home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Algol and Jupiter retrograde

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 2

Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:03 pm    Post subject: Algol and Jupiter retrograde Reply with quote

I know quite few about fixed stars as in my language there isn't much information on this subject.
I have my Jupiter retrograde and conjunct my Algol, both in Taurus. Could you explain to me the meaning of Algol? It's in my first house but not conjunt Asc. I am a solar Sagittarius and I have always thought Jupiter is no good luck to me. Why? I know this Algol is bad. Please give me some clues about this star.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 5144
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello there Jupiterian,

I do think your concern is misplaced.

First off just because Algol appears to be close to your Jupiter in terms of the zodiac doesn't mean its affecting your chart in the slightest. You need to bear in mind that Algol is over 22 degrees outside the ecliptic. Unlike stars very close to the ecliptic such as Spica, Regulus, Antares etc this star was probably nowhere where it appears on the zodiac in the real sky. As astrologers we often forget we are squeezing three dimensional reality into two dimensional symbolism with the zodiac. This isn't such a problem for planets or stars close to the zodiac but when you get stars way outside the ecliptic ( this is also a problem with Pluto and the asteroids too) their real position is totally distorted by simply projecting their position on to the ecliptic in terms of zodiacal longitude.

The best way to see if any star like Algol is significant in your chart is to check the star paran option on solar fire. A paran is when a star is on one of the angles of the horoscope at the same time as a planet just before or after you were born. For example, if you had mercury on the MC and the star Algol rising at the time of your birth we could say your mercury was connected to Algol.

Also although Algol does have a very bad reputation in traditional astrology the leading astrologers who have studied fixed stars today such as Bernadette Brady and Diana Rosenberg have found very little correlation for this in natal charts. For example, Mark Spitz the highly successful Olympic swimmer had Algol very prominent in his his chart by paran. Sean Connery is another example. Mind you OJ Simpson also has this star in a paran in his chart. All stars can be seen as a polarity with the potential to be misused potentiality just like planets.

However, check out this website for more information on the traditional associations of this and other fixed stars:

In regards your Jupiter placement Jupiter in Taurus in the first house is really quite a reasonable placement even if the retrograde motion slightly weakens it. Of course it may lack essential dignity and be peregrine. Still spare a thought for those with Jupiter in Gemini, Virgo or Capricorn in the 6th, 8th or 12th house!

Last edited by Mark on Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 2

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:43 am    Post subject: thank you Reply with quote

Thank you, MarkC for your fast answer. I checked at and it shows that my Algol is conjunct my Jupiter. Is it wrong?
The link is great. I already read it and it is the best about fixed stars. Anyway, opinions are so varied, I am not sure which is correct concerning the stars.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 5144
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Jupiterian,

In regards fixed stars as with everything else in astrology opinions do differ. I don't think the matter is as simple as stating the method suggested on Ann Wrights website is right or wrong. Still using stars like Algol in this way could be said to be astronomically naive by its critics. I do not subscribe to the approach I describe as the 'Ecliptical projection method' in regards stars well outside the ecliptic. Of course that approach can be fun as anyone can quickly spot such connections and it does score a few hits now and again. For example Johnny Depp has his Venus/Mercury close to Algol if you project the star on to the zodiac. His association with films like Sleepy Hollow and Sweeney Todd for example fit the symbolism perfectly. Similarly, Princess Diana had Algol on her natal Venus and this could be seen as indicating her 'losing her head' over her love life. However, despite the occassional hit with this kind of approach it ignores the astronomical reality that stars like Algol need to be located by considering the latitude of the individual horoscope compared to the declination and latitude of a star. In my experience many natal charts just dont correlate with the traditional associations of the star at all.

Of course one explanation could be the traditional explanations are wrong. I certainly take the traditional idea that horary chart points at 26 Taurus are Algol linked with a pinch of salt. However, another explanation could be that we need more sophisticated astrological technique to work with stars like Algol.

I personally don't work with stars like Algol the way the medieval or rennaisance astrologers did. The reason again is that with a star like Algol the fundamental problem is its location is so far outside the ecliptic. If you are dealing with stars very close to the ecliptic like Spica or Regulus for example you can simply check their position projected on to the zodiac and trust that this is close to where they are anywhere on earth.

In fact Spica can actually be occulted or blocked out by the passage of the Moon. Moreover, if you read the current position for Spica on Ann Wrights fixed stars website it will correspond very closely to where it is in a person's chart. For example Princess Diana had Spica on her MC. This could be established by checking the degree on her horoscope with the zodiac degree listed for the stars. As this star is very close to the ecliptic projecting its position on to the ecliptic will produce a very accurate idea of where it was in the real sky. Thus Spica really was on the MC at the time of Princess Diana's birth. This method of projecting a starís position on to the ecliptic is reasonable enough for stars very close to the ecliptic like Spica, Regulus, Antares, Aldebaran etc. Its handy to learn the positions of the most prominent stars like this. I follow Robert Handís recommendation and only really work with stars in this method that have a latitude of about 8 degrees either side of the ecliptic.

Unfortunately, the further a star is from the ecliptic the more this method breaks down. Thatís no doubt why all the traditional sources emphasize giving priority to stars close to the ecliptic.

For example in the case of the champion Olympic swimmer Mark Spitz. If you look at his horoscope he has 17 degrees Taurus on his MC. Checking Ann Wrightís website we see Algol is projected on to 25 degrees Taurus. It appears he has no link to Algol in his chart. Yet one could not be more wrong. In reality Algol was exactly over the MC at the time of his birth. Why is that?

Its because stars are seen to rise at different times depending on where you are on earth and the latitude of where you are. The more a star is outside the ecliptic the more dramatic will be the difference between the zodiacal position projected on to the ecliptic and the zodiac degree the star is actually on in the real sky. For that reason you cannot really rely on the method of simply projecting a star on to the ecliptic thatís way outside the ecliptic if you are interested in working with the real visual sky.

However, there are other ways to work with stars outside the ecliptic. The Astrologer Bernadette Brady has been the main advocate of this approach and I strongly recommend you read her book on fixed stars. In essence the paran method she has revived seems closer to the way the ancient Egyptians, and Babylonians worked with the stars.
Parans indicate stars linked to planets in the real sky. Its not a symbolic system but rather works on the exact time stars and planets cross the four angles of a chart diurnally based on the specific location of a birth. Thus the focus is the diurnal motion of stars and planets across the sky. For example if you have Mercury on the ASC and Sirius on the Midheaven we can link them and it suggests that personís Mercury is linked to Sirius and its associations.

Another method that is slightly different is to see if a star is co-arising with an angle of the chart irrespective of it being linked to a planet. Algol in Mark Spitz chart is co-culminating with the MC. Traditionally stars linked to angles like this are very important.
One other thing you need to watch out for with fixed stars is the declination of a star in relation to where you are. Thus stars well outside the ecliptic will not be observable in certain parts of the world. For example, the bright star Rigil Kentaurus (aka Bungula, Toliman, Alpha Centuri) is not observable in most of Europe and North America. One could get very carried away stating one of our planets was Ďoní this star at 28-29 Scorpio. However, it may never be visible from our location and will generally rise at a different zodiacal degree even where it is observable.

Having said all this there is always room for other viewpoints and approaches. The astrologer Diana Rosenberg uses the method of projecting stars on to the ecliptic even if they are way outside the ecliptic or never rise in the location of a particular horoscope. Her approach could be described as a more symbolic method.

You could argue that most astrologers use of Pluto is similarly symbolic. This planet can be up to 16 degrees either side of the ecliptic. Projecting its position on to the Zodiac without taking into account the latitude of the observer often distorts where it really is in the real sky. That issue is often ignored since as an invisible point its easy to forget this.

Anyway, Rosenberg, argues the ecliptic is a planetary phenomena and therefore all stars exert an influence there. Personally, I disagree with Bernadette Brady in her firm belief that the paran method is the only viable one to work with any fixed star. However, I don't go along with Diana Rosenberg either in using stars way outside the ecliptic projected on the zodiac.

I suggest you read around the subject and make your own mind up. Bernadette Brady already has an excellent book out on fixed stars. In addition both she and Diana Rosenberg are bringing out new books this summer on fixed stars. If you want to start working with fixed stars learn the meanings of some stars close to the ecliptic: Regulus, Spica, Aldebaran, and Antares, and Pollux. I am happy to post a full list of these stars here if anyone is interested.

Vivian Robsonís book ĎThe Fixed Stars and Constellationsí is good although he uses the method I have criticised with stars well outside the ecliptic. His interpretations of many stars is also very dark and fatalistic. Solar Fire has a star aspects feature thatís useful to find zodiacal stars while its Star paran feature helps you find parans and stars on angles in your chart. Be aware though Brady looks at a paran formed not just at your exact time of birth but throughout the day of your birth.

In terms of delineation of Algol I suggest you read what Brady and Rosenberg have to say. One thing I would state though is that from the charts I have studied Algol seems a very powerful star for good or ill. People strongly connected to Algol seem to have a formidable ability to overcome opposition. This does tie into its traditional associations with success over military opponents. I mentioned Mark Spitz already. Another interesting example is the late Pope John Paul II who had Algol linked prominently in his chart by paran. He successfully overcome opposition whether from the the Communist authorities in Poland or the more reformist forces within the church. A good example of Algol in a more negative context is the chart of OJ Simpson. OJ Simpson had Algol exactly co-culminating on his MC in his chart. Both as an American football hero and later by successfully defending himself against a murder charge he overcame his opponents even though many people still believe he was guilty of the charge.

The Scottish actor Sean Connery has Algol linked by paran to his IC. Brady links this to our legacy after death. Quite appropriate as most people probably still associate Connery with his role as the first James Bond. The fictional Bond character seems to fit the Algol symbolism perfectly with his indestructable ability to survive any danger and then go on to defeat any threat. His ruthless methods and 'licence to kill' fit the symbolism too.

Hope this is some help to you.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated