the fixed stars that are rising at the same time, that the conformation of the body is ascertained; the ruling planets have most power in this matter and the special characters of their places aid them."

So the bodily form is taken from the planets rising, their rulers, aspects, the Moon and rising fixed stars.

Ptolemy then goes on to describe the planets, ruler of the ASC, Oriental (stronger) or Occidental (weaker) to the Sun.

And he adds:
2) "The luminaries assist each of these when they bear an aspect to them, the sun tending to a more impressive and robust effect, and the moon, especially when she is separating from the planets, in general tending toward better proportion and greater slenderness, and toward a more moist temperament; but in particular cases her effect is proportioned to the special quality of her illumination, in accordance with the system of intermixture explained in the beginning of the treatise."

So the Sun and the Moon both participate in quality (table of dignities), accidental dignities (Angular) and illumination (visible and increasing in light) to the the body and temperament.
For a Cancer or Leo rising, we need to look at the sign of the Moon or the Sun and its ruler or the bound in which you find the Moon or the Sun.
For example, a Leo rising with the Sun at the beginning of Scorpio (sign and bound of Mars), Mars will be a prime factor to consider for body shape and temperament.

3) "In general terms, once more, the quadrant from the spring equinox to the summer solstice
makes the subjects well-favoured in complexion, stature, robustness, and eyes., and exceeding in the moist and warm. The quadrant from the summer solstice to the autumn equinox produces individuals with moderately good complexion and moderate height, robust, with large eyes and thick and curly hair, exceeding in the warm and dry. The quadrant from the autumn equinox to the winter solstice makes them sallow, spare, slender, sickly, with moderately curling hair and good eyes, exceeding in the dry and cold. The quadrant from the winter solstice to the spring equinox produces individuals of dark complexion, moderate height, straight hair, with little hair on their bodies, somewhat graceful, and exceeding in the cold and moist."

Here he looks at the quadrant of the ruler of the ASC in terms of moist, hot, dry and cold.

4) "in particular, the constellations both within and outside of the zodiac which are of human shape produce bodies which are harmonious of movement and well-proportioned; those however which are of other than human shape modify the bodily proportions to correspond to their own peculiarities, and after a fashion make the corresponding parts like their own, larger and smaller, or stronger and weaker, or more and less graceful. For example, Leo, Virgo, and Sagittarius make them larger; others, as Pisces, Cancer, and Capricorn, smaller. And again, as in the case of Aries, Taurus, and Leo, the upper and fore parts make them more robust and the lower and hind parts weaker. Conversely the fore parts of Sagittarius, Scorpio, and Gemini cause slenderness and the hind parts robustness. Similarly too Virgo, Libra, and Sagittarius tend to make them well proportioned and graceful, while Scorpio, Pisces, and Taurus bring about awkwardness and disproportion. So it is with the rest, and it is fitting that we should observe and combine all these things and make a conjecture as to the character which results from the mixture, with regard both to the form and to the temperament of the body."

Finally Ptolemy considers the Fixed Stars tied to the ruler of the ASC.
The question is what constellation and Fixed Star is rising with the ASC. When we read Ptolemy, he usually goes on saying "of the nature of...". This gives an indication of the planets to look at and if we go by colors, the blue and white stars are more like the nature of VE and JU while the red and orange are more of the nature of MA and SA.
----------------
Inspired from Danièle Jay 'Pour une astrologie de l'événement' p. 273-276)

hi jakob

you have given a lot of information on your family.... you've given a number of comments on them and also on your own chart.. now whether there is a focus in your chart on the 4th house of family - i would surmise there is... but, i use whole sign houses which would put your pisces sun in the 4th whole sign house to your sag rising... regardless of that, lets get to your commentary shown below..

what i am saying is that the ascendant acts like a window to the world ( the other angles do too) and any planet in aspect to the ascendant degree has an outlet for greater expression... i am not just talking about conjunctions with the ascendant, as it sounds like you have none.. but their could be aspects to any of the angles and this energy would modify and alter the expression of the sign on the ascendant... that's all i am trying to say to you.... it is not just degree distance from the angles, but aspects more specifically.. conjunctions ( none of what you have apparently ) or aspects like a square, trine or sextile... perhaps there are minor aspects for you to consider as well, or midpoints if you want to get further into an analysis of the natal chart.. all of these factors can be considered depending on your astrological inclinations... remember you are trying to differentiate between the ascendant verses the sun and i am saying they are very different.. in order to understand the nature of the ascendant or any other angle, you need to not only look at the sign the angle is located within, but other factors too.. i think ouranos post quoting ptolemy goes into this... and of course the sun will also be modified according to these considerations as well... a sign emphasis in not free of these considerations regardless if it is the rising sign or sign of the sun you are considering.. cheers james

Jakob wrote: Sun May 19, 2024 8:21 pm Ok, James, let's project your way of thinking onto my situation. The closest planet to my ascendant is Neptune, 28 degrees away. The closest planet to my MC is the moon, 26 degrees away. The closest planet to my IC is Venus at 27 degrees away. The next planet to my descendant is Uranus 76 degrees away.

I like this planet assignment.

You don't have to answer my question, James, if you don't want.

Hi James, I don't think, that my sun is in the 4. house. The distance to the AC is less than 90 degrees. But that what we call my age point in german astrology is now in my 4. house. But the suns of my daughter and my two grandpas are at my IC. I think the history of my family is rather interesting. Jakob

Even if I didn't respond to every ones text I think that I am closer to my question.

For that, what the sun
means, in the german, astrological school that I learned, we have the word "verhalten", that is behave, when we look into a dictionary. But you cannot translate such words in other languages. Every language has it's own spirit. Our sun is the way we contact the world.

Today it is the birthday of Donald Trump and Olaf Scholz.

What does this mean for astrology?

Jakob wrote: Tue May 21, 2024 9:31 am For that, what the sun means, in the german, astrological school that I learned, we have the word "verhalten", that is behave, when we look into a dictionary.

Maybe this question about the difference between the Sun and the Ascendant is a result of the mixing of significations of planets, signs and houses that modern astrology uses to make. I think, for a traditional astrologer this question would not arise: The Asc and the 1st house show the native in general, i. e. his or her physical appearance, motivation, tasts among others. In a natal chart the Sun is the basic energy, the life force, vitality…

I would look immediately at the ruler of the first house, what planet is it, is it dignified, in which house. At last, what aspects has it.
As to the sun I look which sign modifies it. Your sun is peregrin (somewhat indifferent, not dignified, not debilitated) and as far as I can see it is in the third house. The sun is moderately hot and dry, but Pisces is cold and moist, so you can see this is not a prefered place for it. The third house is a cadent house, so its power to act is not facilitated by the house.Unless I’m very much mistaken it is the daily luminary in a nocturnal chart. So the Moon becomes more important. Another important thing is the dispositor of the Sun. In your case it is Jupiter which is also peregrine etc. …

You see, to me answering your question is mildly comparing apples with oranges.