i've been looking at antiscia in natal and am convinced now that ignoring them is one of the causes of not reading well or at all

they say to all effects they are just like the planets, like a second position of a planet, however I am not clear we are to consider they touch fixed stars too

any help?

thank you

Thank you Tom

and indeed it doesnt seem to work, for example myself would have Regulus with the antiscion of a planet and makes no sense at all

issue cleared

I don't usually click on the "traditional and ancient techniques" section, but I just remembered that antiscia, which I couldn't read a chart without, are actually a traditional and ancient technique.

Interesting question about whether the antiscia of the fixed stars are effective. I do find the fixed stars stunningly effective and don't doubt their importance. To me they are just there and sometimes they grab my attention when looking at charts, such as the chart of Donald Trump with Mars just behind Ascendant 29 degrees Leo 58 minutes, you can't help but think of Regulus. http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Trump,_Donald

When I am looking at a chart, I start off by looking for antiscia, just as I need to know where Chiron is and tear my hair out if I can't find it.

I don't use asteroids or Eris, Sedna, etc. They are the resort of new agists who like to make up their own rules and judgements about a person without necessarily even looking at a person's chart, and are the same people who use massive orbs like 12 degrees so they can make any judgements they like. I mainly only look at aspects with orbs under one degree and two at most. And for most purposes I don't use trines etc. Oddly enough, I found the yods and boomerangs do seem to work.

So your question for me to think about is whether the antiscia of fixed stars like Regulus, which would be about 1 degree of Taurus, has the qualities of Regulus? Interesting question, I need to go away and think about it. It would have to be within one degree orb anyway. I need to remind myself of the exact positions of the main fixed stars - can somebody please tell me what they are as I don't think about the fixed stars much, though I do accept their total validity.

I am already thinking of charts with their Suns on the Aries Taurus cusp that have a certain quality, not sure what it is. Could somebody please remind me of the specific qualities of Regulus? Example http://www.astrotheme.com/astrology/Rob ... (musician) has Sun 0 degrees Taurus 30 minutes. And Edie Sedgwick's Sun was 29 degrees Aries 44 minutes, antiscion 0 degrees Virgo 16 minutes; I can't find the exact position of Regulus in 1943 when she was born, astrodienst does not show the exact positions of the fixed stars in their charts, but if it was more than 29 degrees Leo 16 minutes it would have been conjunct her Sun's antiscion.

Maybe an issue for a lot of people, and definitely for me, is how little we know about the fixed stars. I only know roughly where a few of them are, and only have a vague idea of what they are supposed to mean. Obviously Regulus you think of a roaring lion, the essence of a lion's power, intensely Leo. I do have that Vivian Robson book, "The Fixed Stars and Constellations in Astrology", but rarely look at it, and the exact positions of the fixed stars given by it are probably out of date now? Though they do move very slowly?

Could somebody please give the exact current positions of some of the fixed stars, and also where they were a hundred years ago for older charts, along with the essence or images of what they mean. Then something might become clearer.

According to this article, https://darkstarastrology.com/regulus/ Regulus was in 29 degrees 59 minutes of Leo in 2011. This gives an antiscion of 0 degrees Taurus 01 minute.

I noticed that the Robson book gives the positions for the chief stars on 1st January 1920, and it gives Regulus at 28 degrees Leo 43 minutes, which gives an antiscion of 1 degree Taurus 17 minutes.

I think a rough analogy for how I see the fixed stars is that they are looking at charts in colour, whereas without them you are looking at charts in black and white. When you start to think about the fixed stars, you get flavours and colours......

I could spend ages studying this.

Hi Fleur, thank you for your interest,

you can find most answers you need about fixed stars in www.constellationsofwords.com/Fixedstars.htm

then as an expert the late Diane Rosemberg was fantastic, not particularly because of her information or insights, but mainly because of the "spirit" and fascination she transmitted about the fixed stars, making it adviseble to take into account even the myths behind the constellations, that you can tell to people just like that, when it fits is like magical

I find them tremendously accurate; when they concur with something you get from the planets, bang, never fails;

>>I don't use asteroids or Eris, Sedna, etc. They are the resort of new agists who like to make up their own rules and judgements about a person without necessarily even looking at a person's chart, and are the same people who use massive orbs like 12 degrees so they can make any judgements they like.

haha I know what you mean, you know Frawley parodied that masterfully. Further though, is interesting you bring that up because I had that kind of fear about antiscia, that they would simply complicate the chart to the point that it doesnt really mean anything because there are many contradictory testimonies, therefore potentially meaning anything, which is good for a charlatan but not for someone who really want to get something concrete out of the chart

Well, this is my humble non-expert point: I find that, far from that, there's like a mysterious "complementarieness" with the actual planets, and actual checkable things from a life that seemed a bit difficult to explain suddenly become clear, thanks to the antiscia, a couple of examples from my chart in the next post (this computer is about to log me off)

yeah I was humbly saying, there were two undeniable things from my life that I could with difficulty see in my chart, and always wondered about, they are consumate facts, not playing to "live like my chart" instead of the chart actually corresponding to factual trends of a life

one was my almost 30 years of passionate dedication to learning languages, with unabated interest and satisfaction, a very important issue in my life; also family mythology about me starting talking incredibly soon
I could see that only loosely in my chart, all testimony I could present was "talkative" as the ancients say rising sign, i.e. airy (you know they called "muted" the watery and indeed is easy to see in dayly life that watery ascendant people seem to have difficulty verbalizing, particularly their emotions; but all my planets are water and malefics in earth; Mercury is in muted Pisced, if at all changed a bit because of the powerful mercurial star Fomalhaut, and a close trine to Jupiter in 1st house, therefore touching a bit from afar 1st house, and rosemberg says of royal stars that the native is a bit like a "king" in the matter concerned; also very quick in motion;
but that was all, I was not happy with the explanation

well, when I looked at the antiscion of Mercury (also carrying Jupiter in trine, Mars and Saturn in sextile) guess where it was,, bang, just on the ascendant, and the traditional text I use as guidance says "the native will speak many languages".

The other issue is deteriorating seriously bad relationship with mother, whilst deeply loving relationship with my father; in the case of mother it was explainable by combustion, but applying to my planet just out of rays, and also in reception by exaltation dont seem to justify so serious lack of mutual love; whereas the planet clearly representing my father all that have with mine is a simple reception, I found that puzzling

well, there's something simple I use about Jupiter and Saturn, and am very surprised never heard talking anyone saying it so clearly, Jupiter is love, Saturn is lack of love, as simple as that, where they are, there's or there isnt love (and therefore fortune or problems)

well, simply when I looked at the antiscion of Jupiter, bang, to the 4th house, when I looked at the antiscia of Saturn and Mars, bang, to the 10th house, ... which my brother has by the way, antiscia reproduce themes that your family member have, I find, and you know that they share "karmic" patterns...

Hariolus wrote:Hi Fleur, thank you for your interest,

you can find most answers you need about fixed stars in www.constellationsofwords.com/Fixedstars.htm

then as an expert the late Diane Rosemberg was fantastic, not particularly because of her information or insights, but mainly because of the "spirit" and fascination she transmitted about the fixed stars, making it adviseble to take into account even the myths behind the constellations, that you can tell to people just like that, when it fits is like magical

I find them tremendously accurate; when they concur with something you get from the planets, bang, never fails;

Thanks. I realised that I am missing a dimension by not studying the fixed stars more.

I just read this, to try to understand Regulus more https://darkstarastrology.com/regulus/
and what it says "Medieval astrologers said Regulus would bring glory, riches and fame to all those born under it, and that it was the ?Royall Starre?. Robson says Regulus gives ?success, high and lofty ideals and strength of spirit, and makes its natives magnanimous, grandly liberal, generous, ambitious, fond of power, desirous of command, high-spirited and independent.?" made me think of Donald Trump with his Ascendant conjunct Regulus.

I was just looking at the chart of Dr. Edward Bach, famous for the Bach Flower Remedies but he was also a talented bacteriologist, a qualified medical doctor, and developed some homoeopathic nosodes. http://www.astrotheme.com/astrology/Edward_Bach

His chart really shows that antiscia work, as his Uranus is 7 degrees Libra 41 minutes, antiscion 22 degrees Pisces 19 minutes. That Uranus antiscion is conjunct his Ascendant, square his Midheaven and square Chiron (which is conjunct his IC and square his Ascendant). The unusualness of what he did seems very Uranian, and its subtlety very Piscean. (For anyone who doesn't know, he took the dew from flowers and preserved it in brandy, later on using distilled water instead of relying on the tiny amount of dew. Very Piscean subtlety and very Uranian).

I think his chart illustrates that antiscia may operate in different signs and houses.