View Full Version : Sun Signs - Your Opinion?
I was born on April 7th, which would designate me as an Aries. According to my parents, I was supposed to be born on March 14th, which would make me a Pisces.
For reference purposes, I have very few of the Aries qualities. I am independent, but I also care very keenly for my close friends and can show sympathy towards those I don't know. I'm more intuitive than most, I'm very dreamy and my life is my artwork. I love poetry and all things that are beautiful or even have the potential for Beauty. For these reasons, I've always considered myself to be more of a Pisces.
I do understand that some people have a view of "what you have is what you are;" perhaps one day yet I will shed my Pisces skin and erupt into an Aries.
I'm interested to know other people's opinions on this, if you have similar experiences, and what it could mean in regards to my actual sun-sign.
An Aries or not? You have a whole astrological chart and the Sun is only one of many planets and factors within that chart. Having an Aries Sun raises the possibility that Mercury and Venus may be in adjacent signs as well as being in Aries -- having them in Pisces or Taurus would have a modifying effect on an Aries Sun. Some author once noted that there can be as many as 1800 factors to consider when reading a chart. I don't know the actual possible number but I do know that there are very many. You might want to explore one of the astrology sites that can generate charts for you to see just what is where. It takes time and work and thought to find ourselves, even if it is only through an astrological chart. Good luck, Dave
Welcome vernissage! Dave is right, there may be other factors that have altered the expression of your Aries sun, and not just having planets in other signs. Some factors could be:
- planets aspecting your sun. e.g. if your Sun is right beside Venus, trining Neptune, that would really "soften" your sun and make it more artistically inclined. There could be many possibilities where aspecting planets change your sun expression
- house. If your sun is in 12th house, or if other planets are in stronger houses (e.g. Neptune conjunct your ascendent in 1st), their energy will be more obvious in your personality.
Finally, I would like to say that for some people identify much more with their ascendant sign than sun sign. I'm a Capricorn sun with Aquarius rising and for the longest time I didn't feel "Capricornish" at all.
I recently came across a woman who was Sun sign Pisces but felt that she was nothing like a Pisces and wondered why.
When I did her chart I found that the only placement in Water signs was her Pisces Sun. Her element balance was strongly Earth followed by Fire and Air, and only then, Water. She had a Virgo Ascendant with Pluto conjunct the Ascendant. When I described her as an intense worrier, she said 'now that is me'.
Sun signs on their own can be dreadfully misleading - never, ever do any interpretation of personality based solely on that one factor despite the Sun sign columns :)
Since I seem to be the sole proponent of the sidereal zodiac on this forum, I feel a need to speak up here. I too felt confused about my Cancer Sun sign until I learned that I'm really a Gemini.
The Tropical zodiac used in Western astrology is not the only zodiac -- many people worldwide use the sidereal zodiac (most commonly in Vedic astrology). Whereas the tropical zodiac is based on the timing of equinoxes and solstices, the sidereal zodiac is based on the actual positions of the planets in the constellations (it's the "astronomer's zodiac," if you will). The discrepancy between tropical and sidereal is due mainly to the Procession of the Equinoxes. The two systems are hotly debated, but I won't get into all the reasons here. Who's right, who's wrong, who knows, who cares? I just know what makes sense for me and I'm not about to force the sidereal zodiac on you. You can read about it and make up your own mind.
What I'm getting at in my round-about way is that according to the sidereal zodiac, a person born on April 7 is a Pisces. (Doctor due dates have nothing to do with it.) For a fairly simple account of the two zodiacs, see http://www.mybirthchart.com/signs.aspx.
I do however, agree whole-heartedly with Dave and Isthmus in that the Sun sign is only part of the chart. There are many, many other factors at work in your horoscope. To focus solely on one piece does not do justice to the many nuances that are you.
Kaylee, I couldn't agree more! I always found myself in virtual opposition of not only my sun sign, but most of the rest of my chart as well! I'm a Virgo according to the tropical delineation of the chart, but a Leo by the sidereal. I fit the Leo much, much better.
But as I've learned more of astrology, I now find myself in both charts! The tropical seems to be the ideal me, what I'm striving towards, what I'm working on, and the sidereal seems to be the actual me, where I am now.
That's just my impression anyway!
Wrong. I'm a Cyril Fagan and Donald Bradley fan. I essentially use most of the Sidereal techniques in my work with an exception or three. I don't use either tropical or sidereal signs, only uses Houses in natal and mundane charts, use primarily angles, conjunctions, oppositions and paran-squares. I don't do Novian charts and semi-annual solar charts, etc. I do, however, have a nice way of charting and using the precessing angles of the chart, and also of interpreting the angles as they move across natal and solar return points. I can look at a whole year of activity using this type of chart and tell you when to cast a chart precessed to that given event date. There are some other nice things I've also found. I've been into this since the mid-70's. We may want to establish a side dialog using some of these techniques. Dave.
Yes I agree Dave, a dialogue on these areas could be most productive. I don't really use any of them but I'd certainly enjoy learning how you use them and how you interpret the results.
The sidereal/tropical debate would be an interesting starting point because the tradition is relatively silent on these - probably for the obvious reason that 2000 years ago the two zodiacs were more or less in line with each other.
Sorry if I sounded a bit snobbish in my first reply. <sheepish expression> I had previously heard you mention that you used sidereal techniques, but for some reason I thought that you used them in the past, but were not using them anymore. Not sure where I got that idea. Anyway, I love to be proven wrong, as that just means that I have more to learn! :D
You sound very knowledgeable in this area, and I'd love to learn more about your techniques if you're willing to share. :) I have much to learn.
Looking forward to further dialogues in this area,
For Kaylee and Minderwiz,
I've signed up at the Yahoo Sidereal Astrology group, so you will probably see me there as well as here. Yes, it would be interesting to have a Sidereal section going here. As many realize by now, I am a "minimalist" in that I don't like to use absurdly detailed processes or to make my practice of astrology complex. Done that, been there! I believe in using that which works -- and it has to work close to 100%, I don't like fudging.
I'm thinking of starting a few threads over time. These could include:
1) How Sidereal and Tropical practices differ and are alike, and how you can use your software charting or tropical zodiac ephemeris in using Sidereal practices.
2) Solar Returns using the precession factor for Tropical conversions or using the Sidereal zodiac. How to read Solar Returns and examples.
3) Lunar Returns using the precession factor for Tropical conversion or using the Sidereal zodiac. How to read Lunar Returns and examples.
4) Solar Returns, timing of events, use for prediciting events.
Any other aspects of Sidereal usage could be considered. I'd like a response to see how much interest there is in predicitive astrology. Keep in mind that the involvement of others is suggested as I tend to use very sparse but highly dependable methodologies and my practice with Sidereal techniques might not be strictly "main stream." Dave.
No you're definitely not main stream, it's one of the things I love about you :)
As a Western Astrologer who has gravitated towards traditional and even ancient approaches, I'd love you to try some of those threads, it may be that in the process we will begin to ask fundamental questions about the nature and process of Astrology.
I actually tried to see if I could obtain some of the books by Fagan and Bradley but here in the UK they don't appear to be easily available (at least Amazon and the Wessex Astrologer haven't got the) :(