Tropical zodiac and the Southern hemisphere

1
It's pretty clear that the meanings of each zodiac sign are based on the seasonal changes in the Northern hemisphere. I would go so far as to argue that the meanings of the signs and even the major essential dignities are based entirely on the pattern of the seasons here in the Northern Hemisphere.

This makes sense because that's where Astrology was developed.

Where I'm confused is how we could possibly use the same sign meanings for the Southern hemisphere where the seasonal patterns are flipped? Right now the Sun is a few days from moving into Aries signalling Spring for the, Northern hemisphere but in the Southern hemisphere the exact same ingress signifies Autumn.

Wouldn't that mean that Aries in the Southern hemisphere is more similar to Libra in the Northern hemisphere?

I don?t quite understand the logic behind using the Northern hemisphere zodiac for the entire world when half of the world is having the opposite seasonal experience.

Can someone explain?

2
One justification (I am not saying it is right or wrong) is that most of the landmass is in the northern hemisphere; so the earth - as an entirety - "greens" in the northern hemisphere summer. This is a remark Bernadette Brady makes in her article "Fixed Stars; Why Bother?" - where she is talking about the constellation Ursa Major:
  • The ancient she-bear walks upon the earth at the time of the annual terrestrial biosphere greening. Every year planet Earth greens in the north and the south at the same time. This of course is the summer for the north and the winter for the south. This, according to biologists, gives the biosphere a type of breath. The earth breathes in CO2 and gives us more oxygen at this time, but in the winter (summer for the south) the greening stops and the earth's breath goes the other way. Since the beginning of our recorded history and human myth, indeed from the period from Thuban to Polaris as our pole stars, the great bear is seen to walk along the local horizon at the time of the greening. Her slow steady plod is provided by the diurnal movement of the night sky. When the winter comes and the growth stops, she is only seen high in the night sky, asleep with her legs in the air. Thus in this period which embraces the dawn of recorded history up to modern times the bear annually awakes as the earth awakes and sleeps as the earth sleeps, indeed in this simple fact could lie the reason for the nature of the naming of that part of the sky.
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/bb1.html

3
There are a wide variety of climes in the northern hemisphere.there is a torrid zone and a temperate zone as well as the arctic. There are different continents with different seasons. The lambing season does not start in all these places at 16.57 gmt on the 20th March because the sun enters the sign of the ram. It does not make any difference in the Southern Hemisphere either then surely?

ps the torrid zone extends from the tropic of cancer to the tropic of capricorn and straddles the equator. Climate-wise nearly all Brazil is in the same weather zone north or south of it. In Africa South Africa is in the temperate zone but I doubt the weather is so much different from say Zimbabwe in the equatorial. Indeed looking at a map of global temperature there is not much to distinguish it. Same goes for most of Argentina and in Australia where the tropic of capricorn bisects the country


Matthew
Last edited by Mjacob on Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

4
Deb wrote:One justification (I am not saying it is right or wrong) is that most of the landmass is in the northern hemisphere; so the earth - as an entirety - "greens" in the northern hemisphere summer. This is a remark Bernadette Brady makes in her article "Fixed Stars; Why Bother?" - where she is talking about the constellation Ursa Major:
  • The ancient she-bear walks upon the earth at the time of the annual terrestrial biosphere greening. Every year planet Earth greens in the north and the south at the same time. This of course is the summer for the north and the winter for the south. This, according to biologists, gives the biosphere a type of breath. The earth breathes in CO2 and gives us more oxygen at this time, but in the winter (summer for the south) the greening stops and the earth's breath goes the other way. Since the beginning of our recorded history and human myth, indeed from the period from Thuban to Polaris as our pole stars, the great bear is seen to walk along the local horizon at the time of the greening. Her slow steady plod is provided by the diurnal movement of the night sky. When the winter comes and the growth stops, she is only seen high in the night sky, asleep with her legs in the air. Thus in this period which embraces the dawn of recorded history up to modern times the bear annually awakes as the earth awakes and sleeps as the earth sleeps, indeed in this simple fact could lie the reason for the nature of the naming of that part of the sky.
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/bb1.html
Thanks Deb! I'll look into that concept. I don't really now much about biology, but this is something that I've heard of mildly in the past.
Mjacob wrote:There are a wide variety of climes in the northern hemisphere.there is a torrid zone and a temperate zone as well as the arctic. There are different continents with different seasons. The lambing season does not start in all these places at 16.57 gmt on the 20th March because the sun enters the sign of the ram. It does not make any difference in the Southern Hemisphere either then surely?
Mjacob that doesn't really answer my question. To be honest it actually expands my question.

So there are different climes in the Northern hemisphere that experience the seasons differently as well. Alright.

The lambing season doesn't start in all those places at the same time when the Sun enters Aries. Alright, no one said that it was supposed to.

The fact that the lambing season doesn't start at the same time in the Northern hemisphere doesn't explain why we're looking at opposite seasonal phenomena across hemispheres.

If the seasonal changes don't even match in all Northern hemisphere regions and are the opposite to those of the Southern hemisphere, then how can the same Tropical zodiac be used with the same meanings for all regions if the meanings for the Tropical signs come from seasonal changes in a few particular regions in the Northern hemisphere?

As I said, the Sun being exalted in Aries is due primarily to the reason that that is when Spring begins.

This doesn't make any sense for the southern hemisphere because Aries is when fall begins. The Sun would be declining in power in the southern hemisphere, not rising.

Same with Saturn. Saturn is exalted in Libra because that's when fall starts in the Northern hemisphere, and it's when the cold starts to set in. Alright.

So how does it make sense for Saturn to be exalted in Libra in the Southern hemisphere when in that hemisphere Libra is precisely when the cold begins to vanish and the heat starts to appear?

Basically my question comes down to what makes the signs "work" outside of the regions where Astrology was developed? Because using seasonal basis of the sign meanings in all regions makes little to no sense. The natures of the planets in the signs comes directly from the seasonal attributes of the signs, which don't apply equally to all regions. Dignities that work in one region, by nature, wouldn't make sense in other regions.

5
This topic comes up a lot here and I am not surprised. It does pose challenging practical and philosophical issues for the tropical astrologer.

My very first post on Skyscript was on this issue and its a topic that has always intrigued me.

Here is that thread I opened back in 2005:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1172

I opened a thread on the philosophy forum on this topic too that got a good response in 2010:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5135

For the traditional astrologer this raises issues about whether the signs should be reversed or alternatively the dignities for the planets in signs should be reversed. The traditional Irish astrologer Maurice McCann suggested the latter. As Alice Portman points out we also need to consider the implications for the lunar nodes.

Some other web links discussing this issue:

http://astrodynamics.net/blog/does-astr ... emisphere/

http://aliceportman.com/what-is-the-dif ... astrology/

Mark
Last edited by Mark on Sat Mar 15, 2014 7:56 pm, edited 5 times in total.
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

6
I always start a natal chart by assessing temperament and one factor is the season of the year. This very question occured to me the first time someone born in the southern hemisphere asked for a chart.

I do seem to remember John Frawley who lectures in Australia as well as Europe insists the symbolism remains the same but do not recall his reasoning. Since then though nothing much else.

Perhaps other members may have more up to date opinions

Regards

Matthew
Matthew Goulding

7
Hi Mathew,

I think our posts crossed over about the same time. The discussion on the Skyscript philosophy thread I gave above was interesting. As Margherita Fiorello pointed out astrologers have been debating this since the renaissance! Astrologers such as Cardano and Campanella suggested the logical stance for an astrologer following the tropical zodiac was to reverse the signs. On the other hand Morin vehemently disagreed with this stance his in book Astrologia Gallica.

For the more empirically minded I think studying southern hemisphere charts with a heavy sign focus would be a very practical way to study this issue.

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

8
Hi Mark,

Indeed we must have posted around the same time and I do recall previous discussions here on the forum but I had forgotten the renaissance contribution. The earlier tradition does not assist. I think in Ptolemy's time they imagined they would be fried to a crisp if they dared cross the equator!

Matthew
Matthew Goulding

9
Hi Mathew,
The earlier tradition does not assist.
What exactly are you looking for assistance on? We are still using a domicile rulership scheme based on the tropical zodiac that dates back to Ptolemy. So unless you want to go sidereal you need to confront that issue.

Just not clear where you are going here.

Of course reversing signs (even if advisable) would create its own problems. We would have a bi-polar astrological world where the Sun was in Aries in the northern hemisphere and Libra south of the equator.

Plus the seasons are not as defined in many parts of the world.

And what about people living on the equator? Would the influence of the signs weaken there or change the moment you crossed the equator?

We could avoid this by reversing dignities rather than signs. But then the link between sign and planetary rulers would be totally undermined.

The practical issues as I see it:

Do we reverse signs?
Do we reverse dignities?
What about Lunar nodes, declination etc?

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

10
Mark wrote:Hi Mathew,
The earlier tradition does not assist.
What exactly are you looking for assistance on? We are still using a domicile rulership scheme based on the tropical zodiac that dates back to Ptolemy. So unless you want to go sidereal you need to confront that issue.

Just not clear where you are going here.

Of course reversing signs (even if advisable) would create its own problems. We would have a bi-polar astrological world where the Sun was in Aries in the northern hemisphere and Libra south of the equator.

Plus the seasons are not as defined in many parts of the world.

And what about people living on the equator? Would the influence of the signs weaken there or change the moment you crossed the equator?

We could avoid this by reversing dignities rather than signs. But then the link between sign and planetary rulers would be totally undermined.

The practical issues as I see it:

Do we reverse signs?
Do we reverse dignities?
What about Lunar nodes, declination etc?

Mark
Geez this is complicated.

It's stuff like this that makes me consider experimenting with one of the many sidereal zodiacs :-?

11

Geez this is complicated.

It's stuff like this that makes me consider experimenting with one of the many sidereal zodiacs
Take my word for it. If your looking for dead simple give up astrology now!

If you find one of the numerous sidereal zodiacs more compelling then by all means try them out. But be warned there is no astrological panacea out there. Every choice you make comes at a price. This issue is the tricky one for tropicalists.

But siderealists have their problems too. Like the growing disparity between the signs and seasons. Moreover, siderealists are constantly debating on what is the best ayanamsa or sidereal zodiac.

Logically, I think there is a reasonable argument for reversing the signs but for some reason I cannot really explain the existing tropical zodiac seems to work with southern hemisphere charts.

For example, the Australian singer and actress Kylie Minogue still seems very Geminian/mercury ruled to me.

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Minogue,_Kylie

Unless, of course you want to argue her first single 'I Should Be so Lucky' was a clear hint of Sagittarian influence....:???:

What about the uber Aries Australian actress Lucy Lawless? Best known for her role as the Amazonian Xena Warrior Princess. Do you think she is better understood as an uber Libra?

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Lawless,_Lucy

Or does the Australian double Aquarian feminist writer and academic Germaine Greer really comes over as a double Leo to you?

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Greer,_Germaine

Think about the following charts. Do they work for you better with signs reversed?

Che Guevara
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Guevara,_Che

Charlize Theron
http://www.astrotheme.com/astrology/Charlize_Theron

Russell Crowe
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Crowe,_Russell

Pope Francis I
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Pope_Francis_I.

Diego Maradona
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Maradona,_Diego

Bob Hawke
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Hawke,_Bob

Barry Humphries
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Humphries,_Barry

Michael Hutchence
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Hutchence,_Michael

Peter Jackson
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Jackson,_Peter

Eva Peron
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Per%C3%B3n,_Eva

Nelson Mandella:
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Mandela,_Nelson

Oscar Pistorius
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Pistorius,_Oscar

Ayrton Senna:
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Senna,_Ayrton

Pele
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Pel%C3%A9

Augusto Pinochet
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Pinochet,_Augusto

Mark
Last edited by Mark on Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:26 pm, edited 4 times in total.
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

12
Mark wrote:
But siderealists have their problems too. Like the growing disparity between the signs and seasons. Moreover, siderealists are constantly debating on what is the best ayanamsa or sidereal zodiac.
Nice photo, Mark, and great shirt color, but I would have expected to see you wearing one of those jaunty Scottish caps that our local Scotsman here in town is never without.

As a siderealist, we don't pay attention to a disparity between signs and seasons because the seasons really have no place in sidereal astrology. Seasons are strictly tropical. I think it's important to make that clear.

There isn't really much debate left on the ayanamsa either. Almost everyone has defaulted to the Lahiri value decided upon by the Indian government on the 1950s. A small handful in the west still use the Fagan-Bradley value, and a fair number (like myself) use the slightly modified Krishnamurti ayanamsa adjusted from Lahiri (six minutes difference which is generally negligible except when using Dasa timing).

Siderealists don't debate the ayanamsa issue so much as each astrologer simply uses his preferred ayanamsa in practice. The favored ayanamsas are very close together: Krishnamurti and Lahiri are only six minutes apart; Fagan-Bradley is 53 minutes from Lahiri, and Raman is about a degree out from Lahiri. So there is general agreement on the approximate location of the zero point. Lahiri is now generally accepted in India due to the availability of printed tables and astrological software.

But the interpretation of sidereal signs is a hotly debated topic. At present there are no standard interpretations.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm