this and that

[Guest guest]

At 06:02 PM 12/10/1999 EST, you wrote:

>Well, since the Sidereal Zodiac places Aldebaran at 15* Taurus, Spica at 29*

>Virgo, and Antares at 15* Scorpio, it doesn't sound very arbitrary to me.

+Then how does one find 15`Scorpio in the constellation of the same name?

 

>

>The Sidereal Zodiac's beauty is that, by correcting for precession, accurate

>prediction by returns, ingresses, and other transits, becomes possible,

>making a scientific astrology just as much a science as an art. So, we may

>also ask if Mayo tried any sidereal forecasting methods as well, since

>Fagan's failure with Tropical solar and lunar returns led him to try the

>Sidereal Zodiac.

+Well I don['t know yet. Tropically, my transits have made good sense as

is. But I will give the Sid. a try too.

 

>> The idea seems quite illogical. Why

>> start with the constellation Aries, anyway? With the Tropical Zodiac the

>> signs begin at a distinct and logical point: the intersection of ecliptic

>> and equator at the Spring Equinox. I cannot vouch for the value of the

>> systems used with the Sidereal Zodiac in eastern countries, having not

>> studied these. "

>If it seems arbitrary to start with Aries, then why equate the Northern

>Hemisphere's Spring Equinox with 0* Aries?

+Because (as Mayo points out) that is where the ecliptic crosses the

celestial equator.

 

 

>Patton's Sidereal Sun may have been in Libra, but with his Mars as a focal

>point to a Pluto-Mars-Mercury T-square, Scorpio/Aries behavior is no

>surprise. Patton also has a Grand Trine involving Jupiter, Neptune/Pluto

>(eight degrees apart), and Black Moon Lilith.

+Actually Patton has TWO Tau-Crosses! I just saw the one you point out

(Mutable) involving Mars in Point Focus (to use a Marc Jones term), but he

also has a Tau in Cardinal signs, with Uranus in Libra in Point Focus. His

eccentricity was legendary. The Tau Cardinal involves Uranus square to a

Venus in Capricorn opposition to Saturn in Cancer. Alot of Saturnine

qualities in Patton despite the Uranus and Mars emphases. (I've just read

a bio on Patton this past summer so it is fresh in my mind this amazing

man!). Who believed in reincarnation. I also believe that his VEnus/Moon

conjunction in Capricorn is in the 5th which would give him a Leo rising

chart (his vanity was legendary).

 

All for now, BB

[Guest guest]

Regarding the merits of the sidereal signs (which is not the same as the

constellations) and the tropical signs, I would like to add that modern

sidereal techniques tend to dispense of the zodiac completely, i.e., they

don't use the signs (sidereal or otherwise) to make an analysis and

interpretation.

 

As a tradition Western sidereal astrology has concentrated in 1-) the

symbolism of the planets " by themselves " , regardless of their position in

the signs, 2-) the use of the sidereal year instead of the tropical in all

time calculations, 3-) the use of returns and parans.

 

If you read some of the best articles and columnists who write in American

Astrology, you will see that they are siderealists, but they never use the

sidereal signs --or the tropical--, except as reference points. They are

not needed.

 

Of course, this is my impression only, coming from using that magazine as a

source. I am not familiar with other sidereal publications.

 

I think that both tropical and sidereal signs are valid. My feeling is that

the more spiritual or long-term significance of character traits (which is

what the signs represent), is better revealed by the sidereal signs,

because they are more " transcendental " or " archetypal " . The tropical signs

I would say are better suited for a person's life-span and for

psychological analysis.

 

Juan