posted October 06, 2009 09:48 AM         

Several Virgos seem to achieve an almost mythological "cult" status (as in Queen Elizabeth I, Richard the Lionheart, Cardinal Richelieu, Louis XIV, Michael Jackson), with their sexuality often being notably shrouded in myth and contention. Extremes, whether in terms of success or tragedy, are normal. Their roles as "head of court" give rise to elaborate and specific sets of rules by which their "subjects" are governed. In the following sign, Libra, the tendency towards extremes is tempered towards moderation, which inclines the native towards greater outward success in all areas of their lives, even in the event of crises, where the middle road is more easily found and the Libran will come "back on track" after a while.

posted October 06, 2009 10:51 AM         

it's late tropical Virgo Suns that are actually constellation Virgo Suns

I would look at the rest of their charts.
Michael Jackson did have 3 planets in tropical Leo.
Mercury in tropical Leo as well as Venus-Uranus conjunction in tropical Leo. Therefore,he had significant tropical Leo influence any way with the 2 orbiting planets close to the Sun in tropical Leo which is a very common for many Solar tropical Virgos,especially early ones. He also had Sun conjunct Pluto which can be a very powerful aspect.
His Sun sextile transneptunian dwarf planet candidate,Orcus. His Venus-Uranus square transneptunian dwarf planet candidate,Varuna. His Venus sextile transneptunian dwarf planet,Quaoar.

He was an early tropical Virgo Sun,and so he had a constellation Leo Sun.
His Mercury,Venus,Jupiter,Uranus,and Ceres were in the constellation of Leo too.

Pluto was past 11 degrees away from the ecliptic,and so it wasn't in any of the zodiac constellations. That means that he only had an apparent Sun-Pluto conjunction,but not a true 3Dimensional Body conjunction.

I am a believer that the constellation zodiac has a significant influence too and not just the tropical zodiac. I believe in the tropical zodiac/constellation blend like Diana Rosenberg does.

your post makes me wonder even more if zodiac constellations have just as much influence as tropical zodiac signs and even more so.

Raymond
an early tropical Scorpio Sun that is 2nd to the last day of constellation Virgo

------------------
"Nothing matters absolutely;
the truth is it only matters relatively"

posted October 06, 2009 11:19 AM         

THE GROUND OF HEAVEN:
THE CONSTELLATIONS
Sidewalk book browsin'

The heavens declare the glory of god;
and the firmament sheweth his handiwork.
Day unto day uttereth speech,
and night unto night sheweth knowledge.

-Psalms, 19: 1-2

The sky itself, with its majestic star-set figures, is the root of every astrologer’s knowledge and craft; without an understanding of why and how these glorious star-emblazoned constellation shapes were created, established, and carried down to us through thousands of years, we risk remaining narrow and unsophisticated in our delineation of nativities. Now at last, at the end of the 20th century of the Common Era - more than 5,000 years after the scribes of Sumer first recorded the extraordinarily ancient wisdom that had been passed down to them by memory-chanters - our computers, data collections, and the recovery and translation of ancient texts have made it possible to rediscover, analyze, and test our great heritage of star-knowledge that was once known only to the most learned priests of the earliest civilizations.

Perhaps the most extraordinary discovery is that there is nothing casual or coincidental in the constellational sky - every constellation, (including those of the "Sphaera Barbarica" - the figures above and below the ecliptic that are not part of the zodiac), indeed, each posture, position, length and breadth of every figure, has its reason and message. These energies are still operating, and may be taken and used in the day-to-day counseling of a modern astrologer!

Gradually, over more than two thousand years, the Zodiac of Signs, that is, of our familiar tropical degrees, has shifted backward, largely bypassing the ancient sky figures that gave them their original names and identities, and now overlaying the star-figures that once preceded each of them. Our familiar division of 12 equal signs, each 30° in length, came into being in Babylonia some time in the early 5th century BCE, apparently designed to jibe with an already existing calendar of 12 months of 30 days each. The earliest known horoscope, without houses or aspects (except conjunctions), is dated April 29 410 BC, at Babylon; the positions of Sun, Moon, and planets were defined only by the constellations they were in. By the time of Hipparchus, however (2nd century BCE), the equinoxes and solstices were slipping noticeably out of sync with the beginnings of the constellations they were identified with. Hipparchus (fl. 146-127 BCE) realized the implications of this phenomenon, discerning the process known as the precession of the equinoxes, whereby the Vernal Equinox - the point at which the Sun on its apparent course defining the ecliptic, crosses the celestial equator each spring, moving backwards (or westward - to the right on a star map) through the stars at the rate of 1° every 72 years. The 5th-century BCE calendar of Athenian astronomer Euctemon was based upon the solstices and equinoxes, naming each month by its sky sign and offering Hipparchus a structure based upon the actual seasons rather than the ancient figures in the sky. This we now know as the tropical zodiac.

By the time of Ptolemy (2nd century CE) the signs were "off" by 8° against the backround of their corresponding constellation patterns, and a choice had to be made: whether to stay with the sky figures, or to count in twelve 30° segments from the gradually precessing Vernal Equinox. For the most part, the Greeks stayed with the 4-cornered structure of the seasons, i.e. the sol-stices & equinoxes, and let the actual sky-figures gradually shift from away from their former seasonal places. But at the same time they kept the constella-tions' traditional names, assigning them to the new, gradually-moving tropical signs. This is the system we in the west have inherited: 12 equally sized signs, beginning with 0° Aries, where the ecliptic crosses the celestial equator.

Even though the venerable constellation star-figures have been bypassed, each one overlaid with the sign that originally followed it, these archaic "pictures in the sky" retain and maintain an influence and power, not only in the symbolic, "mythic" areas of our lives, but in a physical way as well. To a surprising degree, the outer frame, shape, and condition of our physical bodies, and the enveloping myths that we enact in each lifetime, are derived from these primordial figures; they represent the personal incarnational drama each of us enacts, every day, in each lifetime.

Our tropical zodiac sign of Taurus, was originally the sky figure of the Bull; but now, each year, as the Sun moves through tropical Taurus (the sign, not the constellation) it is actually traveling through a skyscape of the stars of the Ram. And those of us who call ourselves "Aries" were actually born when the Sun traversed the Fishes. In just this way, each tropical sign now largely overlays the star figure (or morpheme) that originally lay behind it. Just as tropical Taureans have backed up onto the Ram, tropical Aries swim with the Fishes; tropical Pisceans have moved in on the figure of the Water-Pourer; tropical Aquarians now brave the stormy waves with the Sea-Goat, tropical Capricorns ride the back of the half-human, half-equine Archer, tropical Sagittarians attempt to tame the menacing Scorpion, tropical Scorpios nest in the Scales of Justice (which were, even very far back, both Scales & the great Scorpion's extended claws). Tropical Librans now find their balance in the midst of the magnificent Virgin-goddess, tropical Virgoans have taken over the body & tail of the lion, but still possess the upper part of the head of the Virgin; tropical Leos, while still hanging on to the head and forepaws of the original Lion (hear them roar!), have the earlier 2/3 of their sign in the cautious, self-protective Crab; tropical Cancers now envelop the Twin brothers, tropical Geminis have bravely taken over the thundering, sensual Bull of Heaven, and we are back to where the zodiac started: the Bull, leader of the great cycle of signs from about 4,500 BCE (or about 3,000 BCE, depending upon whether you start the figure of the Bull at its horns, or its famous Royal eye), until about 2,300 BCE. Brilliant, red royal star Aldebaran, the Bull's South Eye (now 9Gem43), marked the vernal equinox at the time that the first system of writing developed in Sumer (southern Iraq) at about 3,300 BCE. (Exactly opposite the Bull's Eye, at 9Sag41, is red Antares, the fierce, royal Heart of the Scorpion).

These overlays, confusing at first, become enlightening when we search for the deeper layers of astrology's primeval sources. For while I persist in the belief that the tropical zodiac is the most useful for day to day interpretation of horoscopes, I believe that it is the ancient sky-pattern figures - the actual constellations - that reveal the "fated" or mytho-symbolic level of our lives. Fate is a harsh word, conjuring images of helplessness, passivity, "what's-the-use-of-trying" emotions; but the actuality is that the soul, in each lifetime, has chosen a body, sexual polarity, set of parents, locale, schooling, economic situation, and formative matrix that will best nurture the spirit and carry it forward in the direction it has chosen to explore.

It has been my experience in counseling that the most meaningful and exciting reactions from my clients come when I describe the constellation patterns and individual fixed stars on their charts (usually at the end of the reading). There is often a profound, personal emotional response that resonates on a "life-myth" level of being. Often a client’s deepest conflicts are delineated by the difference between the archetypes of the tropical signs and the original constellations: the variance, for instance, between proud, courageous tropical Leo, and his underlying sensitive, cautious, vulnerable star-Crab; or the tropical sign of Cancer, home-loving, self-protective, careful; but now fully overlaying the original Gemini siblings, who were rollicking, daring, athletic adventurers! It is the task of each of us to find ways to reconcile these differences and make them work creatively in our lives. Many Cancers, for instance, become actors, writers, or filmmakers, permitting themselves the vicarious experience of danger and adventure while actually remaining quite snug and safe, while others translate Cancer’s love of home to love of homeland, and become super-patriotic, adventuresome test pilots, astronauts, or Olympic athletes!

It was the realization that the original sky-figures carry powerful messages of the symbolic and mythic elements of our lives that led me to dig deep into astrology’s roots, to seek out the earliest sources of these ancient constellations and to rediscover and analyze their energies.
http://ye-stars.com/tmacons.htm

------------------
"Nothing matters absolutely;
the truth is it only matters relatively"

posted October 06, 2009 11:58 AM         

I looked at her heliocentric planetary node aspects which have to do with collective karma

Pluto Nodes in 14'00 Cancer/Capricorn
square Mercury - 1'08
trine/sextile Midheaven - '34
(Power,Intensity)

Jupiter Nodes in 5'42 Cancer/Capricorn
oppose Ascendant/Descendant - 1'51
square Venus - 1'09
sextile/trine Moon - 1'53
(Expansion,Judgment)

Mercury Nodes in 12'48 Taurus/Scorpio
oppose Midheaven/Imum Coeli - '38
(Communications,Intellect)

Venus Nodes in 12'29 Gemini/Sagittarius
conjunct/oppose Mars - 1'02
(diplomacy,relating)

Uranus Nodes in 11'36 Gemini/Sagittarius
conjunct/oppose Mars - 1'55
(independence,unconventional)

Neptune Nodes in 6'38 Leo/Aquarius
square Moon - '57
(inspirational,idealistic)

Ceres Nodes in 21'14 Gemini/Sagittarius
oppose/conjunct Jupiter - 1'07
(nurturing,protective)

Chiron Nodes in 25'28 Libra/Aries
sextile/trine Lunar Nodes - '25
(maverick,guide)

looking at her direct midpoint pictures

Midheaven conjunct Pluto/Node - '33
(note: she has Pluto Nodes trine/sextile Midheaven)...a strong Pluto-Midheaven theme which suggests aim of life involves power.

Raymond

------------------
"Nothing matters absolutely;
the truth is it only matters relatively"

posted October 06, 2009 04:28 PM         

I want to point out that the sidereal zodiac that the vedic astrologers use is not the constellation zodiac. the sidereal zodiac has 12 signs,and each of them has a 30 degree span. The constellation zodiac consists of 13 uneven constellations including Virgo being the largest and Scorpius being the smallest. Ophiuchus is the constellation that doesn't have an equivalent in neither tropical nor sidereal zodiac signs,and its considerably larger than Scorpius.

I have Sun in Scorpio in the tropical zodiac,but my Sun is in the constellation of Virgo even though it's in Libra in the sidereal zodiac.

Raymond

------------------
"Nothing matters absolutely;
the truth is it only matters relatively"

posted October 07, 2009 12:31 PM         

and thanks for the link on elizabeth. who came to power when everything was a mess and the people were polarized on the issue of religion,

AND her legitimate claim to the throne was a subject that caused unrest and downright revolt periodically throughout the 45 years she was systematically making england a major power in the world at large...

posted October 07, 2009 12:35 PM         

Heck...It's possible a woman could be the greatest president that USA ever had.

Raymond

------------------
"Nothing matters absolutely;
the truth is it only matters relatively"

posted October 08, 2009 12:51 AM         

She didn't marry because, I think, she couldn't without creating further problems amidst allies. She couldn't show favor.
It worked against her, but she really was caught between a rock and a hard place.

It's really strange to me when I read about Virgos being 'the power behind the throne' and all this tripe about how Virgo is content to serve quietly behind the scenes.
It's so narrow and dogged and in so many ways the sign is already misrepresented.

posted October 08, 2009 01:43 AM         

Would you choose between geocentric sidereal and tropical, or do you marry them together somehow? I ask because I am looking at my sidereal chart, and well... if this was the chart I first saw, I would have bought it completely. The houses don't change much in the chart of course, but the degree position of the planets make some sense.

Of course, to keep with this thread, natural leader or not, I have always found myself in leadership positions all my life, regardless of the "fact" that Virgo's aren't "natural leaders". This always struck me as strange when I read about Virgo NOT being a leader because it seems I can't help but be elected or appointed into leadership positions, since I was young- and you know what? I wasn't so bad at it. Now, this can be attributed to my Moon cnj MC and my ability to anticipate people through sensitivity, but... hmmm... (Moon/MC conjunction is at 29 deg 10 min in Gemini in geo sidereal, and 23 deg in Cancer in tropical).

This also puts my Venus is Leo, instead of the fall Virgo, and funnily, my Venus doesn't feel that much debilitated either. In other words, when I read those descriptions they have for Venus in Virgo, they don't ring too true for me.

But, I am also very Virgo in other ways, so where does that come from?

Well, in sidereal I have Mercury and Saturn in Virgo (5 degrees apart), which would make up for my Virgo-esque qualities. So, I am just wondering which is valid, or can both be? Already, I have been looking at whole signs due to your posts, and my Uranus goes in the 2nd house in whole signs, which makes sense too, although Uranus in 1st can be clearly seen in my life too...

So, what I am wondering is: how important is the Zodiac a person chooses to use?

posted October 08, 2009 02:57 AM         

I prefer the tropical zodiac over the sidereal zodiac because tropical zodiac is based on the northern hemisphere based seasons. It's not a star-based zodiac. However, I won't use it for people born in the southern hemisphere. That doesn't mean that I would use a sidereal zodiac system though. Even though the the sidereal zodiac is a star-based zodiac,it is not completely aligned with the constellations because it ignores the fact that the zodiac constellations' sizes are unequal instead of equal and total 13 instead of 12,especially with it having Ophiuchus located between Scorpius and Sagittarius. Scorpius is a very small constellation. Virgo is the largest constellation.

I am actually started to prefer the blending of the tropical zodiac and the constellation zodiac.

I think confusion happens when we refer to the tropical zodiac or the sidereal zodiac as the constellations. In some books, I have read astrologers refer to them as that.

I will never discontinue the use of tropical zodiac, but I will pay attention to the tropical zodiac-constellation blend. I believe that the stars are significant in Astrology. If we use both tropical zodiac and the stars that are in the constellations,it would make sense to consider the constellations having an influence. I don't think it makes sense to consider that my tropical Scorpio Mercury is conjunct the beta Libra star,Zuben Eschamali but ignore the fact that my Mercury is in the constellation of Libra. The same with my tropical Pisces Moon conjunct the Alpha Aquarius star,Sadalmelik and the theta Aquarius star,Ancha and ignore that my Moon is in the constellation of Aquarius.

This explains how the Sidereal Zodiac is not the same as the constellation zodiac
http://therealastrology.com/HTML/ASKKEVIN/980116.html

I was born on October 29th.
Sun doesn't go into Libra constellation until October 31st. I missed the cutoff by 2 days,and so I am near the end of the Virgo constellation.

Maybe my Sun conjunct South Eris Node in constellation of Virgo indicates that I was meant to stir up controversy by debating with the Sidereal Zodiac astrologers and showing them that my Sun doesn't fit neatly into their system whenever they start preaching that the sidereal zodiac is the one and only true zodiac. hahahahaha

my tropical Sagittarius Imum Coeli is in Ophiuchus and not Scorpius even though it's in Scorpio in Sidereal Zodiac.

Moon conjunct MC is a strong placement for the public.

if you have Mercury-Saturn conjunction in early to mid tropical Libra,you're very like to have that conjunction in the constellation of Virgo. If it was in late Libra,then it will likely be in the constellation of Libra.

Does Venus have any harmonious aspects that could modify the debilitation of the Virgo placement?

Yeah...I love the whole sign house system. I am using that for now on.

Raymond

------------------
"Nothing matters absolutely;
the truth is it only matters relatively"

posted October 08, 2009 03:34 AM         

quote:

---

I prefer the tropical zodiac over the sidereal zodiac because tropical zodiac is based on the northern hemisphere based seasons. It's not a star-based zodiac. However, I won't use it for people born in the southern hemisphere.

---

I was born is South Africa. Is the constellation zodiac chart better suited for me (used with tropical of course)?

quote:

---

Even though the the sidereal zodiac is a star-based zodiac,it is not completely aligned with the constellations because it ignores the fact that the zodiac constellations' sizes are unequal instead of equal and total 13 instead of 12,especially with it having Ophiuchus located between Scorpius and Sagittarius. Scorpius is a very small constellation. Virgo is the largest constellation.

---

So that Fagan/Bradley geocentric sidereal chart is not accurate? If that's the case, is the Hindu/Lahiri geocentric sidereal the one I would choose on astro.com? Is the eastern zodiac the same as the constellation zodiac that you speak of?

quote:

---

I am actually started to prefer the blending of the tropical zodiac and the constellation zodiac.

---

I think I am going to also start looking at both.

quote:

---

Maybe my Sun conjunct South Eris Node in constellation of Virgo indicates that I was meant to stir up controversy by debating with the Sidereal Zodiac astrologers and showing them that my Sun doesn't fit neatly into their system whenever they start preaching that the sidereal zodiac is the one and only true zodiac. hahahahaha

---

quote:

---

Does Venus have any harmonious aspects that could modify the debilitation of the Virgo placement.

---

Actually, my Venus is sextile Jupiter (2) and sextile my AC (1)

For interest's sake, the Hindu/Lahiri sidereal puts my Moon/MC conjunction at 0 degrees Cancer.

______________________

Sorry about the lower grade questions that may seem obvious, but I just want to be certain that I understand.

_____________________