In my simplistic view I regard the divisions of space (ie, the signs) as the "curtains" of the earth, through which all cosmic influence is filtered; each "curtain" (division of space; sign) has certain intrinsic characteristic qualities, the various planetary and stellar influences being modulated by the intrinsic characteristics of each "curtain" those influences "pass through". See, in my outlook, I consider that space (meaning relative space from one's point on the earth) is qualitative in fundamental nature, just as I believe that time (relative "sections" of time) have specific qualities, as well as "things-in-space" (stars-including the sun-and planets) also having specific qualities, and that at any given moment at any specific place on the globe, this trinity is operative on all levels (physical fields, dynamic fields, spiritual/symbolical fields). In addition to the this outlook, I also follow Paracelsus in his understanding that the stars, signs and planets we see are merely reflections and "objective indicators" of an interior macrocosmic reality within each living creature, these "objective indicators" pointing to the "trend" and "direction" of the "movements" of this universal interior reality, at any given moment of time.

Hi Mark,

I don't really mind the high price for omitting the zodiac, I find the removing of the problem quite worth it. Note that Kepler still uses the positions of the planets in the zodiac, not in the traditional way but rather the climatological way.

Kepler wrote:Thesis 33
As to the reason for both the power of heating and that of moistening, one should consider in what (zodiacal) sign the planets are situated. For both the planets and the Moon operate at the maximum in Cancer, as they are then longest above the Earth because of the other reasons mentioned in the beginning when we were dealing with the Sun. So also they have more power when they are in the Northern part. Therefore, the winter full Moons are more humid than the summer full Moons. Thus, in the Northern zones for this year and the following few years the above explained powers of Saturn and Jupiter, nay, even Mars at the end of the year, will be weak because they will be situated in low (zodiacal) signs, but in the Southern zones they will be, in the same measure, stronger.

http://www.hermetics.org/pdf/astrology/ ... rology.pdf

The idea of reversing or flipping over the dignities or signs is an interesting theoretical point. For various reasons though I think this is an unattractive proposition. The idea of the Sun ruling Aquarius and Saturn being in detriment there plays havoc with traditional understanding of the signs and their linkage to planets.

Admittedly the flip over makes things more difficult, especially in the equatorial charts as you mentioned some posts ago. In such a case one should almost believe that there would be a 'transitional stage' where both Sun and Saturn, both rule and are in detriment in both Leo and Aquarius.

Mark C wrote:Its just as well as we would get into an awful mess with equatorial charts. The sceptics (and siderealists) would have a field day making fun of those kinds of charts.

Talking about the siderealists, I think the tropicalists would have the same making fun feeling about the dozens of ayanamsha's all somewhere in Aries so historically inextricably bound with a tropical origin in which precession was unknown and a tropical v.s sidereal discussion didn't exist. Moreover the sidereal signs aren't more real than the tropical http://www2.bitstream.net/~bunlion/bpi/precess4.html . But respecting the purpose of this thread I won't continue on the tropical/sidereal discussion and those who are interested can read this thread http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2978 which mentions several differences in the later pages. However if the origins are really northern hemispheric then I would find it hard to accept to use the same in the tropics and southern hemisphere. I once read an explanation in Dane Rudhyar's 'The pulse of life, New Dynamics in Astrology'

Rudhyar wrote:The Zodiac is the symbolization of the cycle of the year. It is so, essentially, in the temperate regions of the Northern hemisphere where astrology was born. Zodiacal symbolism is the product of the experience of human races living in such regions: experience of the seasons, of the activities of nature and of man through the changing panorama of vegetation ? vegetation being the very foundation of animal and human life on earth. As such races have been, during the last millennia, the active factor in the evolution of human consciousness, their experience has come to acquire a universal validity in the determination of cosmic meaning and human purpose. Civilization, as we know it today, is therefore centered in a Northern-hemisphere and temperate-climate kind of consciousness. It may conceivably not remain so in the future, but for the time being it is; and our present astrology interprets thus accurately its cyclic evolution.

I don't really like this explanation, because it's rather western centered and thus a cultural bias. Perhaps this is true though to a certain extent. Kepler mentioned a similar thought:

Kepler wrote:4-6 In my book, I did indeed challenge the concept that the divisions of the sky into twelve signs and the distribution of the signs among the planets [i.e. as rulers] had some basis in nature. Nevertheless, since the human race has envisioned this partition from the time of the Chaldeans down to our own times, and among all nations, I submitted to the reader's consideration, whether God himself does not conform to it, even though this division is not a natural thing, and whether He does not wish to speak to human beings therewith in a language or method of communication that they understand.
(On the Nova in the Foot of Ophiucus, 1606)

Kenneth G. Negus: Kepler's Astrology
http://cura.free.fr/docum/15kep-en.html ?4.6

This could make the signs work everywhere in the same way or perhaps only on people of the Western culture. (White) Australians are Western, they celebrate Chrismas in their Summer etc. and differ much less from European culture than from Aboriginal culture. Perhaps the same would apply to South-Americal culture, many Spanish and Portuguese influences mixed with African and some Indian elements.

Rudhyar (in the quote) leaves the possibility of change in the future. So if the world might be 'China-ized' in a couple of centuries could this mean that all people would fit more in Chinese astrology? If so, this would make astrology more a cultural issue and not a natural. Could be but I don't like it, furthermore I don't like it. It also could mean that one can 'resist' the cultural issue, and also risk to be viewed as 'unadapted' by the mass who are submitted to the culture. I suddenly remember that I once read in a forum about black astrologers who as a counter cultural movement reversed the meanings of astrological issues in the 'usual' (for white people)astrology.

I hate to steal your thunder Eddy but this theory has been around for a while. For example Gavin White mentions it in his book 'Babylonian Star Lore'. The link between the Exaltations and the seasons is suggested by Ulla Koch-Westenholz in her book Mesopotamian Astrology: Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination (1995). However, she didn't originate the hypothesis and was merely referencing older research.

No problem at all Mark, I'm even glad you mention it. At least it means that my thoughts weren't just fanciful. It occurs more often that people get to the same ideas independently from eachother.

Could you please mention some page numbers/chapters where Gavin White mentions this, Mark? I've found the book on google books (2007, 1st edition) http://books.google.nl/books?id=nAuTreD ... q=&f=false and I'd like to know if he found this in some sources in translations of ancient Babylonian clay tablets etc. Then I might be able to search for more in University websites etc.

Eddy wrote:
This could make the signs work everywhere in the same way or perhaps only on people of the Western culture. (White) Australians are Western, they celebrate Chrismas in their Summer etc. and differ much less from European culture than from Aboriginal culture.

I never saw something more different from my knowledge of reality celebrating Christmas for Summer.

What about the snow, Mary and Joseph searching shelter from the cold, the ox and the donkey warming the Child with their breath?

What it is called Christmas in Australia is something very far from Christmas iconography as an Italian.

Christmas iconography is like astrology, it is something shaped on Europe and Mediterranean area, it's difficult to adapt in other places, and it is evidently based on seasons, because the date was fixed evidently on pagan winter solstice, and the symbolism of the waxing light.

margherita

Christmas iconography is like astrology, it is something shaped on Europe and Mediterranean area, it's difficult to adapt in other places, and it is evidently based on seasons, because the date was fixed evidently on pagan winter solstice, and the symbolism of the waxing light.

I agree. Hence my envious comments about someone born on my birth date in Australia! We do see this issue of northern hemisphere traditions coming up vs southern hemisphere realities in other areas. I believe many Pagans/Wiccans in the southern hemisphere reverse the order of their festivals. Many Feng Shui practioners also reverse the traditional or directional associations.

However, whatever approach we adopt to southern hemisphere astrology we have to sacrifice something. In short:

Existing zodiac-We lose the direct association between specific seasons and the symbolism of the signs.

Reversed Dignities-We lose the traditional associations between planetary dignities and signs. Also there is confusion over what the planetary dignities are for charts cast near the equator

Reversed signs-We create a divided astrology with planets in opposite signs at the same time in the two hemispheres of the Earth. We also have the major problem of equatorial charts where there is confusion on which order of the zodiac prevails.

Beyond all these theoretical considerations there is the pragmatic point that nearly all practitioners in the southern hemisphere seem to find the existing zodiac working.

Actually, has anyone heard of any astrologer in the southern hemisphere actually working with reversed signs or dignities? I know it been proposed theoretically but I haven't heard of it actually being done by anyone. I would be interested to know.....

I found this article by an Australian astrologer musing on this issue and how to work with it:

http://www.astrobarry.com/2003/dec1503.php

Thanks for that link Mark. It links ( http://www.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadCoriolis.html to another subject that has been baffling my mind for several years, that of the coriolis force in the bathtub. I had heard about the two tubs on the equator story which now turns out to be a fake. I had my questionmarks about it since the geographic equator usually doesn't coincide with the equator of the rotation of the Earth. Excuse me for this short distraction from the subject.

Back to the subject, note that if distances are measured along the ecliptic, seasons don't have a meaning because declination and height aren't part of the eclipitic coordinate system.

Back to the subject, note that if distances are measured along the ecliptic, seasons don't have a meaning because declination and height aren't part of the eclipitic coordinate system.

That's a bit misleading because whilst its true that they are not, we have latitude instead. Celestial latitude is to celestial longitude what declination is to right ascension. However, I believe this is why some of the very ancient texts recorded planetary positions by both the zodiac signs and the visible, ecliptic-based constellations. Recording positions along the zodiac without reference to the background stars was much easier than recording their height - celestial latitude was a later development which needed the ecliptic to be reliably established first.

From the start, knowledge of the ecliptic developed as part of our increasing awareness of the Sun's seasonal cycle, as did the zodiac.

From the start, knowledge of the ecliptic developed as part of our increasing awareness of the Sun's seasonal cycle, as did the zodia

So true Deb! The seasonal cycle was of tremendous importance to the ancients simply because of agriculture. But the seasonal cycle has just as much importance with other earthly cycles besides agriculture. Over the last 30+ years, I have seen dozens of key Sun Dates dividing the seasonal cycle by 24; turn all kinds of financial markets to an exact Sun Date with major Tops & Bottoms. This is truly a phenomenon to witness. It can only be witness by historical analysis of daily price charts that cover yearly periods of time. It made me realize that all markets move in cyclical waves topping & bottoming at major cyclical moments govern by astronomical natural law, involving the earth & sun. In fact it was this same phenomenon that got me seriously interested in the entire field of astrology. I told myself if this same natural law could govern market movements with important Tops & Bottoms, it damn sure could govern planetary life cycles in our lives. Unfortunately, I have not found any method of astrology that predicts which of these Sun Dates will determine a major Top or Bottom?these Major Tops & Bottoms remain, only an observable natural law phenomenon to be used intuitively.

Regards, Steve

I don't really mind the high price for omitting the zodiac, I find the removing of the problem quite worth it.

Hi Eddy,

Fair enough. Although your comment rather reminds me of the old joke:

'The operation was a complete success but the patient died''

Clearly if you side step the conventions of tropical astrology you avoid any of the complexities this kind of astrology entails. However, you also lose all the immense benefits it can offer too. It would be rather like a siderealist coming along here and stating 'I have the answer! Abandon the tropical zodiac and adopt the sidereal zodiac'.

Like the majority of people here I have not come to critique the tropical zodiac. Most of us are very satisfied with it. I dont perceive this as a perfect world where there are any easy answers. Frequently, we have to scratch our heads and try to resolve paradoxical issues. As JP Sartre wrote 'we are condemed to choose'. Once we do that we must accept the consequences of where our choices take us. Maybe I am a masochist but I quite enjoy thinking my way through such difficulties.

Incidentally, this is off topic but dont you think its time you set out your personal approach for us here on Skyscript? We have had various snippets in your posts but I am still unclear how it comes together in practice. Maybe you could open a thread setting out your 'Neo-Keplerian' approach? For example how do you do natal work? I would be interested in finding out more about how you practice astrology without a zodiac, houses or planetary dignities.

Mark

johannes susato wrote:

PFN wrote:Well, I live in Brasil and here we have only two seasons: summer and winter .

Only a short in between question to you, PFN:
Are the meanings of the signs (in personal charts) in Brasil contrariwise to those of the northern hemisphere? To be very short (too short of course, but in this context it may be allowed) Virgo 'tidy', Pisces 'chaotic'?

Thanks in advance.

I'm a bit late, but here is my say on the subject:

Some astrologers do propose the reversal of the zodiac in the southern hemisphere. Most of them, modern. For a traditional astrologer, I believe that would be mind numbing and impossible to work with. Virgo is 'tidy' here as well, and so is Pisces 'chaotic'. And you can still guess a Leo for his Sun tatoo on the arm and that crazy Aquarian on the spot. On the 21st of December we entered the summer, and right these past weeks, just as the Sun entered in Aquarius, I experienced a really strong heat wave, with clear blue sky and few clouds for an undying sun (how much I wanted to live in a place like Scotland, or somewhere without a sun at all...).

So, in terms of climate, I do not even use a correlation like "Sun is there, so this is the characteristics of this season". It would not work. But everything else does. So what is the answer? I do not know. For us, in the southern region, the correlation of signs to climate quality is partially lost already. Still, the shifts and some of those are not. For example, the fixed, mutable and cardinal qualities are not. But I'd like to point something: our climate never is as extreme as in the northern hemisphere. Rather than a precise shift, we do experience stations that are hard to discern between themselves, especially spring from summer and autumn from winter (they get easier to discern the more we go to the south, though). In both cases, the only really noticeable difference is generally that summer rains a lot, contrary to dry spring, and in winter there is almost no rain or humidity (contrary to mild, pleasant autumn).

And I find it very interesting to think that here, in the southern hemisphere, the Sun is at it's "highest" in Capricorn, not Cancer, which could explain why the seasons are "mixed" instead of clearly divided.

PFN wrote:
Some astrologers do propose the reversal of the zodiac in the southern hemisphere. Most of them, modern. For a traditional astrologer, I believe that would be mind numbing and impossible to work with. Virgo is 'tidy' here as well, and so is Pisces 'chaotic'.
.......

So, in terms of climate, I do not even use a correlation like "Sun is there, so this is the characteristics of this season"..

This is not exact. Reversing signs for southern hemisphere is Cardano and Campanella method, which are not modern astrologers.

They based their idea on Ptolemy thought.
Because for Ptolemy- I wrote many times, so forgive me for repetition- signs are just portions of ecliptics, which in turn is the annual path of the Sun, so Sun is very important here.
Nothing to share with sidereal zodiac.

The first 30 degrees after Spring ingress is called "Aries", the second 30 degrees Taurus and so on.
This is the only reason why Cardano and Campanella, who were Ptolemy followers obviously should reverse zodiacal signs- they could not write anything else.

Differences between Cardano, Campanella on one side and Morin who was a supporter of not reversed charts can be found in Astrologia Gallica volume 15, chapter I - translation by Holden

margherita

Deb wrote:

Back to the subject, note that if distances are measured along the ecliptic, seasons don't have a meaning because declination and height aren't part of the eclipitic coordinate system.

That's a bit misleading because whilst its true that they are not, we have latitude instead. Celestial latitude is to celestial longitude what declination is to right ascension. (......)

From the start, knowledge of the ecliptic developed as part of our increasing awareness of the Sun's seasonal cycle, as did the zodiac.

True but I meant to say that according to my view any seasonal meaning can't be derived from celestial longitude whether taking latitude into account or not. The Sun for instance is always of latitude 0?, yet as the Sun proceeds through the zodiac the seasons and (except on the equator) the length of days change.

Seasonal change is related to height so we should rather look at the height of the Sun. We have two coordinate systems at our disposal, equatorial (with right ascension and declination) and the horizontal/azimuthal coordinate system. The latter is how we directly experience the seasons and day and night. Sun is low in the East and highest in the South (at the Northern hemisphere) and goes down again. This causes the differences in temperature during the day and the differences in the year is that the highest position of the Sun in Summer (for London for example) is 62? and the lowest in winter at 15?. Another effect of this is the length of the day. Here we rather look at the equatorial positions when the Sun moves parallel with the equator with long days in Summer and short days in Winter.

In archeological findings we see this in places like stonehenge and other ancient sacred places. Stones, walls, earth-mounds etc. are often placed as markers of the seasons on the horizon. In the early Babylonian astronomy we see the concept of 'paths' where the Sun is in Summer Winter etc. This concept is more related to the equator and displays the long and short paths of the seasons. The fixed stars are also given their places in the paths. Only later the concept of the ecliptic was to get realized when the Sun Moon and planets all moved always through the same path. Especially the eclipses were useful for this developement, hence the name ecliptic. While the Babylonians where more arithmetic, it were the Greeks who gave the ecliptic, equator etc. their geometrical meaning as great circles in the sky.


So I think that while we use the ecliptic now as the main path of the Sun, I believe that the meaning of the signs have their origin in the seasonal meanings that once were given to them. This also counts for the sidereal zodiac because precession was unknown before Hipparchus (2nd century BC) so there was no distinction between the two. Moreover many Indian astrologers/astronomers (who used the sidereal zodiac) adhered the theory of 'trepidation' (an osculation back and forth of the tropical 0? Aries around the sidereal 0? Aries) rather than the precessional movement in one direction.

If this is how the meaning of the signs originated then I would feel quite uneasy in using them, and especially with using them the same way everywhere on Earth. So here I come to your question Mark. Another thing of the astrological zodiac is the division in 'sectors', which obviously was derived from the 12 lunar months in the solar year. Symbolism and analogies served the spirit of the time when they originated but I consider them untenable. For example I think that the rulerships are a projection of the order of the planets on the signs as it was believed according to the Egyptians (the 'Egyptian order'). Same problem I have with the planetary hours, they are a projection of the 'Chaldean order' on the seasonal hours. I just can't use these with the Copernican knowledge in my mind. I'm sorry, while I can believe in some effect of different regions in the ecliptic/sky......

Kepler wrote:4-3 If one turns to the planets or to nativities in order to prove the nature of the [zodiacal] signs, then the investigation is greatly obscured. It is comparable to the image of the sun in turbulent water, in which one sees a clear flashing of the sun far and wide, but no figure or image of the sun can be perceived, because the water is moving about. Likewise with nativities: that the sky is functioning within the human being can be seen clearly enough, but what it is doing specifically remains hidden, much less what quality each sign has, or at which points it begins and ends. This is because so many causes come together and are intermingled. Thus we stand by the statement that there is no experiment that proves that the twelve signs are divided up into various qualities -- especially in view of the fact that in the other [i.e. southern] temperate zone those signs that make us warm would have to be considered as cold, and visa versa...
(Response to the Discourse of Dr. R?slin, Physician and Philosopher, on the Nature of the Present Time, 1609)

..... I have problems with the idea that for example Venus would be comfortable in Pisces and as she moves forwards into Aries, bang! she is uncomfortably placed and later when entering Taurus, suddenly pleasant again.

Perhaps that's one of the reasons I like Kepler. He was modern in the sense that he believed in heliocentric system, yet he tried to apply old concepts to the modern world view. With a new term in my study which just started, I'm afraid I don't have much time to start a thread on my Keplerian views, but this collection of translated excerpts of Kepler's works http://cura.free.fr/docum/15kep-en.html implies for say some 90% of how I see astrology. Geometry and the relation with musical intervals is the main thing how I too see that astrology should work. I almost completely agree with his allmost all of his views in the article, it's a rather short and easy read and worth it. Moreover I really like this view, I see the magnificent beauty of it. I don't want to ridiculise the classic view though. The classical view is very coherent and has also a great beauty and sense of order. Moreover I respect and alsy envy the people over here with knowledge of Greek and Latin who can read the old original texts and have the patience to dig through them.

As for natal charts, I'm having a break from these for a while because with my chart as the main object of study I was getting a bit tired of this 'self observation'. I have been focussing on weather astrology (with aspects) for a while.

Gjiada wrote:

PFN wrote:
Some astrologers do propose the reversal of the zodiac in the southern hemisphere. Most of them, modern.

.......

So, in terms of climate, I do not even use a correlation like "Sun is there, so this is the characteristics of this season"..

This is not exact. Reversing signs for southern hemisphere is Cardano and Campanella method, which are not modern astrologers.

They based their idea on Ptolemy thought.

margherita

That's why I said most (and I hope I did not imply it was a modern idea, since I had no idea whose it was at all).

Anyway, given the way things are, either Ptolemy is wrong, or the system is incorrect, or usage of non shifted signs on the southern hemisphere is. OR, there is something at play here that we can not quite grasp yet.