PDA

View Full Version : Capricorns and water signs.


LovelyMissAries
28-09-2011, 06:30
I was wondering what others' experiences are with people who are Capricorn suns and have a large influence of water in their natal chart. The one I'm inquiring about in particular has a Scorpio moon and venus. I imagine that would make for a large need for control. PLUS there's his Mars in Pisces. SO much water! Compared to me who has none in her chart. :D

Thoughts on this? Positive or negative?

NikkiB
28-09-2011, 06:41
I have Pieces and Scorpio in my chart and I can be really emotional and sensitive as well as have quite a sting.. so it all comes into play for me..

Flaxen
28-09-2011, 06:44
I'm Capricorn Sun, Cancer Rising and Pisces Moon.

I'm a curious mix of grounded practicality and a strong emotional, dreamy quality. I'm far too sensitive sometimes, crave security and commitment deeply but at the same time, am rather frightened of being tied down. :)

The rest of my chart is quite balanced though - the elements are pretty evenly spread.

With Scorpio Moon and Venus, I'd expect this person to be quite intense in relationships.

LovelyMissAries
28-09-2011, 06:49
I'm Capricorn Sun, Cancer Rising and Pisces Moon.

I'm a curious mix of grounded practicality and a strong emotional, dreamy quality. I'm far too sensitive sometimes, crave security and commitment deeply but at the same time, am rather frightened of being tied down. :)

The rest of my chart is quite balanced though - the elements are pretty evenly spread.

With Scorpio Moon and Venus, I'd expect this person to be quite intense in relationships.

Do you get along with (well, I guess you can get along with anyone if you try regardless of sign, but I meant do you tend to gravitate more towards...) fire signs with all that water? I'm an Aries but I have a Capricorn stellium in my 7th house, a pluto singleton in my 5th and an Aries stellium in my 11th. I was told due to some aspects and those placements that it doesn't make me a typical Aries. I'm imagining what our rapport would be like and if it'd be easy to hurt his feelings (I tend to do that unintentionally) or if his Mercury in Sagittarius would help greatly.

Minderwiz
28-09-2011, 08:21
I'm Capricorn Sun, Cancer Rising and Pisces Moon.

I'm a curious mix of grounded practicality and a strong emotional, dreamy quality. I'm far too sensitive sometimes, crave security and commitment deeply but at the same time, am rather frightened of being tied down. :)

The rest of my chart is quite balanced though - the elements are pretty evenly spread.

With Scorpio Moon and Venus, I'd expect this person to be quite intense in relationships.

My wife has the same placements. She claims to have no imagination - and she can take a dispassionate view of things if there's a problem, but after things have been sorted, the emotion flows out.

Remember that a Capricorn Sun, is a Winter sign and traditionally would have been treated as 'Phlegmatic' - the Water humour. A Capricorn Sun and Pisces Moon, mean that the Moon is late First Quarter or into Second Quarter, adding some Sanguine (First Quarter) or Choler (Second Quarter). Sanguine adds Air (in modern parlance) Choler adds Fire. and Jupiter (Moon ruler) However the strong likelihood is that temperament comes out as Phlegmatic:

- contemplative, reserved, shy, slow moving, but slow and steady wins the race (my wife describes herself as a 'plodder' but she gets there in the end, even if I or others fall by the wayside). Loves the status quo (not the group LOL) tends to put off things, and prone to inertia. Loves food, likes home, feels comfortable with the familiar, so tends to visit the same places. Phlegmatics tend to get on well with everybody, except other phelgmatics - because of the awkward silences, but all other types tend to be quite happy to do the talking.

My wife also has strong psychic phases, so sensitivity is to more things than other people and their moods

LovelyMissAries
28-09-2011, 08:30
My wife has the same placements. She claims to have no imagination - and she can take a dispassionate view of things if there's a problem, but after things have been sorted, the emotion flows out.

Remember that a Capricorn Sun, is a Winter sign and traditionally would have been treated as 'Phlegmatic' - the Water humour. A Capricorn Sun and Pisces Moon, mean that the Moon is late First Quarter or into Second Quarter, adding some Sanguine (First Quarter) or Choler (Second Quarter). Sanguine adds Air (in modern parlance) Choler adds Fire. and Jupiter (Moon ruler) However the strong likelihood is that temperament comes out as Phlegmatic:

- contemplative, reserved, shy, slow moving, but slow and steady wins the race (my wife describes herself as a 'plodder' but she gets there in the end, even if I or others fall by the wayside). Loves the status quo (not the group LOL) tends to put off things, and prone to inertia. Loves food, likes home, feels comfortable with the familiar, so tends to visit the same places. Phlegmatics tend to get on well with everybody, except other phelgmatics - because of the awkward silences, but all other types tend to be quite happy to do the talking.

My wife also has strong psychic phases, so sensitivity is to more things than other people and their moods

And Minderwiz, what did it take for you to woo her? Lol. I guess the cat's out of the bag now that this is someone I'm interested in whom I think is interested in me as well (but how, oh how, can you tell with Capricorn/Scorpio combinations? They're nearly impossible to read.) but all that water has me a bit nervous. I'm a Gemini ASC, which makes Sagittarius my DSC and I definitely have foot-in-mouth/wish-I-hadn't-just-said-that tendencies! I know anything can work with effort, but it's still fun to speculate what the best approach is.

Saturness
28-09-2011, 23:24
- contemplative, reserved, shy, slow moving, but slow and steady wins the race (my wife describes herself as a 'plodder' but she gets there in the end, even if I or others fall by the wayside). Loves the status quo (not the group LOL) tends to put off things, and prone to inertia. Loves food, likes home, feels comfortable with the familiar, so tends to visit the same places. Phlegmatics tend to get on well with everybody, except other phelgmatics - because of the awkward silences, but all other types tend to be quite happy to do the talking.

My wife also has strong psychic phases, so sensitivity is to more things than other people and their moods

I just wanted to say that I found your analysis based on temperament very interesting. I had never seen it done that way before, although I had seen you talk about it. :)

I don't know many Capricorn people, but the ones I know can actually seem more tough than they actually are. My idea is that an Earth sign with a lot of Water influence could be a bit like Earth with a lot of Water... when you look from far away it seems stable and unchanging, but try walking on it and you may find yourself a foot deep into the mud. What I mean is that either they may feel like they move slow through the water-influenced parts of their lives (you'd have to see the Houses), or make others have this impression, that they get nowhere (specially emotionally, since we are talking about Moon and Venus).

However, I have to say that although Scorpio is a water sign, it is so intense that all this 'still' appearance could be hiding a fast river underneath. I'd look at his Asc to see if the water influence is that intense or if you have more factors that can stabilize it.

My knowledge of Astrology is very basic yet, so I apologize for not offering a more objective reply. Since you talked about the elements, and I happen to work with these very often when reading playing cards, I thought I could give my 2cents. :)

And Minderwiz, what did it take for you to woo her? Lol. I guess the cat's out of the bag now that this is someone I'm interested in whom I think is interested in me as well (but how, oh how, can you tell with Capricorn/Scorpio combinations? They're nearly impossible to read.) but all that water has me a bit nervous. I'm a Gemini ASC, which makes Sagittarius my DSC and I definitely have foot-in-mouth/wish-I-hadn't-just-said-that tendencies! I know anything can work with effort, but it's still fun to speculate what the best approach is.

I'm Sagittarius with Sagittarius ASC, perhaps I am the biggest foot-in-mouther in the whole universe? }) You can feel better now, lol! :P

Water signs do not make me nervous, because my mother is Pisces Sun and Moon so I kind of grew used to that *sigh*. They appear to be much more frail (or evil or unstable or whatever fašade they use to manipulate you into doing what they want, lol!) than they actually are, and sometimes I think they get a thrill out of it. Tsk tsk. I do think a Capricorn will be strong enough to handle whatever your Sagittarius-big-mouthness has to say, although the Scorpio tendencies may not like it (it always seems to me that Sagittarius and Scorpios don't get along very well). But nah, they will not break, in the worst case they'll give you the Killer Look.
(This whole paragraph is a bit of a joke, I do not mean to offend any fellow Water-sign ATers!) :bugeyed:

Besides, I'm sure that a DSC Sagittarius (if it's all you have in Sagittarius, and your Mercury is not roaming in the solecistic parts of the natal chart) won't make you such a huge foot-in-mouther. ;) As on wooing techniques I am sure Minderwiz knows them better than me!

Barleywine
29-09-2011, 00:00
They're nearly impossible to read. . . but all that water has me a bit nervous. I'm a Gemini ASC, which makes Sagittarius my DSC and I definitely have foot-in-mouth/wish-I-hadn't-just-said-that tendencies! I know anything can work with effort, but it's still fun to speculate what the best approach is.

This sort of polarity can work. All of my personal planets are in negative signs (Cancer, Capricorn and Virgo), while my wife has all of hers in positive signs (Gemini stellium, Libra and and Aries). The "glue" that has held us together for 33 years seems to be the fact that our Ascendant-Descendant axes are mirror images (me: 25 Scorpio-Taurus, her 25 Taurus-Scorpio), plus her stellium is in my 7th house and my Cancer complex is in her 2nd house. At times I do need a LARGE measure of patience when she gets particularly "cerebral" on me (psychologists spell it with an "N" I believe) ;)

Saturness
29-09-2011, 00:37
At times I do need a LARGE measure of patience when she gets particularly "cerebral" on me (psychologists spell it with an "N" I believe) ;)

LOL! If you are talking about the Myers-Briggs psychological types, I think it's be spelt with "T", as to "thinking". "N" is "intuitive", the kind of people who are more likely to get a-cerebral on you, lol! :laugh: Now if you were talking about something else, I apologize for sticking my big nose!

I am also sorry for asking, but while I theoretically know what a stellium is (well, I think I do, lol!)... does it have any special effect? :) Thank you!

Barleywine
29-09-2011, 01:40
LOL! If you are talking about the Myers-Briggs psychological types, I think it's be spelt with "T", as to "thinking". "N" is "intuitive", the kind of people who are more likely to get a-cerebral on you, lol! :laugh: Now if you were talking about something else, I apologize for sticking my big nose!

I am also sorry for asking, but while I theoretically know what a stellium is (well, I think I do, lol!)... does it have any special effect? :) Thank you!

Nope, I was just being impertinent: "N" is for "neurotic" :) There is a current article in "The Mountain Astrologer" by Donna Cunningham about the stellium. As she describes it (and not everyone agrees) a stellium is 4 or more planets in a sign or house, ideally in a massive conjunction. Other considerations would be that three of those can't be Sun, Mercury and Venus since they never get far apart anyway, the stellium by house is weaker if it is across signs, and any stellium is much stronger if it involves the slower-moving planets. She notes that some astrologers will take three planets as a stellium. We will need to hear from Minderwiz on the traditional understanding. There is also a book out called "Planetary Containments" that has a slightly different take on the idea. This approach would seem to be best if not all of the planets are part of a mega-conjunction; if they are, you could just synthesize the meanings of all the joint conjunctions, perhaps along with the ideas of the applying and separating and oriental and occidental planetary relationships.

LovelyMissAries
29-09-2011, 02:16
Other considerations would be that three of those can't be Sun, Mercury and Venus since they never get far apart anyway,

Oh...
The Aries stellium is indeed my Sun, Merc, and Venus. I have 3 planets in Capricorn in the 7th house though (Satu, Uran, Nept) so now those are a stellium but the Aries planets are not?

Saturness
29-09-2011, 02:20
Nope, I was just being impertinent: "N" is for "neurotic" :)

Ahahahaha! :laugh:
I like impertinence!

And I apologize for my now even bigger nose!

There is a current article in "The Mountain Astrologer" by Donna Cunningham about the stellium. As she describes it (and not everyone agrees) a stellium is 4 or more planets in a sign or house, ideally in a massive conjunction. Other considerations would be that three of those can't be Sun, Mercury and Venus since they never get far apart anyway, the stellium by house is weaker if it is across signs, and any stellium is much stronger if it involves the slower-moving planets. She notes that some astrologers will take three planets as a stellium. We will need to hear from Minderwiz on the traditional understanding. There is also a book out called "Planetary Containments" that has a slightly different take on the idea. This approach would seem to be best if not all of the planets are part of a mega-conjunction; if they are, you could just synthesize the meanings of all the joint conjunctions, perhaps along with the ideas of the applying and separating and oriental and occidental planetary relationships.

Thank you for this explanation!

Minderwiz
29-09-2011, 02:29
We will need to hear from Minderwiz on the traditional understanding. There is also a book out called "Planetary Containments" that has a slightly different take on the idea. This approach would seem to be best if not all of the planets are part of a mega-conjunction; if they are, you could just synthesize the meanings of all the joint conjunctions, perhaps along with the ideas of the applying and separating and oriental and occidental planetary relationships.

Well there's no 'traditional' definition as the 'stellium' and indeed other aspect patterns are modern inventions. From a traditional stance a triple conjunction of the superior planets (Mars, Jupiter and Saturn) would be very noteworthy and add some or all of the other 4 and you've got a very big indication of something spectacular.

I do have the book Planets in Containment, though it's more Dave's thing than mine. It seems to me to be loosely connected to the traditional concept of besigement[i], something that is also in some Vedic practices. The traditional [i]besiegement is only really used if the two 'besieging planets are Mars and Saturn or possibly Lords 8 and 12 (or Lord 6 could be substituted for either of these). The example Lilly gives clearly shows that he's talking about a triple conjunction and specifically Mars and Saturn. The term seems to date back to Medieval Astrology, and symbolises a restriction of action by unwanted forces.

Besiegement and indeed conjunctions generally would not usually be considered across sign boundaries (the main exception being conjunctions with the Sun, as it also signifies a planet which is combust - though even there I've seen some references quoted to combust having to be in sign - I take it simply to mean, within 8 degrees 30' of the Sun)

Barleywine
29-09-2011, 03:46
Oh...
The Aries stellium is indeed my Sun, Merc, and Venus. I have 3 planets in Capricorn in the 7th house though (Satu, Uran, Nept) so now those are a stellium but the Aries planets are not?

I suppose it depends on who you talk to. Here are a few quotes from Cunningham's article (with my editing for brevity):

"A stellium consists of several planets in 30 degrees or less of the zodiac." (Hmm, I always thought they at least had to be in the same sign.)

"The classic rule was four planets, of which two had to be other than Sun, Mercury or Venus."

"Modern interpretations lean toward accepting three planets as a stellium. We're especially tempted to view it as one when it involves a multiple conjunction. The orb for a conjunction is usually 8 degrees but can be extended to 10 degrees in a multiple conjunction. The resulting focus of energy has nearly as much impact as a stellium - and a stellium that includes a multiple conjunction is more potent than one that does not."

"Stelliums involving conjunctions between the outermost planets - Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto - are highly memorable but complicated to manage. They represent a life-long learning curve!"

"To generalize, here are some criteria that contribute to or detract from its strength:

- the number of planets involved - four minimum; the more the stronger
- when the planets are far apart with no conjunctions, its weaker
- the number of planets in a particular sign - split into two signs makes it weaker
- the number of planets in a particular house - split into two houses makes it weaker
- when all of the planets in a stellium are in the same sign and house, it's stronger
- when stellium planets are conjunct the Sun, Moon, Ascendant or Midheaven they're stronger
- when a multiple conjunction is present, the stellium is strengthened."

I don't know how much of this is "standard parlance" for the astrological community. I've never been too sure about my "multiple conjunction" - Sun, Mercury,Venus in Cancer, Uranus in Gemini, all within 8 degrees in the 8th house. While I do read it as a conjunction of all four since the Sun sits on the midpoint of the configuration, I've tended to give Uranus more importance as the "planet of oriental appearance" than as a significant contributor to the conjunction. It certainly presaged my strong interest in astrology! On the other hand, I'd have no trouble taking my son's cross-sign stellium, with Sun, Mercury and Saturn closely conjunct in early Scorpio and Pluto at 29 Libra 39, all within 7 degrees of one another.

Barleywine
29-09-2011, 04:47
Out of curiosity, I went fishing on the internet to see what the general astrological public is saying on this subject. As I expected, it's a bit murky overall but everyone seems to agree on one thing: it can be three planets, and nobody is talking about any restrictions on which planets. There is a lot of confusion about sign and house placements, though. When I was learning, we talked about, for example, a "stellium in Libra," implying that all of the planets were in Libra, not two-thirds or half of them in Virgo or Scorpio. We never talked about cross-house stelliums (stellia???). We mainly treated them as fancy conjunctions, since we did expect all of the planets to be reasonably close to one another (10 degrees comes to mind). I don't know what Donna Cunningham was refering to by the "classic rule;" she had no traditional references listed at the end of her article.

Here is what I found:

A Stellium is a configuration that occurs when three or more planets are in the same sign or are in the same house. To be truly significant, a stellium should have four or more planets involved. This places much focus upon the affairs ruled by this house and/or the tendencies shown by the sign involved. Strong will power, self-awareness, and a direct stimulation to action will be shown in these affairs.

A stellium is a multiple conjunction of planets. It's a close cluster of three or more planets in one sign and/or house. The planets are clumped together (within 0 to 5 degrees). This puts an energetic emphasis in the sign and house where it is concentrated.

A stellum is a group of planets/asteroids/node all in the same house.

A stellium is a multiple conjunction of planets. It's a close cluster of three or more planets in one sign and/or house. The planets are clumped together (within 0 to 5 degrees).

A Stellium is technically a group of three or more planets forming conjunctions to one another within an orb of 10░ or less. Most astrologers are adamant that the Stellium must occur within the same sign. Actually, I've found that the house placement is most important with Stelliums and the conjunctions should not be divided up between two different houses.

A Stellium (which is technically three or more planets conjunct each other in the same sign, but which can also be considered, by extension, three or more planets in the same sign, conjunct or not) simply represents a tremendous amount of focus on the energy of that sign.

A stellium consists of three or more planets in the same sign of the zodiac. A stellium often brings great power and focus.

Minderwiz
29-09-2011, 07:35
I suppose it depends on who you talk to. Here are a few quotes from Cunningham's article (with my editing for brevity):

"A stellium consists of several planets in 30 degrees or less of the zodiac." (Hmm, I always thought they at least had to be in the same sign.)

Well traditionally if they're not in the same sign there's no conjunctions and like you I've always taken a stellium as the same sign - though I can see an argument for including planets in the preceding sign that are applying to a conjunction and, that conjunction will be perfected when all the planets are in the same sign. If the planets in the preceding sigu are being separated from then I don't see that any significant weight should be put on the stellium - and of course if those planets are out of orb then the feature makes no Astrological sense under any circumstances (and that could be the case under Cunningham's definition)



"The classic rule was four planets, of which two had to be other than Sun, Mercury or Venus."

That's sloppy phraseology and something that tends to annoy me. It gives the impression that this has always been the case in Astrology - it hasn't. I believe, but Dave will correct me if I'm wrong, aspect patterns derive from Bruno and Louise Huber and are a twentieth century development (I believe Louise is still alive and Bruno died in 1999). Hardly 'classic'

Minderwiz
29-09-2011, 07:49
Out of curiosity, I went fishing on the internet to see what the general astrological public is saying on this subject. As I expected, it's a bit murky overall but everyone seems to agree on one thing: it can be three planets, and nobody is talking about any restrictions on which planets.

Good research there!!

I reached for my copy of Astrology, Understanding the Birth Chart by Kevin Burk

He defines a stellium as:

technically a group of three or more planets that are conjunct each other

Burk also insists that all aspect patterns have to have the following features:

They must be formed by physical bodies

Orbs must be very small - he quotes 1 degree - otherwise transiting planets will not fire the pattern at the same time - especially transits by the outers

Aspect patterns must be in the correct signs - no out of sign aspects

Now of course that's simply one take but it clearly does not agree with Cunningham.

Personally if I did use aspect patterns, I'd use Burk rather than Cunningham because I can see that under his definition it's possible to argue that the pattern is greater than simply aspects between the constituent planets but looking at the way other Astrologers use aspect patterns I can see that Burk too, is somewhat out on a limb.

Barleywine
29-09-2011, 08:39
I believe, but Dave will correct me if I'm wrong, aspect patterns derive from Bruno and Louise Huber and are a twentieth century development (I believe Louise is still alive and Bruno died in 1999). Hardly 'classic'

Hmm. Did the Hubers precede Marc Edmund Jones, with his Bowls, Buckets, Bundles and Splashes, etc (seven in all)? He published "The Guide to Horoscope Interpretation" with his take on planetary patterns in 1941. Or did you simply mean T-Cross, Grand Cross, Grand Trine, etc? Jones had them covered in 1941 as well, in that book and in "How to Learn Astrology" published the same year. Still 20th century though, as you observe.

Oh, and here's something interesting: in "Interpretation" there is an Appendix B, Focal Determinators, that has the following definition of a stellium.

"The case where four or more planets, at least two other than the Sun, Mercury and Venus, lie in one house or one sign, indicating a life emphasized in terms of the particular house or sign genius."

Hmm once again. Now why didn't Cunningham reference Jones as her precedent in that magazine article?