For Therese; sidereal sign meanings

[Guest guest]

At 10:13 PM 8/12/2009 +0000, Dave Monroe wrote:

>Therese, Jim Eshelman has published (on his Solunar's site) a set of

>Sidereal planet and sign meanings in the form of a handout sheet that he

>used at a recent seminar.

 

Dave, do you mean the winzip file that has to be downloaded? Anyhow, I did

download the file, but had to tweak winzip to get the file opened. Winzip

wanted a registration, though I have the purchased CD here somewhere.

 

>You wrote: " These seem to be fragments of writings from various authors

>from way back when --- quite a mix and match to consider. If I were to

>want to utilize them, I'd have to look for the underlying common themes

>and derive some guidelines that might suggest just what sidereal signs

>mean in those terms that we expect of modern day sun-sign or moon-sign

>interpretations. "

 

Yes, you are right there, Dave. The writings seem to be a collection. I'd

disagree with much of it. I believe we have to *begin* with theme concepts

(Where do traits come from? What are they based on?), and then using birth

charts of people with recorded times, build on those themes. For example,

if Mars rules Aries, how does this show in individuals with Solar

stelliums in Aries? In a way, it's working backwards.

 

As I've discussed on my web site, I believe the foundation of the signs as

related to planets is based on the zodiac that has come down to us from

Hellenistic times. Each of the five planets is related to two signs, one

solar (Leo through Capricorn) and one lunar (Cancer [going backwards]

through Aquarius. Thus, for example, Mars is naturally externalized and

active in Scorpio (its own nocturnal sign), but tends to be internal

(determined, stubborn, directed) in its lunar sign of Aries. If this type

of symbolism works out, then sidereal Scorpio as a sign would be more

outgoing, linking with others while sidereal Aries would be more " a man

unto himself. " Going about his/her own life without asking for a lot of

input from others.

 

But perhaps the most obvious key is how the signs express in outer

activities that we can observe. These are the charts I'm collecting so

there can be no disagreement about psychological traits.

 

It's now just signs, however. It's how planets combine with the signs. It

seems that in Hellenistic times it was normal to consider a planet in a

sign to be influencing the **ruler** of that sign rather than the sign

toning the planet. This is a whole new wrinkle which I've been considering.

So I'm taking a lot of time studying horoscopes. And often dispositors seem

to tell most of the story. So it's all a complex network. It has to be

sorted out to make any sense.

 

And while we're on the subject of signs--where has Jim Eshelman been all

these years?? We can't call the sidereal signs " constellations. " This was

done way back in the early days of sidereal astrology, but the

constellational sky is entirely different than sidereal signs. We really do

need to use correct terminology.

 

>You wrote: Have you finished your own writings on this subject which you

>were working on over the winter months?

 

My central theme ideas have been set down for some time, but to put the

material on line I feel I need some good example horoscopes for the signs.

I'm collecting these now, but am somewhat hampered by moving to a new

computer and a new printer. The dial-up isn't working exactly right, and

I've been avoiding taking the computer to a technician. I also have to move

my web program and all the files to the new computer before the old one

(Win98) gives out.

 

And then there's the summer family time...which I know you're familiar with!

 

Therese