The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum

So how does an astrologer work under these circumstances? Do you cast the chart as it actually is, and assign the real sun sign, regardless of convention? Do you wave your hand and make some noises about the timing being more important than the timepiece, and assign the sun sign by calendar date? Or do you ignore the whole thing, toss out sun signs entirely, and stick with the stars, planets and so on?

If I understand what you're saying then yes... but the problem is that the calendar date is off by a month in the case of sun signs. No one I know that has been born in the late July to mid August period has ever been told that they're not a Leo, even though the Sun is not actually in Leo during that period anymore.

Here, this actually explains it because it's written by someone who knows what they're talking about:

http://www.astro.com/astrology/in_praezession_e.htm

"Sun signs" have to do with which chunk of the ecliptic the sun is in.  People call those sun signs because the planet whose position is relevant is the sun.  As opposed to moon signs, etc.

And it's not 'on the day', it's 'at the moment'.  For a lot of stuff you can approximate by day since planets don't move that fast, but if you don't have a time you don't have stuff like ascendant.

Here's mine with the birth information edited out. It's, uh, rather lopsided, as you can see. :whis:

A sort of goaty, horsey kind of smell. :p

One thing I noticed, by the way, is that the chart nicely illustrates the question I originally brought up.

Notice that the chart says the sun is in capricorn, and displays that in the inner circle with the sun symbol placed in the arc labeled with the capricorn symbol. But if you look at the outer circle, where the actual star positions are indicated, capricorn isn't in that sector at all. And for that matter, the constellation of aquarius spills out across two sectors.

Which is why it is as Darkhawk said, and I've been reading about: solar/planetary astrology isn't about the relationship of those bodies to the actual constellations at all, but about the relations to equal-portioned arcs along the plane of the ecliptic that bear the names of the original zodiac - presumably because when these arcs were defined, these constellations lay roughly in these zones. It's not about the 'stars affecting your life' but about how the rhythms of your life relate to the cycles of a very complicated clock.

As I said, fascinating to people with a bit of an compulsive attraction to systems and patterns.


She says, sheepishly.