Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:33 am
We can find, in the references posted by Eddy, above (thanks fo them!!) many similarities to the more metaphysically expressed concepts in parts of Blavatsky's "Secret Doctrine".
Regarding the apparent disparity of precessional ages mentioned by MarckC regarding Steiner's concepts, this is the reason:
-remember Steiner was not an astrologer; he was building a philosphical/metaphysical model (anthroposophy)
-Steiner believed that the actual influence of any constellational epoch would only begin to manifest by the time equivalent to the middle of that constellation (15 degrees), and then would continue operative (with some degree of "mixing") deep into the next constellational epoch. Steiner believed that the Aries constellational period began (Aries precessed to vernal point) in 1800 BC, and "physically" (by precession) ended around 300 AD-however, the Arian epoch effects didn't begin to "kick-in" until the middle of the Aries constellational time (approx. 700 BC) and this Ariian epochal age continued well after the "physical end" of the Aries constellation-period (300 AD)-at which time the constellation of Pisces precessed to the vernal point-because the Piscean Age would not "kick-in" until the middle of that constellation (which accounts for Steiner's dating of 1473 AD-he meant that it was then that the Piscean Age "began" vis a vis an effective influence)
-Now these are Steiner's (and Anthroposophy's) concepts relating to precession-initiated epochs. In addition to this, as I mentioned earlier, Steiner also entertained the Hindu-originated concept of the "Yugas", these latter by no means being directly related to the precession/constellation-initiated "astrological" epochs. It is interesting to me that there are significant indications in Vedic astrology (jyotish), which is based upon starry constellations (and of course the planets)-to the effect that the most powerful point of any (constellational) sign is in the middle, ie, 15 degrees, and continues potent onward through the end of the sign: it is the first half of the (constellation) sign which is regarded as "weak" (relative to placement of a planet in that part of the sign). This reminds me of Steiner's view relative to "when" the precessed constellation's "effects" start to come into prominence and its "epoch" or "age" finally kicks-in.
(Note: I have found much of interest in anthroposophy-particularly the field of anthroposophical medicine-however, I am not an anthroposophist nor am I an advocate of Steiner's astrological concepts regarding "ages" and "epochs")
Regarding the apparent disparity of precessional ages mentioned by MarckC regarding Steiner's concepts, this is the reason:
-remember Steiner was not an astrologer; he was building a philosphical/metaphysical model (anthroposophy)
-Steiner believed that the actual influence of any constellational epoch would only begin to manifest by the time equivalent to the middle of that constellation (15 degrees), and then would continue operative (with some degree of "mixing") deep into the next constellational epoch. Steiner believed that the Aries constellational period began (Aries precessed to vernal point) in 1800 BC, and "physically" (by precession) ended around 300 AD-however, the Arian epoch effects didn't begin to "kick-in" until the middle of the Aries constellational time (approx. 700 BC) and this Ariian epochal age continued well after the "physical end" of the Aries constellation-period (300 AD)-at which time the constellation of Pisces precessed to the vernal point-because the Piscean Age would not "kick-in" until the middle of that constellation (which accounts for Steiner's dating of 1473 AD-he meant that it was then that the Piscean Age "began" vis a vis an effective influence)
-Now these are Steiner's (and Anthroposophy's) concepts relating to precession-initiated epochs. In addition to this, as I mentioned earlier, Steiner also entertained the Hindu-originated concept of the "Yugas", these latter by no means being directly related to the precession/constellation-initiated "astrological" epochs. It is interesting to me that there are significant indications in Vedic astrology (jyotish), which is based upon starry constellations (and of course the planets)-to the effect that the most powerful point of any (constellational) sign is in the middle, ie, 15 degrees, and continues potent onward through the end of the sign: it is the first half of the (constellation) sign which is regarded as "weak" (relative to placement of a planet in that part of the sign). This reminds me of Steiner's view relative to "when" the precessed constellation's "effects" start to come into prominence and its "epoch" or "age" finally kicks-in.
(Note: I have found much of interest in anthroposophy-particularly the field of anthroposophical medicine-however, I am not an anthroposophist nor am I an advocate of Steiner's astrological concepts regarding "ages" and "epochs")