I forgot my main point: in practical terms, the Tropical vs Sidereal debate acts a distraction from a deeper mutual understanding of the Archetypes of the Planets, both in Aspect and in their location in the visible sky (or invisible as the case might be, below the horizon). So yes, there is a discussion to be had there, but imo it is far from one of the most important Astrology conversations to be having.
Hi Josh, thanks for this: I have worked through a lot of these questions myself.
My main comment would be that I think you are getting too tied up in the use of specific words: for example the word "Season", which I think is a logical starting point when trying to explain the rationale behind the Tropical Zodiac (I usually use "Seasons/Equinoxes" as short hand).
Tropical Astrologers themselves will very often try to explain the Tropical system in terms of the seasons, arguing that the current stage the Sun is at in its cycle directly informs the Archetype of the Tropical Sign. Why is Aries like Aries? In the northern hemisphere, because it is the start of Spring: we are rising, we are becoming activated, we are initiating, we are felling new sources of energy leading us forward boldly and courageously.
I don't agree with Athen on everything, but I think you are being too harsh overall. He identifies Ptolemy as the person considered most responsible for tying the Zodiac to the passage of the Sun rather than the visible sky. To narrow this down to the word "Season" seems a logical and appropriate starting point to then understand the Tropical System in more detail. His 13 Sign model is great as a True Sidereal starting point, and the resources and software he offers (mostly for free) are excellent.
Having said all that, I disagree with the methods of a lot of True Sidereal Astrologers (Athen is the only one I still follow). True Sidereal should practice at the level of fixed stars not constellations, which is why I use the Nakshatras (I am not a "Constellational Astrologer" in other words). You can't just straight swap the Archetype of a Sign and apply it to that Constellation, as they clearly aren't the same thing. Mars also isn't the ruler of the Aries Constellation: Rulerships, Exaltations, Detriments etc are Tropical concepts not applicable (imo) to Sidereal.
Also, yes: the term "actual sky" is unfortunate. I would suggest "visible" sky, in that the essence of Astrology lies in direct observation of the Planets and Fixed Stars around the Ecliptic, is more appropriate.
For me, I really need to have a firm foundation with something in order to feel that I can truly understand it; and my goal is to really truly understand the depth of it. I don't want to get tied up in the use of specific words, however, often we use the same word to mean different things but don't realize this, and it causes confusion.
For example, usually "season" means spring, summer, etc. It can also just mean the time that some specific thing is happening. I have heard astrologers talk about "Virgo season", which could just mean, the "season", the time that Virgo is happening; it isn't clear to me whether they also intend to relate it to seasons springs, etc.
You mentioned "the current stage of the Sun", which is what the tropical zodiac is based on...but we have to be clear about what that means. I use it to mean the stage of the Sun relative to the equator. And, according to Vic DiCara, who I know and appreciate very much, the modality of the signs is linked to the perceived movement of the Sun, dynamic, fixed, mutable. Both of these factors are the same for everyone. However, neither of these is directly related to the seasons, spring, etc. The movement of the Sun influences those seasons, but those seasons are place-based and have a lot of other factors. So in that same paragraph you mentioned the stage of the Sun and then related Aries to the spring...so I'm simply pointing this out as an example of possible conflation and how that can cause confusion. For me precision is important in these matters.
While I am happy for anyone to do what they believe, I think that if we in general want to have conversations about these things (and some people may not) then we need to have a firm foundation, which necessitates using accurate, factual statements and not inaccurate ones. I am very influenced by Mercury and I have a lot of Gemini and Virgo, so that it part of the reasons these topics are important to me, because I can't really do anything if I don't have an understanding of the fundamentals; I need to know what we are really talking about.
Two things you mentioned brought up a question for me: one point concerning Why is Aries like Aries? (Well, I have to say that Aries is not like Aries because it happens during the spring; even in the northern hemisphere spring doesn't happen everywhere during Aries; some places at 10d latitude don't even really have spring, while spring in Quebec may not happen until late April or May. Following DiCara, the fundamentals of Aries being Aries are the facts that: it is ruled by Mars, it is male, its dynamic, and it is fire.) The second thing was that you said we should be trying to have a "deeper mutual understanding of the Archetypes of the Planets" and the signs and houses as well.
The question is: how do you personally go about understanding and exploring these archetypes? And how would you suggest we in general going about exploring them together?
Of course a comment response would be fine, but I'm wondering if you have any posts in your archive that speak to this? Or if you would write/record something along these lines, since I think this is actually an important question that a lot of people would benefit from hearing perspectives on and contemplating.
Lastly, what do the fixed stars have to do with astrology? What do they mean to you? Do you think they have so power over us? How does a planet relative to a fixed star mean what it means?
I forgot my main point: in practical terms, the Tropical vs Sidereal debate acts a distraction from a deeper mutual understanding of the Archetypes of the Planets, both in Aspect and in their location in the visible sky (or invisible as the case might be, below the horizon). So yes, there is a discussion to be had there, but imo it is far from one of the most important Astrology conversations to be having.
Hi Josh, thanks for this: I have worked through a lot of these questions myself.
My main comment would be that I think you are getting too tied up in the use of specific words: for example the word "Season", which I think is a logical starting point when trying to explain the rationale behind the Tropical Zodiac (I usually use "Seasons/Equinoxes" as short hand).
Tropical Astrologers themselves will very often try to explain the Tropical system in terms of the seasons, arguing that the current stage the Sun is at in its cycle directly informs the Archetype of the Tropical Sign. Why is Aries like Aries? In the northern hemisphere, because it is the start of Spring: we are rising, we are becoming activated, we are initiating, we are felling new sources of energy leading us forward boldly and courageously.
I don't agree with Athen on everything, but I think you are being too harsh overall. He identifies Ptolemy as the person considered most responsible for tying the Zodiac to the passage of the Sun rather than the visible sky. To narrow this down to the word "Season" seems a logical and appropriate starting point to then understand the Tropical System in more detail. His 13 Sign model is great as a True Sidereal starting point, and the resources and software he offers (mostly for free) are excellent.
Having said all that, I disagree with the methods of a lot of True Sidereal Astrologers (Athen is the only one I still follow). True Sidereal should practice at the level of fixed stars not constellations, which is why I use the Nakshatras (I am not a "Constellational Astrologer" in other words). You can't just straight swap the Archetype of a Sign and apply it to that Constellation, as they clearly aren't the same thing. Mars also isn't the ruler of the Aries Constellation: Rulerships, Exaltations, Detriments etc are Tropical concepts not applicable (imo) to Sidereal.
Also, yes: the term "actual sky" is unfortunate. I would suggest "visible" sky, in that the essence of Astrology lies in direct observation of the Planets and Fixed Stars around the Ecliptic, is more appropriate.
For me, I really need to have a firm foundation with something in order to feel that I can truly understand it; and my goal is to really truly understand the depth of it. I don't want to get tied up in the use of specific words, however, often we use the same word to mean different things but don't realize this, and it causes confusion.
For example, usually "season" means spring, summer, etc. It can also just mean the time that some specific thing is happening. I have heard astrologers talk about "Virgo season", which could just mean, the "season", the time that Virgo is happening; it isn't clear to me whether they also intend to relate it to seasons springs, etc.
You mentioned "the current stage of the Sun", which is what the tropical zodiac is based on...but we have to be clear about what that means. I use it to mean the stage of the Sun relative to the equator. And, according to Vic DiCara, who I know and appreciate very much, the modality of the signs is linked to the perceived movement of the Sun, dynamic, fixed, mutable. Both of these factors are the same for everyone. However, neither of these is directly related to the seasons, spring, etc. The movement of the Sun influences those seasons, but those seasons are place-based and have a lot of other factors. So in that same paragraph you mentioned the stage of the Sun and then related Aries to the spring...so I'm simply pointing this out as an example of possible conflation and how that can cause confusion. For me precision is important in these matters.
While I am happy for anyone to do what they believe, I think that if we in general want to have conversations about these things (and some people may not) then we need to have a firm foundation, which necessitates using accurate, factual statements and not inaccurate ones. I am very influenced by Mercury and I have a lot of Gemini and Virgo, so that it part of the reasons these topics are important to me, because I can't really do anything if I don't have an understanding of the fundamentals; I need to know what we are really talking about.
Two things you mentioned brought up a question for me: one point concerning Why is Aries like Aries? (Well, I have to say that Aries is not like Aries because it happens during the spring; even in the northern hemisphere spring doesn't happen everywhere during Aries; some places at 10d latitude don't even really have spring, while spring in Quebec may not happen until late April or May. Following DiCara, the fundamentals of Aries being Aries are the facts that: it is ruled by Mars, it is male, its dynamic, and it is fire.) The second thing was that you said we should be trying to have a "deeper mutual understanding of the Archetypes of the Planets" and the signs and houses as well.
The question is: how do you personally go about understanding and exploring these archetypes? And how would you suggest we in general going about exploring them together?
Of course a comment response would be fine, but I'm wondering if you have any posts in your archive that speak to this? Or if you would write/record something along these lines, since I think this is actually an important question that a lot of people would benefit from hearing perspectives on and contemplating.
Lastly, what do the fixed stars have to do with astrology? What do they mean to you? Do you think they have so power over us? How does a planet relative to a fixed star mean what it means?