Wednesday, July 2, 2008

Sideral versus Tropical Astrology: neither is right

Sideral versus Tropical Astrology
Neither is correct! See below


After having performed a study of birthdates of many friends and colleagues and dozens of celebreties, I have seek to define the dates for each zodiac sign/ influence.
Neither sideral (vedic or constellational) or tropical zodiac (western astrology) is correct.
Somehow, sideral zodiac makes sense as the strong of each sign is somewhere around the middle of the month.
Let's have a look at these dates:

These are:
Aries 25mar-3may, with stronger influence between 9-28abr (many dictators, fiery people and genious; examples like Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Salazar or Lenin, Queen Elizabeth II and Catherine the great, amongst others, Shakespeare or Leonardo da Vinci) and also around 28mar-3apr, which appear to be another periods of distinct influence!
Taurus 4-25may, with stronger influence 6-18may (many sensual beautiful people, mainly musicians and tv stars; like George Clooney, Andrea Corr, Bono...)
Gemini 28may-6jul, with stronger influence 7jun-2jul (many inventive and communicative people; like Michael J Fox, Johnny Depp, Clint Eastwood, Marilyn Monroe, Paul McCartney, Morgan Freeman, Che Guevara, Silvester Stalone, Prince, Princess Diana, Pamela Andersson...)
Cancer 7-24jul, with stronger influence 7-23jul (with many sensitive people, mainly singers, such as Carlos Santana, Amalia Rodrigues, Cat Stevens, Rick Davies...)
Leo 26jul-1sep, with stronger influence until 19aug (many leaders and famous stars; Fidel Castro, Napoleon, Bill Clinton, Obama, Joseph Austria, Mussolini, Schwarzenegger, Mata Hari, Maddona, Jennifer Lopez or Michael Jackson)
Virgo 5sep-28sep with stronger influence between 15-24sep (many perfectionists, shy people, musicians, writters, such as Oliver Stone, Agathe Christie, David Copperfield, Nick Cave, Fiona Apple, Moby...)
Libra 29sep-31oct, with stronger influence 5-21oct (many beautiful people, singers for peace and romantic, Paul Simon, John Lennon, Sting, Gandhi)
Scorpio 1-30nov, with stronger influence 9-29nov (many are introverts, emotional, harsh speech, Pinochet, Engels, Condoleeza Rice, Dante, Bjork, Jeff Buckley or Neil Young)
Sagittarius 1-27dec, with stronger influence 1-5dec and 9-22 dec (many are visionary, some dictators in late december; exacmples of Spielberg, Arthur C Clarke, Walt Disney, Newton, John Milton, Nostradamus)
Capricorn 31dec-24jan, with stronger influence 31dec-8jan (many are shy and introspective, some singers, after that period some are genious and more extrovert)
Aquarius 25jan-27feb, with stronger influence 26jan-22feb (many are genial, rebels, eccentric, humanitarian and solo singers) : examples of Mozart, Galileo, Copernicus, Darwin, Abraham Lincon, and many others
Pisces 28feb-24mar, with stronger influence 2-20mar (many are introvert, easy-going, shy, sensitive and some genial) Einstein, Michaelangelo...

These influence are a continuous. Some people may seem more the other sign due a strong rising of a different nature, or some inner planets in next sign.
However, it seems undeniable the strong influence of aries in late april, strong influence of gemini in early july and strong influence of scorpio in late november.

Its also funny that so many of the archetypes may be found in each sign (visionary in sagitarius, dictators in aries and leo, sensitives in cancer and scorpio, inventive people in gemini...)

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ADD COMMENT OR INSIGHT

6 comments:

Maju said...

I'd rather abide by the tropical system. Isn't it obvious that Jackson is Virgo? He looks Virgo (Mercurian by the classical rulership system) and he is hypocondriac. Certainly the Pisces Moon also weights a lot but he is anyhow the odd man out in the group of supposed Leos. Madonna also has Virgo Moon, what can create some confussion but she's obviously much more steady, fiery and determined than that hysterical Mr. mutable Jackson

All the political leaders you placed in Aries are Taurus. Taurus is a manager (of the material reality) and so were Stalin, Hitler and Saddam, for whom material success was the highest goal and ability. All of them were Taureanly conservative, btw (in their respective contexts: all them destroyed the "leftists" in their parties and were extremely pragmatic - even Hitler, when you look at the issue in detail).

I think the misunderstanding about Taurus derives from the misunderstanding about Venus. Many people read Venus as the Greek mythological archetype of ebauty and love but that's not the right thing to do: Venus is over all the manager of or resident at Reality. Venus is a planet of material power (or at least potential of such power). Certainly when you sculpt or draw you are using such power but also when you build a bridge, manage a company or a country.

Venus is like the Sun (circle on top) but with the important difference that it's based on material reality: that adds potential in this aspect, and much pragmatism, but also makes the natives dependent of such materialist foundations. Like the minotaur, they rule the Labyrinth but can't easily get out of it.

If any of the former would have been Arians, they would not have been ruling their countries for so long probably. Arians are pioneers, not steady managers (generally speaking of course; a Taurus or Gemini Venus would change that quite a bit). Arians like action and innovation almost as much as Taureans do not.

segurelha said...

Dear Maju,

nice to hear for you.
I am ready to question the limits of sign based astrology, or boundary based astrology. My vision makes me see that the zodiac is rather a continuum than a twelve divided cicle of influence, except perhaps when you draw a natal chart and a planet crosses your rising, MC, IC or descendent degrees.

Lots of what you have said makes sense. But I still question what is what, what is the reality and not our conceptual astrology.
Furthermore, I want to discover if Aries is the period of influence right after spring echinox in april (tropical view) or if stars affect with specific energies a birth chart (sideral view) or irf both occur (and that would pretty well explain the astrological ages!) when the stars of pisces cross for example the tropical spring echinox point of zodiac, the age of Pisces would be upon us, for instance)

IF Stalin, Hitler and Saddam are Aries or Taurus it does not matter for me so much, but rather realizing that people born in second half of april have a tendency for being more agressive, controlling and also genial than people born in either early april or early may (both of which are more easy going). Even though late march and early april people are self-centered and self-challeging, and early may are pragmatical but more soft-hearted, unassuming and sensual. Furthermore, I have a lot of friends born in early July than are more mental than the more emotional types born in mid July (this is rather easy visible in the dozens of reports that I have)

Maybe you can also help me here with this, with our friends and clients births?

segurelha said...

One extra note: your note about Venus is wonderfully clever. As I'm in a relationship with a Taurus rising person, I can clearly see that.

But, if you can help me with the questions I was telling in my former comment, I would be very glad for you.

Maju said...

Hi, Segurelha.

First of all, I just noticed that according to Wikipedia (sourced to http://state.rin.ru/cgi-bin/persona_e.pl?id=4140&id_subcat=6&r=8), Stalin was born in Dec-18-1878 (though he later changed it to Dec. 21 1879) and seems to be consistently documented that way. If so Stalin was a late Saggitarius, and not a Taurus (I was also confused about that).

So basically we have Hitler and Saddam left what is not a sample large enough to draw a good picture of late April births.

Saddam looks very much Taurean in his late pics, IMO. And his "aggresive" traits (was he more aggressive than the average statesman or is just porpaganda?) could anyhow be traced to elements like a possible Moon conj. Mars (in Sagg. - alternatively it could be in Scorpio), Saturn in 0º Aries or even Venus in that same sign. He also had Sun conj. Uranus what made him probably somewhat odd among Taureans (though this is a generational trait for many Taureans born in the 30s-40s: my father also has it). Mars and Pluto trine that Saturn in 0º Aries, btw. - placement that might be enhanced depending on the Asc or even MC.

As for Hitler he had a Mars+Ven stellium (in Taurus) - square Saturn in Leo, and a Plu+Nep generational stellium in Gemini. Not sure if that makes it, maybe not. But add Mercury in Aries (sharp mind and speech) opp. Uranus in Libra.

In any case it's been often mentioned that Hitler's issue was one of wrong karmic choice: he went clearly for his Capricorn SN instead than for his Cancer NN. In this sense the Mars+Ven stellium gets very emphasized as it bridges between the nodes (trine SN, sextile NN). He just chose not to use that sextile but prefered to remain stuck to his karmic imbalance.

But I still question what is what, what is the reality and not our conceptual astrology.
Furthermore, I want to discover if Aries is the period of influence right after spring echinox in april (tropical view) or if stars affect with specific energies a birth chart (sideral view) or irf both occur (and that would pretty well explain the astrological ages!) when the stars of pisces cross for example the tropical spring echinox point of zodiac, the age of Pisces would be upon us, for instance)


Good luck. I have not been able to percieve stars as influential - but I may well be wrong. I tend to think "what may be really influential"? And stars don't seem to be justified for that: they are sooo distant and detached from the Solar electromagnetic field.

My vision makes me see that the zodiac is rather a continuum than a twelve divided cicle of influence, except perhaps when you draw a natal chart and a planet crosses your rising, MC, IC or descendent degrees.

Sounds intriguing. I just happen to have discovered astrology first and foremost via sun-signs and I find it terribly difficult to ignore them (the 12 signs). But I don't discard at all I may be missing something important thinking that way anyhow.

I have a lot of friends born in early July than are more mental than the more emotional types born in mid July (this is rather easy visible in the dozens of reports that I have)

Maybe you can also help me here with this, with our friends and clients births?


You may be onto something but can't really think much into that direction for the reason mentioned above. Also I understand that each person is unique and that it's not all just the Sun. Personally I think the Moon specially is at least as important when determining personality. If the Sun is the expressive or creative soul (willpower), the Moon is the perceptive or reflexive half of it (reflexive mind, in it's basic, general form).

But, well, it's just my opinion. Other cultures, like Etruscans, apparently divided the zodiac in different sectors. Etruscans, that were famous among Romans for their predictive abilities, apparently divided the ecliptic in 16 signs, but the basic quatripartite seasonal division was the same anyhow.

Btw, I'm not professional. Just self-taught. I can see if I have friends' and aquaintances' charts that may help you if I know what to look for.

One extra note: your note about Venus is wonderfully clever. As I'm in a relationship with a Taurus rising person, I can clearly see that.

That is part of my main personal "vision" of astrology. Maybe I'm totally wrong but I suspect that there is a "sacred meaning" to planetary glyps (and the signs they rule). In fact, I even made up the "logical" or "natural" signs that should bear the planets ruling Libra and Virgo (long before the Eris controversy).

Hence Venus is willpower on matter (or reality), and therefore the ability to use or manage the material world (in all senses, including creative ones, of course). Taureans are therefore natural-born managers, though the particular inclinations and abilities of each one vary a lot.

There is another reading of autonomy on the material world: they are not subject to the imperatives of it but are not truly detached either: they are founded on it (spiritually, of course). Like the owner can be enslaved by his property, so can the typical Taurean often happen to be too dependent on the fraction of reality he/she is most gifted to rule and use at whim.

Of course there is free will and each case is unique. Just a general rule that statistically happen IMO to be real.

In a different case, being totally detached from reality (except in the trascendental holistic sense that everything is one), like could be an archetypical Leo, can also be "bad" (or "good", it depends). The creative freedom is maybe greater but the resources can be much more feeble. And that applies for every sign: no case is intrisecally better or worse, but they are different and mutually complementary.

segurelha said...

:)
Thanks to your reply. I took a while, these last days I was fully occupied.

*Taurus and Venus*
I very much enjoy your vision of Taurus since, as I said, I share a life with a Taurus rising person. She is definitively wise in resources terms and Taurus seems to be wise when coming to enrich themselves gradually and in a sustained way, over years (relationships, money, resources, etc). I have Venus in 12th house and in my case adds to my wish for self-sufficiency in nature and in a isolated place, I am very fond of nature (I am also idealistic in love, and devotional), but I am a Saggitarius with a very tight Sun-Neptune conjuntion!

* Sideral Astrology *
Curiously, I have also come to Astrology, by looking at the 12 signs (powerful indeed). However, as strong and defined as they are, I think there are the two sides of the coin. Both are boundary-defined and a continuum (do you know the paradox of the light as being both a wave and a particle, in physics?); I think the zodiac is the same (and some astrologers I know think the same too)
That said, discussing if late April born people are Taurus or Aries may be more meaningless than observing that those born during those days have a consistent personality different from those born one week before and one week later. I would go saying that we could find sub-classes inside its sign. Maybe zodiac is a clever illusion, like those of our reality and that of time, for example. That would explain why different cultures divide the sky in different portions (12, 13, 16, 24, 29...). Anyway, I don't think we should be too much analytical over Astrology.
Considering the natal chart delineation of houses (which is another conceptual division), I find striking the importance of the ASC, IC, MC or DSC degrees, but maybe the houses are also a bit of a continuum. Sometimes, I still have some 8th houses issues when having a 9th house transit (and already 10th houses). In another way, a transit over your 9th house is your 12th house counting from 10th house, and 2nd house of 8th house. That makes the entire zodiac a complicated and complex thing. And, personally, I prefer not going into those strange worlds.


Check my latest thoughts on new dwarf planets. This is what is really exciting me these last months! I am in agreeing with the other astrologers about Eris. And now I am also digging in about Sedna, Quaoar, Ixion, Orcus, Ceres, Makemake... (I am still not sure about each mean; I am comparing many people having different aspects and seeing what it comes; and also what each planet may stand in mundane Astrology) these are really exciting times for Astrology! All good for you

Maju said...

Its unfair that one person nowadays can have easily access to internet, science and a mobile phone, contraception, but no self-generated energy, no self-grown food, no stability guaranteed for creating a future family or a healthy environment around us.

You defined that very well in my opinion. The gadgets are fine but there is a lot of alienation. I'm also extremely concerned about the enviroment and the consequences for humankind of the ongoing ecological disaster.

Anyway, Earth is a spiritual school for souls. And we have still a lot to learn and apply.

You know: I am still agnostic. Even if astrology works it means nothing for me in the "spiritual" aspect. It could just be sort of a videogame and we would not know, or it could even be a merely physical phenomenon, still unexplained.

What I think I know is that, having no memory of previous existences nor conscience of future ones means that all that matters is this life. Not in a materialist sense, I think what matters is joy, fulfillment.

...I am a Saggitarius with a very tight Sun-Neptune conjuntion!

I though you said you were Aquarius.

Sun-Neptune stellium is an interesting aspect. Some people with it may be very charismatic (guess that because they embody somehow the ideals of their generation, ideals that you tend to serve naturally). Guess that the main problem with it could be drugs and maybe vanity (rosy glasses towards oneself). Neptune and the dreams it represents are on on side a powerful motivation but, as dreams, can be delusory too. The world moves always towards Neptune but it never really becomes Neptune.

Curiously, I have also come to Astrology, by looking at the 12 signs (powerful indeed). However, as strong and defined as they are, I think there are the two sides of the coin. Both are boundary-defined and a continuum...

It's possible. But notice that this trend may be defined by elements like Mercury. For instance, a late Leo can have Mer. in Leo or Virgo but never in Cancer, so the average late Leo is more Virgoan than the rest, just because of probability. Venus also plays a similar role, though it's more flexible.

I mentioned that because I am certainly a very Virgoan late Leo but I have more planets in Virgo than in any other sign, so it's normal. But I am also somewhat Cancerian (Moon) and Arian (Asc, Sat, Eris, NN).

Mercury specially can decieve and make someone appear somewhat, and even percieve oneself like his/her Mercury sign.

Maybe zodiac is a clever illusion, like those of our reality and that of time, for example.

Certainly we cannot in truth discard that possibility 100%. Not without scientific evidence certainly.

Anyway, I don't think we should be too much analytical over Astrology.

I think we should. Because I'd hate to be self-decieved. I think the scientific method can and should be applied to Astrology. We cannot determine probably the forces behind it but we can in principle check if our archetypes are statistically meaningful or just some illusion.

Considering the natal chart delineation of houses (which is another conceptual division), I find striking the importance of the ASC, IC, MC or DSC degrees, but maybe the houses are also a bit of a continuum.

The 12 houses are a more "modern" (late Roman) developement. At least that is what the people of CURA (http://cura.free.fr/artic-en.html) claim. I've always been more cautious about houses, though for my use of Astrology they are mostly unimportant (I don't care what people does in life but how they are intrisecally, their psychology, for what I need just the signs and at most the Asc).

Sometimes, I still have some 8th houses issues when having a 9th house transit (and already 10th houses). In another way, a transit over your 9th house is your 12th house counting from 10th house, and 2nd house of 8th house. That makes the entire zodiac a complicated and complex thing. And, personally, I prefer not going into those strange worlds.

Ok. Maybe such elaborate complexities exist but for me it's the basics what count most. I tend to avoid the elaborate systems and focus on the fundamentals, maybe because they are the most easy to check and generally the most meaningful.

Check my latest thoughts on new dwarf planets. This is what is really exciting me these last months! I am in agreeing with the other astrologers about Eris. And now I am also digging in about Sedna, Quaoar, Ixion, Orcus, Ceres, Makemake... (I am still not sure about each mean; I am comparing many people having different aspects and seeing what it comes; and also what each planet may stand in mundane Astrology) these are really exciting times for Astrology! All good for you

I will, even if I have not yet checked where was Makemake in my birthday (Virgo too??). This is a forum exclusively dedicated to "new planets" (any kind of Sun-orbiting body, specially the largest ones) that may have some info of your interest (it's only intermitently active anyhow):
http://www.thegreenduck.com/cgi-bin/karmast/qforum/quaoarbb.cgi

Enjoy.