|
Please see also Astrology Questions Index, Archive 2, Archive 3 and Archive 4.Progressed Sun Trine Natal Pluto What does an Unaspected Sun mean? 'I have a question about the moon's nodes. In my chart the true node is at 29 Sagittarius, but the mean node is at 1 Capricorn - which would you use and why?' - from Angie I personally would always use the true node, not the mean node, and this is the
way I was taught. The reason for this is that the mean node is by it's nature an
'approximation' if you like, given that the mean measurement exists to even out the bumps
and unevenness of the ecliptic path, whereas the true node is the actual, true,
measurement. 'Can you tell me more about Saturn in the 12th house, and how one can mitigate any negative effects of this placing? And also, how can one best handle Saturn transiting opposite Sun?' - From Linda Saturn in the 12th house can tend to make the individual something of a recluse,
although other planetary placings would have to back this up before we could confirm that
as being likely in its literal sense. What 'I understand that some time this year my progressed sun is going to trine my natal Pluto, and that this will involve considerable disruption for me. Can you elaborate a bit further on this?' - from Melissa You are absolutely correct in your assumption that this period is likely to
bring some kind of disruption into your life - the reason you are unable to find out more
about it from books is because the precise nature of the disruption is dependent upon the
rest of your natal chart as well as upon your life circumstances at that time. 'I read somewhere that people who have Jupiter in their Sun Sign are very lucky, and that those who have it in the opposite sign are very unlucky. I have Jupiter in the 6th house in Aries - where does that leave me?' - From Nannette You mentioned that you had heard that for those who have Jupiter in the same
sign as their sun luck is abundant, but for those who have it in the opposite sign luck is
hard to come by. I don't know that I would necessarily agree with that. I think what is
probably meant by that is that those who have Jupiter conjunct their Sun (i.e. within 8
degrees of it, which may or may not be in the same sign) can expect general good fortune
in most things. Meanwhile, those who have Jupiter in opposition to their Sun (i.e. approx.
180 degrees away, which may or may not be in the sign opposite to the sun sign) luck is
less forthcoming. 'Can you define for me: What is a Natal Chart?' - from Heather The 'Natal Chart' is the basic tool of astrology.
Someone's natal chart is basically a map of the heavens at the exact date, time and place
of their birth. It is usually shown as a wheel, divided into 12 segments (houses). The far
left of the wheel shows the Ascendant Line - this is the line which marks the exact degree
of the sign that was rising on the eastern horizon at the date, time and place of birth,
and the Ascendant is probably the single most important factor in any natal chart
interpretation. 'This might sound very hypothetical, but I would like to know what the effects would be if a person had everything in Gemini - Ascendant, houses, all of the planets, everything.' - From Edgar You asked us about the hypothetical effects of someone having everything in
Gemini. Well, the houses cannot be 'in Gemini' as the houses are the twelve cusp line
divisions of the chart, each covering 30 degrees of the chart and so each house contains
only one or sometimes two signs. "Hi I'm 15 and very interested in
this field. In my career class we were asked to write a report about what we want to be
when we graduated. Well I would like to be an astrologer. So if you could e-mail me back
with some information to the questions that will be stated below, it would really help.
Thanks for your time. 1)description of career and
duties 2)education and/or training required Well done for considering astrology as a career, and I hope I can help you with
some of your questions. I should point out, however, that I live in the UK not the US, and
the situation here will probably be slightly different to yours with regard to the law,
etc. "I recently had a chart done by (a well known astrologer). He said in this that I was unusual, as I had an unaspected Sun. He didn't elaborate on this, but it sounded very unlucky. What does this mean?" It seems here that you have been unfortunate in your choice of astrologer - no astrologer worth his or her salt would decline to elaborate on a point such as this. Alternatively, if you received a written report, I imagine that you have fallen foul of a computer generated report that cannot and does not consider the personality as a whole, but merely recreates paragraphs of text based on 'cookbook' interpretations. Hopefully we can redress the balance a little by examining the answers to your question. The term 'unaspected planet' can be very misleading. 'Aspect' is the astrological term for the angles between the planets, and the 'patterns' they make through these angles - for instance, two planets 90 degrees apart are said to be in a square aspect, whereas 120 degrees apart would be a trine aspect. There are a dozen or so major aspects, and a whole host of minor ones. Any given planet invariably makes some kind of aspect pattern in a birth chart, either through minor aspects, connections with the angles of the chart (Ascendant, Midheaven, Descendant etc.), or through techniques we use called Midpoints and Harmonics. However, the often used definition of an 'unaspected planet' is one which has no major aspect within a reasonable degree of orb (exactness - for a major aspect, we allow an orb of, say 6 degrees). Using the data you gave me, I have calculated your Natal Chart, and I can confirm that your Natal Sun makes no major aspects to any of the other planets - therefore a computer generated report, or a less than thorough astrologer may well have indicated that your Sun was unaspected. However, in actual fact, your Sun does make two minor aspects to other planets (a semi-square, which is 45 degrees, to Jupiter, and another semi-square to Uranus). As well as this, it makes a major aspect (a trine, 120 degrees) to an important chart point called Chiron, as well as an opposition (180 degrees) to your Midheaven. I will return to the implications of these aspects later, but for the moment, let's deal with what it means to have an Unaspected Sun in terms of the often used definition of no major aspects within orb. Before we can talk about an unaspected planet, it is important to be clear about the role and importance of aspects. Why are they relevant anyway? Well, when a planet forms a major aspect with another, the energy of that planet is in some way modified by the other. Sometimes this fusion of energies can be very positive, other times it can be difficult and stressful. The important thing is that being in aspect to another planet enables a planet to undergo experience through involvement with the other. If you like, it allows the planet to fulfil it's potential in your chart by developing the capacity to express its energies in a rounded way. Being in aspect produces new dimensions for both planets, as they shape one another, and the energies of each are subtly modified, enhanced or restricted. An unaspected planet has to function without that involvement and exchange of energies, in isolation. Unaspected planets are not necessarily weak, but they don't integrate easily within the other components of the psyche (the other planets). Having said that, the unaspected planet does retain its true nature more so than the aspected one - for better or for worse. The energy of the unaspected planet is very intense and pointed, since it is not coloured by another planet's energy, nor does it have to express any of its own energy through another sign. Other astrological houses are not involved either, so all of the unaspected planet's energies tend to be concentrated in the one area of life. There is no blending of principles. An unaspected planet's energy is much more difficult to control than that of a heavily aspected planet, because it tends to act in a kind of all or nothing way - sometimes very strong in the chart, sometimes very weak - and it is notoriously difficult to foresee the strength of the energy before it manifests itself. Karmically, it seems that the unaspected planet has development to work on that it would be unable to do if encumbered or hindered by the other planets. We can see then that the way in which you experience an unaspected planet is that the energies of that planet are highly self-contained. The sign in which the planet is based becomes influential, and the house in which it is based also takes on a prominence, especially if no other planet is in the same house. In your particular case, it is the Sun which is 'unaspected' in the accepted sense. Because the astrological sun represents the self and the ego, having an unaspected Sun makes you a very self-contained and independent individual, very detached from external influences. The autonomous, self-governing nature of the Sun is emphasised in your personality, and you have a very independent spirit - but not always helpfully so. A heavily aspected Sun would indicate a person who is driven to gain recognition and honour in the external world through a vibrant, confident display of her abilities. She would make a huge effort to attract attention to herself and to be admired or praised for her achievements, in order to feel ego-fulfilled. In other words, she would consciously try to radiate her Sun energies in order to have a direct impact on her environment. However, with your unaspected Sun, you are much less driven to 'externalise' matters. You are less glory-seeking, and indeed make little effort to put yourself on centre stage. You are, however, motivated by your own self-importance, and you do hold yourself in high regard. Self-esteem and pride are important to you, whether or not reinforced by your environment and society. Your strength and integrity comes from within, so you are much less dependent on outer relationships for moral or ego support. You are very rooted internally, and emotionally self-sufficient, regardless of how chaotic or unstable your circumstances may become. This sometimes makes you appear a little aloof and unresponsive, as if totally absorbed in your own world. Your Sun is in your 4th house, so it seems that all of this intense energy is channelled into your family and domestic life. Nothing is more important to you than your family, and it is through them that you feel your own ego satisfied. However, you are also at times driven to be your own worst enemy within the family, and discord can arise because other family members may sometimes perceive you as selfish or irresponsible. I mentioned above that your Sun is not truly 'unaspected' because it does make some minor aspects and some major ones to chart points other than planets. The semi-square to Uranus is quite a difficult aspect, causing you periods of tension and backing up your tendency to be your own worst enemy. The semi-square to Jupiter imparts you with a lack of moderation in many things - again, the Sun is expressing itself in an all or nothing way. You also tend to lose your sense of perspective quite easily. The Sun is in opposition to your Midheaven, which is the point of your chart concerned with your aspirations and objectives, especially in your career. This would seem to indicate that although you have a clear idea of what you want from life, you often struggle to achieve it. You identify with values such as freedom, justice and philosophical understanding, but you often don't feel yourself to be worthy. Although to others you come across perhaps as very self-assured, you actually do have a number of little niggles in your confidence levels, and you really are to harsh on yourself most of the time. Your Sun is in Gemini, so this sign takes on a certain prominence within your chart, which would otherwise be dominated by Cancer and Libra. A Gemini Sun that runs wild, as an unaspected Sun might, probably means that you don't always know where to draw the line when communicating with others, and that superficiality sometimes gets the better of you. However, on the positive side, the strong trine aspect that your Sun makes to Chiron enhances your empathy and understanding of others, and gives you a natural ability to listen to and to understand those in pain. It also gives you healing talents, should you care to develop them. You mentioned in your original question that having an unaspected Sun sounded 'unlucky'. To summarise, I hope I've been able to explain that it is not, of itself, unlucky - and in any case, astrologers believe that we make our own luck. An unaspected Sun can be hard work, and it can (and therefore you can) be 'difficult' at times. But that is not necessarily all a bad thing - because you have to work so much harder than another person at integrating the Sun energies into your life, you have a greater flexibility of mind and of nature than many people do. And anyway, in your case, the 'difficult' energies of this placement are more than compensated for by the wonderful trine to Chiron, which adds so much softness and compassion to your nature. Properly harnessed and understood, your powerful Sun energies can do a lot of good in your life, especially in your domestic and family life, if you consciously try to channel your feelings of ego and self-worth into your family. Your independence of spirit and mind is something to be proud of too. You have always been able to fend for yourself, and you are never afraid to stand or fall by virtue of your own talents, and many people admire you for that. Even unharnessed, these energies in your particular case will not cause you any lasting damage - the gift from Chiron has ensured that even though you may at times feel thoroughly self-centred you do in fact have a heart of gold "I would like to ask you what you think/feel about the Grand Cross appearing at the Solar Eclipse, and if you think it has any significance for humankind on the collective level." As most people know, we are experiencing a solar eclipse on August 11th 99, the path of totality of which crosses the South-West of England, although a partial eclipse will be visible from much of the rest of the UK. The last solar eclipse visible from England was in 1927, and there won't be another one during the lifetime of us adults. With the end of this (man-made) millennium approaching, our thoughts are increasingly turning towards a collective consciousness for the new millennium. Is there anything within the astrology of this eclipse that heralds this new beginning, or otherwise? Well, this particular solar eclipse and its accompanying astrological patters are indeed rather potent. It is interesting to note that the signs and aspects involved, in isolation, are not especially 'good' or benevolent. Taken in isolation, the astrology of this eclipse could be said to be rather troublesome. Many dire predictions have been thrown around about catastrophes and the end of the world, thanks mainly to mis-interpretations of the work of Nostradamus. I don't think anything particularly catastrophic is going to happen, or even especially dramatic, but I do think that the astrology involved here is going to be a catalyst for change. If we look first of all at the geographical implications of the path of totality. Beginning in Nova Scotia, totality crosses SW England and the Channel Islands on its way towards the Balkans, before passing over Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran, Southern Pakistan and central India - many potential trouble spots could therefore be said to be directly 'in the spotlight'. In order to analyse the effect of the eclipse on any particular country, we would need to look at the country's 'birth chart', and time or space do not permit that here. Suffice it here to say that traditionally, an eclipse in Leo would suggest the loss of a 'leader'. Endless possibilities suggest! To return to the more general implications for mankind. The meaning of a solar eclipse in general astrology is that of a new beginning - but not without a traumatic or difficult ending first. The most important astrological element of this eclipse is a Grand Cross in the four fixed signs (a Grand Cross is the aspect pattern formed when two sets of two planets are each in opposition to the other, forming a large cross across the natal chart). A Grand Cross would normally indicate a point of mounting tension that needs to be released. It points to the culmination of certain activities, as signified by the planets and houses involved and the ability to then begin anew. However, in order to begin again, one must be able to 'let go' of that which is finished with. Fixed signs are notoriously difficult at coping with change or upheaval of any kind, so one can begin to see an immediate problem here. Let us look first of all at the main 'protaginists' of this eclipse - the Sun and the Moon in Leo (joined by the North Node) and in opposition to Uranus (and the South Node) in Aquarius. This is a very intense combination. The individual ego of mankind (Leo) is being challenged to give way to the collective consciousness of humanity (Aquarius). There has been much talk of the 'Age of Aquarius' over the last decade or so, with many alternative dates offered for its 'official beginning'. This eclipse is as good a date as any - could this be the time that once and for all the selfishness of individual nations and individual people gives way to a collective urge to 'make things better'? Could this see the end of third world debt, for instance, and a curb on some of the unbelivably huge profits being made by some of the world's richest out of some of the world's poorest? This, I believe, will be the beginning of a tide of change in public opinion. Certain things that were acceptable are going to gradually become unacceptable. This can only be for the greater good, but it may be painful along the way. The Moon embodies all that attaches us to the past, whilst Uranus embodies all that intrigues us about the future. Tensions in current scientific advances are highlighted here - GM foods, for instance, genetic cloning and other research. Subjective human opinion is being challenged to give way to Progress, with a capital P. Again, this involves quite a struggle, because many people hold strong and evidently justifiable views - but then again, the 'other side' holds equally strong and justifiable views. This could be the beginning of a timescale which sees the balance of power shift firmly towards the 'futurists' after all. The other half of the Grand Cross is the opposition of Mars in Scorpio and Saturn in Taurus. It is commonly thought that this speaks of the distinct possibility of economic and idealistic wars - but then again, mankind has been having economic and idealistic wars for ever, sadly we don't need another eclipse as an excuse! There does seem to be a general tension about world finances here though - with Venus in Virgo in trine aspect to Jupiter in Taurus, and also with Pluto in the 2nd house square Venus, which is, incidentally, the ruler of the eclipse chart. The Mars-Saturn opposition is of course square to the Sun/Moon-Uranus one, so it seems that there will certainly be some power struggles involving large amounts of money going on at the time of the eclipse. We can already see that this is the case - there has been in recent years and months a rise in terrorism, social problems, and economic blackmail all over the world. These problems already exist - they are not being 'caused' by the eclipse, but what is happening through the energies of the eclipse is that they are being brought into focus, and mankind is being challenged to come up with solutions for dealing with them - or to face the consequences of not dealing with them well enough. Rather than sudden out and out war in some part of the globe, I would imagine that this combination of aspects is more likely to indicate long, tense, drawn-out negotiations to solve various existing crises. Both Scorpio and Taurus are extremely stubborn, so this is not likely to be something that gets brushed under the carept quickly. We can take some comfort from the fact that peace-loving, diplomatic Libra rises in the eclipse chart, surely indicating a strong desire for a gentle solution to any problem. Surely? In summary then, I imagine that this eclipse will have far reaching effects on the collective consciousness of mankind, but that it will be a slow and painstaking process rather than a dramatic shift. The indications are that much good will come of these planetary energies in the long term, but that the price to pay for that is the struggles and tensions in the near-middle future. I would hope that this marks the beginning of a more responsible, socially aware type of human imagination and deed, and that it also opens the door towards healthy, sensible compromise on many of the scientific issues facing us at the moment that could be so good for mankind - if only we can get them right, not horribly wrong. It is important to remember that these things are not 'caused' by the eclipse. I am a firm believer in free will. Rather than the eclipse 'causing' anything here on earth, I prefer to think of the saying 'As above, so below' - the energies that the eclipse releases are in parallel to what is also happening here on earth, and each is mutually reflective of the other. In our own personal charts, we can see how the eclipse is going to affect us by looking for the point of the eclipse within our charts, and seeing what house it falls in and what aspects it makes. As far as the world as a whole is concerned, it is of course up to our leaders and governments to do as they see fit. But rather than the doom and gloom that many people are preaching, I see this as a time of opportunity - albeit with a price. The challenge facing us all collectively is - how do we make sure we don't waste it! The argument of the Precession of the Equinoxes is one frequently made by those opposed to astrology, who claim that it ‘disproves’ astrology and renders it invalid. This is perhaps best illustrated by an answer we gave in response to a recent question: "How can astrology be valid when the points in space you refer to are no longer in the same positions as they were thousands of years ago? Doesn't that invalidate all of this horoscope stuff?" I think the phenomenon to which you are referring is known as the Precession of the Equinoxes. Because of this phenomenon, the zodiac signs do not now correspond with the constellations of the same name. This point is often made by astronomers and others to apparently 'prove' that astrology cannot 'work'. In actual fact, astrologers are well aware of the Precession and its effects. The point referred to by Astronomers as the vernal equinox, and by astrologers as 0 degrees Aries is in fact seen each year from the earth as slightly before its previous year's position against the background of the constellations. This is caused by a wobble in the earth's axis, caused by unequal gravitational pull of the Sun and the Moon on the earth's surface. The point referred to as 0 degrees Aries is actually seen from earth now as being in the constellation of Pisces. Aha, the sceptics say - that proves astrology is nonsense, you say that someone's sun is in Aries when in fact that point in space is now in Pisces, right? Wrong. It is vital to understand the difference between constellations and the zodiac. Much confusion arises for the lay person because the constellations have the same names as the signs of the zodiac, but they are not the same thing. The groups of stars marked on charts as constellations are not actually groups at all. What we see from earth is the grouping of several points of light, some from points many millions of light years away, and others from much further even that that. These 'groups' have no definite boundary lines as such, but are conveniently classified by man into constellations. At the time that these constellations were being named and their name becoming known in the public arena, the 30 degrees of ecliptic, starting from the vernal equinox, was called Aries and the constellation that appeared as its background was therefore also called Aries. No precise date can be given for this, but the precession of the equinoxes was not discovered until 134 b.c by Hipparchus. It is the vernal equinox point (0 degrees Aries to an astrologer) that appears from earth to move further back each year - the constellations remain in the same positions. However, the signs of the zodiac are and always have been counted in 30 degree segments from the vernal equinox point. Aries will always be the first 30 degrees of the ecliptic (with the others signs following on), and therefore will, each year, appear slightly further back against the background of the constellations. So, the fact that the point we call 0 degrees Aries is now seen from earth as being against the background of the constellation of Pisces has nothing whatsoever to do with astrology - it neither proves nor disproves anything. When people assume that it somehow 'disproves' astrology, they have not understood the difference between the astronomical constellations and the astrological zodiac. It might help to understand if you can think of the signs of the zodiac as being a kind of shorthand to describe the various degrees of the ecliptic (remember, this always begins at the vernal equinox, and it's starting point does not change but it appears to against the background of the constellations). Each 30 degree segment of the ecliptic has certain astrological significance, but we don't actually need to call them Aries, Taurus and so on at all. It is just easier to say (for instance) that in a particular chart Mars is at 3 degrees Cancer rather than have to say it is at 93 degrees of the ecliptic. I hope this answer has made things clearer for you. It is quite a tricky concept for the non-astrologer to grasp, but basically you should always remember that the signs of the zodiac and the astronomical constellations may share names, but are not the same thing! 'What are hyleg and alchochoden, and where are they found?' These two terms are used by historical astrologers and other medieval-based types of astrology. They hyleg is the planet or point of the chart which is the strongest of the whole chart. The meaning is derived from an Arab word meaning 'giver of life'. It's usage is in determining the life span of the owner of that particular chart. The alchochoden is the 'almuten' of the hyleg, which means that it is the planet which has the most 'dignities' and 'fortitudes' in the place of the hyleg. All of these terms are medieval in background. The hyleg and the alchochoden are not really used in modern psychological astrology, and I personally hardly ever use them. However, some astrologers do. I must say at this point that I personally am a strong believer in free will. I do not believe that the planets 'cause' any event here on earth, but merely that the planetary energies reflect events ALSO happening here on earth. Therefore I have philosophical objections to the idea that the life-span and time of death of an individual can be pinpointed from a natal chart. It is true that death can normally be seen in charts retrospectively, after the event, when one looks at the transits and progressions activating the chart at the moment of death. 'Predicting' death, however, even using transits and progressions, is not only (in my view) unethical, but also exceptionally difficult. Death can take place under various different planetary aspects, which is why it is so difficult to predict even should one wish to. Death can come with a push from violent mars or unexpected Uranus, for instance, just as commonly as it can come in the sleep under a gentle Neptune transit, or as a release from suffering through benevolent Jupiter. And all of these transits can also indicate other, less drastic events quite apart from death. However, my own point of view made clear, let's continue to look at how hyleg and alchochoden are found and used. Finding the hyleg is rather tricky, and is not helped by the fact that the authors and astrological scholars of the time disagreed amongst themselves. The general procedure is to look first at whichever light was alive during the time of birth - the Sun for a daytime birth, the Moon for a birth after sunset and before sunrise. There was a consensus from the ancient authors that if the correct light was in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th or 11th house, then it could by the hyleg (this is of course further complicated by the variety of house systems one can use in drawing up a natal chart). Ptolemy considered only the houses above the horizon (but not the 12th or the 8th), whilst Valens considered some places below the horizon as long as those places had a ptolemaic aspect to the rising sign. If, after considering both the Sun and the Moon neither is found to be the hyleg, then one must look to the part of fortune (not a physical 'place at all, but a point in space arrived at by a complicated calculation). If this is not the hyleg, then the prenatal new moon is considered. If all else fails, the Ascendant itself is considered to be they hyleg. Once the hyleg is determined, one must then find the planet which is the almuten of the hyleg, and make that the alchochoden. It is generally agreed that the hyleg and the alchochoden could be one and the same planet. Once the hyleg and alchochoden have been established, one must then calculate the rays of the hyleg to the rays of a 'malefic' planet. Unless a malefic planet indicates otherwise, then one is thought to live the entire period indicated by the alchochoden. If a malefic planet does intervene, then it is though to show the timing and the manner of one's death. As I stated above, I have found the hyleg and the alchochoden to be of not that much use in my own work, and I have philosophical doubts about the validity of their use in predicting death. Notwithstanding that, however, they may be of some other use, for instance in establishing potential early warning signs of ill health. 'I was born 'on the cusp' between Taurus and Gemini. Which horoscope should I read, and is my personality affected by the other sign at all? I sense that I must be a Taurus, rather than a Gemini, and I would be interested to know if this is true." This is an interesting question, because it neatly illustrates one of the common misconceptions about astrology. When reading sun sign columns, someone born on the cusp is often unable to tell which of the two possible sun signs to read. The truth is that the notion of being born on the cusp is rather misleading. There is a definite time during a 'cusp day' when the Sun moves from one sign into the next. With an accurate birth time, it is a very simple matter for an astrologer to calculate where that person's natal Sun is. With the data that this lady gave me, it was easy to see that her Sun is in Gemini - the Sun moved into Gemini at 11:53 on the morning of her birth, and she was not born until late afternoon. Anyone born before 11:53 on the same day and roughly the same place as her will have their Sun in Taurus. However, astrology is about rather more than your Sun Sign. The Sun is indeed an important 'planet', but the degrees and the positions of all of the other planets have to be synthesised together to give us an accurate picture of an individual’s personality. First of all, the Ascendant Sign, the degree of which changes every four minutes, is probably the most important factor in any Natal chart, more so than the Sun. This lady’s Ascendant Sign is Virgo, so straight away we have to add a generous helping of Virgo qualities into her makeup. Virgoan and Taurean qualities are easily confused by a lay-person, and this probably partly contributes towards her feeling 'more Taurean' than Gemini. The Ascendant Sign aside, however, people are often confused when born on the cusp because when they do discover what sign their Sun is in, they often feel more affinity with the other sign. The most common reason for this is Mercury. Because of the astronomical position of Mercury, it is always close to the Sun. A lot of the time they are in the same sign, but when the Sun is moving from one sign to the next, Mercury will be a little bit behind or ahead, again depending on it's exact position at your time of birth. This can happen for a few days, or is some cases it may be several weeks before both planets are once again the same sign. In this lady’s case although her Sun has moved into Gemini, her Mercury is still firmly in Taurus. This results in her ego being symbolised by Gemini, but her thought processes, the way she communicates and the way she processes information are all symbolised by Taurus. These are of course very noticeable things, and this could well be the reason why she ‘feels’ more Taurean than Gemini. Another reason for the confusion that arises for people born on the cusp is that although you retain the astrological makeup you were born with, for all of us the Sun 'progresses' by one degree per year (in terms of the astrological technique progressions). So if you were born with the Sun in a very late degree of, say, Scorpio, then by the time you started school your progressed Sun may well have moved into Sagittarius, giving you quite a different outlook on life. This can often be the explanation when someone really doesn't 'feel' like their Sun Sign. By the time we reach 30 years old, all of our progressed Suns have necessarily changed signs, and this is an interesting way of tracking the shifts in our focus and priorities throughout our adult lives. It is commonly agreed between astrologers that when a planet changes sign, it does so and that is that - there is no overlap period, or blending of energies. This can easily be tracked by using the Moon as an example, which changes signs roughly every 2-3 days. If you get hold of a table of positions for the Moon, and track it's changes through your daily life, you will often find it relatively easy to notice a change in your own attitude or in your feelings at the time that the Moon changes signs. The term 'on the cusp' as meaning between two signs is actually a bit of a misnomer. The cusp, astrologically speaking, is the dividing line between one sign and the next - but, as I have just stated, there is no 'middle ground'. If you are born with the Sun at 29 degrees and 59 minutes Taurus, then Taurus it is. If you are born with the Sun at 0 degrees and 0 minutes Gemini, then Gemini it is. However, there is always an explanation when someone does not identify well with the position of their Sun. Either a strong Ascendant Sign, a weak Sun, a different Mercury Sign or a different sign for the progressed Sun. On top of all of those possibilities, other completely different planets may be more dominant in the natal chart, or making debilitating aspects towards the Sun. The moral of the story, then, is not to place too much importance on the sign of your Sun, without taking due regard of all of the other astrological factors involved! What are the Strongest Factors in Astrological Relationship Analysis? Relationship analysis, or Synastry, is a fascinating branch of astrology, and one of our specialities. I always find it so interesting to note how different personalities play together, and how one personality might find so-and-so a perfect match whilst another personality might find the same so-and-so intensely irritating! Common misconceptions about Synastry are that certain sun signs ‘go well’ together, and others do not. Sometimes people also mistakenly believe the same about moon signs, or that the sign on the cusp of the 7th house is the sun sign of your dream partner. None of these things are actually true. There are many factors to be taken into account when practising synastry, so let's take a look at some of the major ones. First of all, let's dispel the myth that certain signs 'go' well with certain others and do not 'go' well with the rest. That is not the case, whether we are talking about Sun Signs, Moon Signs, Mars signs or any other planets. Humans are subtle creatures, and it is vital to look at the two natal charts as a whole before reaching any conclusions about who 'goes' well with whom. It is true - very, very broadly - that signs of the same element interact well with one another. However, it is not true - even broadly - to say that signs from different elements do not 'get on'. A lot of people think, for instance, that fire and water do not go well together, because water 'puts out' the fire. Fair enough, but if you think a little more deeply about it, you will see also that this can be a wonderful combination - water dampens fire's flame sufficiently to get rid of the brashness and aggressiveness, whilst fire warms water enough to display some real passion and excitement. Most things in astrology cut both ways. It is also important to remember that most of us have planets in many different signs, in varying strengths, and that our personalities are made up of the blending of all of these factors. Even in a chart which is very strongly Taurean (or whatever) there will be modifying influences. So where do we start in assessing the compatibility of two people via their natal charts? Well, we have to consider in each chart where we can find the qualities that generally make a relationship work - rapport, good communication, sympathy, empathy, tolerance, give and take and so forth. I like to do this first of all by considering each natal chart individually. If we start with the Sun and the Ascendant - these represent our personalities, and so are a good general starting point to assess the subject's general temperament. The Moon is important in synastry, but not from the point of view of whether the two Moon signs 'go together' or not. The Moon represents our emotions, instincts and reactions, and so tells us how this person reacts to a partner - how moody or changeable they are, and how empathetic. Venus represents love and affection, and also possessions (which are closely linked - think of the squabbles over domestic items when a partnership breaks down). The position of Venus will tell us how demonstrative, affectionate and romantic each person is, as well as how materially-conscious or not. Mars represents our physical energy and the sexual urge. Whichever of the two partners has the stronger Mars is likely to take the lead sexually. Mars also tells us how strong the sex drive is in each person. Saturn is also an important planet in synastry, telling us as it does where each person feels restricted, and, when the two charts are compared, how and whether each person is likely to restrict the other, and how they will deal with joint responsibilities. Mercury (mental rapport, shared intellectual interests), Jupiter (joint enthusiasms and growth), and the house positions of Uranus (possible tension and disruption), Neptune (romance, but also deceit) and Pluto (ability to work through issues, transformation) then bring up the rear as I consider the planets in each individual's chart. That process finished, I have a good idea of how each person feels, thinks, and is likely to look at their partner. We then need to look at the houses in each chart. The 7th house is the most important area of the chart when judging how this person will relate to other people. It is true that the sign on the cusp of the 7th house is an important clue to this and the influence of any planets within this house are also very important. Even if there are no planets in the house, the sign itself is an excellent guide. The sign on the cusp of the 7th house is the opposite or polar sign of the Ascendant. It is here that the subject's needs and requirements from a partner are found. I don't know that I would agree that the cusp of the 7th house is a reliable guide to the marriage partner - certainly I can find no evidence that the person is likely to marry a person who's Sun or Ascendant is that sign. This happens, but no more frequently than chance might allow. What is very true, however, is that we all do tend to respond to our intimate partners in the manner of the sign that is the cusp of the 7th house. This is apparent usually only to those intimate partners, not to the casual observer. For instance, someone with Pisces rising will seem, to friends and family, to exhibit all of the Piscean sensitivity and gentleness, but when interacting with their partner, a sharply critical Virgoan side will emerge, that others are unaware of. The 5th house is also very important in synastry, dealing as it does with risk-taking - in this case, the emotional risks that every relationship carries. The 5th house also reveal the subject's attitude towards the joys of children (as opposed to the serious side of parenthood). The 2nd and 8th houses are important, because of their material implications - after all, any good marriage or long-term relationship has to deal with the financial aspects of everyday life in a fair and equitable manner. Finally, the 4th house is another vital area to check - this is the house of the family and domestic life, showing how settled (or not) the subject wants to be, what kind of domesticity they enjoy, and how they will cope with the ups and downs of serious parenthood. In my opinion, the strongest link between two natal charts is an exact opposition between one partner's Sun and the other's Ascendant - e.g. Sun at 22 degrees Aries, Ascendant of partner at 22 degrees Libra. Sun opposition Sun is also very strong indeed - it's difficult to put a finger on why these aspects work so well - after all, oppositions are commonly seen as trouble and tension. Perhaps it's because in any relationship there needs to be a certain amount of positive 'tension' - call it excitement - in order to keep the spark alive. I also find that an emphasis on one particular sign (i.e. shared Ascendant, Sun or Moon signs) is not a particularly good link. Although these two people will share many characteristics, and be alike in many ways, one may begin to resent the faults they see in the other, because they unconsciously recognise these short-comings within themselves. In this situation, one or both partners often feels rather threatened rather by the other. Sexual attraction is of course vital in a successful relationship, but the aspects that indicate sexual attraction should not in themselves be over-interpreted - if the longer term personally compatible type of aspects are missing, then one could be dealing with a very short term passionate affair, rather than an enduring match. Sexual attraction occurs when one partner's Venus aspects the other's Mars; conjunctions are the most potent, with trines and sextiles also making for rewarding contact. Squares often promote a lively, but tense, sexual expression, and oppositions indicate a powerful rapport. There tends to be a dynamic, magnetic, 'irresistible' attraction if one partner's Venus aspects the other's Uranus. Contacts between one person's Mars and the other's Neptune also indicate a magnetic attraction, but this can be a difficult one - the Neptune person tends to over-romanticise, whilst the Mars person tends to be rather too sexually aggressive. Perhaps the most difficult contacts of all are between Mars and Uranus - there is bound to be a certain amount of tension in such a relationship. Although much happiness - especially sexual - can result from this combination, there must be a considerable amount of compatibility indicated by other areas of the chart, else this relationship is in danger of becoming a power struggle, with neither partner really good for the other, but neither being able to break away either. The ruling planet of one chart in aspect to the Mars or Venus of the other is usually a good indication of permanence in a relationship, as is a Moon-Mars/Venus contact. As far as negative indications in either the individual or joint charts; Pluto is a major culprit here. Any aspects from Pluto in one chart to Mars or Venus in the other tend to indicate trouble sooner or later. Also, aspects from one Saturn to the other's Mars, Venus, Ascendant or Moon can be a problem, although this needs careful interpretation, as it can also be a steadying, enduring anchor in an otherwise turbulent relationship. We also look for indications in individual and joint charts of external factors causing problems for the relationship - financial circumstances, for instance, the demands of young children or elderly relatives, infidelity on the part of one or both partners. Finally, we normally close a synastry analysis with a look at the composite chart of the couple (this technique involves calculating the midpoint between the two Suns, two Moons and so on, and plotting these midpoints into a separate chart). The composite chart can be considered to be the chart of the relationship an entity on its own. In my experience, the influence of the signs here is not that important, but the house positions of the planets and the aspects between them can be very revealing about how the couple each experience their relationship. "I have a question about possible love matches. I am a Leo, so I think I only tend to get attracted to girls who are Aries, Gemini, Libra or Sagittarius. The thing is, I have recently met a lovely girl who is a Taurus. I am very attracted to her, and this really baffles me. One day, I met a girl who is a Pisces, but who is happily going out with a Leo. She says their relationship is great. When I mentioned my theory to her, she told me that she was supposed to have been born a Gemini, but was premature and ended up being a Pisces. She said that sometimes she acts like a Gemini, and sometimes like a Pisces. This started me thinking that maybe the same was true with the Taurus girl I like so much. I casually mentioned my conversation to her, and she said that she was supposed to have been an Aries, but was born late under Taurus. I think that proves my theory? Is it possible that my love match could be someone who is not Aries, Gemini, Libra or Sagittarius? And is it possible to have one personality trait from one sign and another from a different sign because of having been born premature or late?" I was really very pleased to receive this question, as it gave me an opportunity to dispel a myth that many people have - that the Sun Sign is the be-all and end-all of astrology. The issue of premature/late birth was also of especial interest to me, given the recent premature birth of our own baby daughter. First of all, it's important to understand that although one may be 'A Leo', all that means is that the Sun was in Leo when you were born. All of the other planets were also somewhere in your chart, and we have to take them into consideration too. When we talk about love, the most important planets to consider are Venus, the Moon, Saturn and your Ascendant. You won't know what signs any of these are in until you have your chart professionally calculated. If you think about it, you can see that with only twelve 'sun signs' one twelfth of the whole of humanity is 'a Leo' - and we cannot make generalisations as vast as that. Your personality (and everyone else's) is made up of the subtle influences of all of the planets, the signs they are placed in, the area of your chart they are placed in, and the inter-relations between all of them. So it's not quite as simple as Leos being attracted to Geminis and not to Taureans. The only thing that it is easy for a lay-person to work out is the sun sign, because it runs in constant months, whereas the rest of the planetary positions have to be calculated. That's why sun sign astrology has grown so popular, but it is often very misleading. The one thing that is true, and which you have obviously understood, is that each of the sun signs belongs to a particular element - fire, earth, air or water. It is often the case that people with strongly fire charts (such as a strong Leo) get on best with people who also have a strong fire chart (strong Leo, Sagittarius or Aries) or people with a strong air chart (strong Gemini or Libra). I assume this is where your choice of signs stems from, although I am curious to know in that case why Aquarius has been left off the list! However, the elements also combine well or not so well in other ways too. For instance, people often think that fire puts out water, and so would assume that a Leo would not gel well with a Pisces, for instance. In fact, the opposite may be true - water eases some of fire's 'over-the-top' qualities and provides balance, so the two are compatible after all. On the other hand, if you consider two fire signs together, it can easily be the case that the fire burns out of control with no other element to restrain it - so two fire signs may not be as compatible as you think. The long and the short of it is that one cannot judge compatibility by sun signs alone, or even by elements alone. You ask about the issue of premature or late birth - as I have mentioned above, there is much more to be considered that just the sun sign, so the fact that someone was born with sun in Taurus but 'should' have been born with sun in Aries is not really relevant. We normally say that if a baby is born early or late NATURALLY i.e. not induced for convenience but for emergency, then we take the baby's date of birth as the time it should have been born, hence the birth is right and proper at that time, and we disregard the 'due date'. After all, babies are born premature or late for a reason - especially in the case of prematurity. Often had a baby not been born premature, it would not have survived at all (as was the case with our own precious daughter, who 'should' have been a Sun Pisces but is actually a Sun Capricorn), so it makes no sense to attribute the 'due date' astrological data to that child. We all have a mixture of signs within our personalities. Each of the planets is present somewhere in everyone's chart. Often the planets are scattered so that perhaps nine or ten of the twelve signs are represented somewhere. Even when they are more closely grouped together, it is impossible (due to the slow movement of the outer planets) for someone to have ONLY Taurus (or whatever) in their chart. So I think that answers one of your question, about whether it is possible to have personality traits from more than one sign - not only is it possible, it's impossible not to have! That is why professional astrology is so complex. When you consider that there are at least ten planets (some astrologers use asteroids and other bodies as well), twelve signs and twelve houses, there are hundreds and hundreds of variables to take into account when assessing someone's natal chart as a whole. When you add to that the fact that each of the planets makes aspects (angles) to some or all of the other planets, further modifying the interpretation, you can begin to see that Sun Sign astrology alone can be extremely misleading. Each planet expresses its energy in a different way - so for instance, a sun in Taurus means something quite different from Venus in Taurus, which again is different from Moon or Saturn in Taurus. And the way the planet(s) in Taurus react with the other planets in other signs is also quite different depending on the angles and timings involved. I guess that what goes to make us all unique individuals! So - to sum up, yes it is quite possible that your soul mate will not turn out to be a sun sign Aries, Gemini, Libra or Sagittarius, and could well be a sun sign Taurus, or indeed any of the other signs. "Hope you can shed some light on some things for me? I was born on August 26th 1973 at five in the morning. My sun is in Virgo but I certainly don't feel like one (if you know what I mean?). Also, I wonder if you could tell me what constitutes a strong Mars. I have my Mars in Taurus in 10th house, is this a strong placement? I would really appreciate some clarification." You say that you do not *feel* like a Virgo,
although your Sun is in Virgo. Well, as you obviously know, there is rather more to
astrology "Are astrologers born or made?" Well now that's a good question! My first instinct, on reading the question, was to answer that astrologers are most definitely made rather than born, as astrology is a skill which can be learned like any other. But, looking into it further, there are certain planetary aspects and positions which seem to be shared by many astrologers (although by no means all), which would seem to indicate a predisposed 'affinity' with the subject. On the face of it, however, this question is a lot like asking 'Are Engineers, or Lawyers, or Doctors (or any other profession) born or made?' As anyone who has ever studied vocational astrology will know, it is notoriously difficult to pinpoint precisely someone's profession from looking at their natal chart alone. It is relatively simple to narrow it down to an industry - for instance, a Midheaven in Taurus, backed up by other factors, might suggest a career in the building industry - but discovering precisely how that person uses their various skills within that industry is a different matter. It might by physical building work, or architectural design, or manufacture of building materials, or anything else in-between. Often planetary positions will give us clues that can rule out or in something specific such as work with the hands as opposed to mental work - but not always. Likewise with the 'caring professions' which include all forms of counselling. Although it is relatively straightforward to ascertain that someone may be involved in some form of counselling, it is much harder to see whether that might be traditional psycho-analysis, or re-birthing, or astrological counselling, or marriage guidance, or anything else in between. However, it is possible to judge from a natal chart whether or not someone has a strong interest in or affinity with a particular subject such as astrology - although whether or not they have been able to take that interest further is not always clear, and depends a great deal upon the free will of the person involved. Bearing this in mind, let's take a look at which astrological factors might indicate this strong interest. Astrology is traditionally thought to be ruled by Uranus. Clearly, then, a strong Uranus in a chart would help to provide an immediate background affinity with this type of subject. Uranus may be strong in a chart that has an Aquarius Ascendant, Sun or Moon, or where Uranus is conjunct the Ascendant. Uranus conjunct the Midheaven (the point that deals with career aspirations, among other things) is a very helpful sign for the budding astrologer - but it might also indicate a career in a highly technical or scientific field, or simply that this person's career will be rather 'off-the-wall' in some way. Aquarius on the cusp of the 10th house is another 'typical' place for an interest in astrology that may go far enough to develop into a career. However, so is Uranus or Aquarius in/on the cusp of the 9th house, which would usually indicate a more spiritual interest in the subject. Apart from Aquarius, I personally feel that Scorpio is also often prominent in the chart of an astrologer. Scorpio likes to dig deep, beyond the superficial, and has a probing interest in the mysteries of life. I also feel that Libra provides just the right amount of sympathy and empathy whilst retaining an objective, rational outlook on client's problems. In my own chart, the Moon is in Scorpio, and Uranus is conjunct my Libra Ascendant, but Aquarius is not particularly prominent at all. Quite apart from the initial interest in astrology, however, an astrologer needs various skills in order to take that interest to the stage of practising. S/he needs to be a good communicator both orally and in writing, in order to explain complicated concepts to clients in lay-person's terms. A strong Mercury, Gemini or Virgo help here. Astrologers often have to deal with distressed clients and listen to upsetting tales, so a good deal of understanding and compassion are also required - a well placed or aspected Moon or Venus are helpful here, and an emphasis on Libra is useful for keeping a balanced, objective view. Tact and diplomacy are also important, and again, it is to the Moon, Venus and Libra that we look for support in that area. Although one might think that a strong Cancer or Pisces would be helpful for the 'caring/counselling' aspect of an astrologer's work, I personally think that the person with very strong water signs dominating the chart would tend to become too emotionally involved with a client's problems - not good for either. I think air signs are more important, in order to maintain that little bit of distance and objectivity. However, a good smattering of intuition does help when dealing with a chart that seems to offer too many options - Neptune in a water sign, or in positive aspect to the Sun or Moon provides this intuition without necessarily getting swept away emotionally. The astrologer also needs to be rather open-minded, and certainly non-judgmental of people and their problems. A well aspected Mercury or Jupiter, again in air signs, is essential for that. They also need a good eye for detail, for which Virgo and Scorpio are best, and, as for any self-employed person, plenty of business sense, for which we usually look towards a strong Leo or Capricorn. Plus, of course, there has to be the intellectual capacity within the chart to study a complicated, wide-ranging subject - but then that is true of very many professions. So much for the 'ideal' astrologer. Not everyone has all of the above, of course - I certainly haven't, although it is interesting to note that the 'astrologically-inclined' type of positions I do have are very strong in my chart compared to other things, and this has also been the case with the birth charts of other astrologers I have been able to study. To sum up, I feel that the answer to the original question of 'Are astrologers born or made' is 'BOTH!'. The initial interest in astrology, the open-mindedness to study it, and the motives for wanting to get involved with it - these are things that we are born with, that are offered to us by our natal charts, and can relatively easily be pinpointed within the chart. However, just as any other skill can be taught, so can astrology - with varying degrees of success, as with anything. There has to be an initial spark of fascination in order to make the teaching worthwhile, but anyone who wants to can study astrology and become reasonable adept at the mathematics and technicalities of it. As one gets more and more used to working with astrology, that is when the intuition you were born with starts to kick in - although astrology is not a 'psychic' thing, but a science, I do find that my own intuition often helps me through issues where a particular chart is not clear. Again, that intuition is something that I was born with - other people have the same intuition, but use it in different fields. To sum up - it seems to me that an average astrologer can be 'made', by the will to study and to work hard. A really good astrologer, however, is 'born' in the sense that they will have had a life-long fascination for the subject, and will have felt, much as I did, that it was something they just 'had to' get involved in. As with so many other professions, it is the people who's hearts are in the profession who do best - those who enter it for material or other reasons may well be reasonably successful, but there is that special 'something' missing. "I was born in Eger, Hungary, on 10th February 1976. I would like to draw up and examine my own natal chart, but my time of birth is unsure (from 11:00 to 13:30), so where do I start? I feel that I have both Gemini and Cancer traits in me. Is it possible to find out on my own or do I have to have my chart done by a professional?" ~ from Ildik This question about an uncertain birth time is interesting, as it is a problem many people face when wanting to make use of astrology in their lives. When we look at your chart calculated for 11:00, it shows a Gemini Ascendant (only just) with a Moon-Mars conjunction in the 1st house. For 13:30, however, it shows a Cancer Ascendant, with the Moon-Mars conjunction firmly in the 12th house - quite a different kettle of fish altogether. It is never possible to be 100% certain that one has found the 'correct' birth time when it is uncertain to begin with, but there are ways in which someone with a moderate knowledge of astrology can narrow down the time to a 'best fit'. What I mean by that is that you need to take a good, hard (honest) look at what you know of yourself, and try to narrow down the planetary configurations which take place within that 2 and half hour window until you find the one that you feel best reflects your personality. To be extra sure, try to describe the various personalities shown by the different charts to someone who knows you quite well, and see which they feel fits best as well - we're not always our own best judge! With your chart, I think that the Moon-Mars conjunction is a good place to start. The Moon makes its move from the 12th house to the 1st house at roughly 11:45, while the Ascendant is still Gemini. If you feel that you are more of a 1st house Moon, then you need to be looking more closely at times from 11:45 onwards; if on the other hand you feel you are more a 12th house Moon then you need to be looking at the 45 minutes between 11 and 11:45. A first house Moon person wears their heart on their sleeve, and, emotionally speaking, is very upfront and honest - what you see is what you get. They are emotional, but these emotions are usually expressed in a very positive and direct way. A 12th house Moon person, on the other hand, usually has exceptionally intense emotions which they may have trouble dealing with. They are often very secretive and private by nature, somewhat shy, and often very spiritual, artistic or psychic. I note that you say you feel you have both Gemini and Cancer traits strong within your personality; well, it could be that the Gemini is coming from your Ascendant, but what you think are Cancer traits are actually 12th house Moon influences - shyness, insecurity, possessiveness and so forth. A 12th house Moon is very similar to a Cancer Ascendant in many ways. Another factor which might be a good second starting point is the position of Saturn, which at 11:00 is in the 2nd house, but by 13:30 is in the 1st. Saturn in the 1st house would also indicate a degree of shyness or restriction which you should be able to recognise within yourself if it is there. So you can then begin to look for the time when Saturn changes house, and work from there - as you can see, it is a complicated juggling procedure! At the end of this lengthy process, you would have ascertained the times that the important planets change houses, juggled them all around a little, and hit upon the one that you feel is most 'you'. The second option for narrowing down an uncertain birth time is called 'rectification' and this requires quite an advanced knowledge of astrology. Basically what happens is that the astrologer uses dates provided by you of important times in your life - a marriage, birth of a child, death of someone close etc - and looks at the transits and planetary patterns on those dates, and then compares and contrasts them with the possible natal charts, looking for significant links. In this way, the birth time can be narrowed down to a 'probable'. This, however, is an even more time consuming (and therefore usually expensive!) process than the 'best fit' option described above. Although it is of course very helpful indeed to have an accurate birth time, there is plenty that you can discover about yourself from examining your natal chart even without being sure of the birth time. The planet-in-sign interpretations are usually not affected by time of birth, and nor are the major inter-planetary aspects. If you don't have the time (or the energy) to narrow down your birth time, you can still learn a lot by looking at these factors. You would, however, have to disregard the house positions of the planets unless you were fairly certain of your birth time, or unless the planet did not change houses within your range of possible times.
|
© elysian.co.uk 2002 |
