I personally feels that studying more objective problems (like elections and economy) is a much better approach to resurrect mundane astrology.

Not to say that we should ignore the ages. Just to say that it is too easy to do cheap philosophy when we are talking about dawrs that are as large as 20 thousand years...

But I have used the mundane sequence for Firdaria with, I believe, great sucess.

MarkC wrote:I have been able to follow the trail of the 'astrological ages' through the procession of the equinoxes in sidereal signs a little further back. In particular to the early 20th century. It appears Rudolf Steiner wrote about this subject:

So was Rudolf Steiner the first source of this idea or does it go further back to older Theosophical writers?

Regarding our current view of precession/"Age of Aquarius", we find Theosophist W.Q. Judge writing about the idea in 1893. Judge was a close associate of Madam Blavatsky, and one of the founders of Theosophy (at New York City in 1875) So far-surprisingly-I have not yet found direct reference to the matter in Blavatsky herself (its not in "Isis Unvieled"-I'll next check the "Secret Doctrine")

At this point I believe that Judge (1893 in his Ocean of Theosophy) might very well have originated this precession/age of aquarius notion

The great Sidereal year is the period taken by the equinoctial points to make in their precession a complete revolution of the heavens. It is composed of 25,868 solar years almost. It is said that the last sidereal year ended about 9,868 years ago, at which time there must have been on this earth a violent convulsion or series of such, as well as distributions of nations. The completion of this grand period brings the earth into newer spaces of the cosmos, not in respect to its own orbit, but by reason of the actual progress of the sun in an orbit of its own that cannot be measured by any observer of the present day, but which is guessed at by some and located in one of the constellations.

....man is also affected by astronomical cycles because he is an integral part of the whole, and these cycles mark the periods when mankind as a whole will undergo a change. In the sacred books of all nations these are often mentioned, and are in the Bible of the Christians, as, for instance, in the story of Jonah in the belly of the whale. This is an absurdity when read as history, but not so as an astronomical cycle. "Jonah" is in the constellations, and when that astronomical point which represents man reaches a point in the Zodiac which is directly opposite the belly of Cetus or the whale on the other side of the circle, by what is known as the process of opposition, then Jonah is said to be in the center of the fish and is "thrown out" at the expiration of the period when that man-point has passed so far along in the Zodiac as to be out of opposition to the whale.

Similarly as the same point moves thus through the Zodiac it is brought by opposition into the different constellations that are exactly opposite from century to century while it moves along. During these progresses changes take place among men and on earth exactly signified by the constellations when those are read according to the right rules of symbology. It is not claimed that the conjunction causes the effect, but that ages ago the Masters of Wisdom worked out all the problems in respect to man and found in the heavens the means for knowing the exact dates when events are sure to recur, and then by imprinting in the minds of older nations the symbology of the Zodiac were able to preserve the record and the prophecy. Thus in the same way that a watchmaker can tell the hour by the arrival of the hands or the works of the watch at certain fixed points, the Sages can tell the hour for events by the Zodiacal clock.

Quote:
At this point I believe that Judge (1893 in his Ocean of Theosophy) might very well have originated this precession/age of aquarius notion

I would accept this is the earliest reference we have referring to the zodiac , precession and different ages.

Does anyone know when the first astrological text discusses the ages in terms of the location of the equinoxes in the signs? I am sure the Theosophists advocated this in the late 19th century but I dont know if the idea of astrological ages based on precession came before this. Clearly, this requires a knowledge of both western tropical and Indian sidereal astrology and I assume this was not widespread amongst astrologers in Europe until this period.

As a tropicalist I have always found it odd that fellow tropicalists spend so much time and energy discussing the location of the equinoxes in a different zodiac. Surely, we should be looking at things the other way round in terms of mundane cycles? To be specific rather than focusing on equinoxes moving backwards in a sidereal zodiac we should instead focus on the stars and constellations moving forwards against the background of the tropical zodiac through precession? Hence rather than discussing the 'Age of Aquarius' shouldn't we be focusing on the forthcoming movement of Regulus into Virgo in 2012? That is my perspective anyway. What do others think?

I have made the point myself that modern astrologers often project back onto ancient cultures viewpoints that were actually alien to them, such as an ancient notion of an 'age of Gemini' based on the use of a tropical zodiac which wasn't used in that period of time, etc. However, I'm not sure that I understand the point being made in this thread.