Star signs...2000 years later.

Salandria

So, I just saw this really interesting peice. 2000 years ago more or less, the world was tilted as star signs were used to represent your birth month. The sun rose in that constalation at that time, but now the world is tilted so we could very well be a much different star sign in constalation terms.

Could i Be and aries/taurus?

This is just a random thought.
 

Maggiemay

I read about that. You are definitely on to something here.

Actually, from what I gather, this issue is what distingues the 'occidental' (tropical zodiac) astrology from the 'hindu/vedic' astrology ( sidereal zodiac).

The Vedic astrology, I believe uses the actual placements of the planets in the sky.

If you draw up your chart with the Vedic system ( hindu/Lahiri sidereal), you will see where the planets actually were in the sky when you were born.

Sometimes I wonder why we don't use those charts.

Maggie :)
 

SkadisPhoenix

Well that would definately explain why I don't have many Virgo traits! It's defiantely interesting. I've always read my horoscopes, and so often been left scratching my head, because it doesn't apply to me at all, and this really would make a lot of difference I'm thinking.
 

Maggiemay

SkadisPhoenix said:
Well that would definately explain why I don't have many Virgo traits! It's defiantely interesting. I've always read my horoscopes, and so often been left scratching my head, because it doesn't apply to me at all, and this really would make a lot of difference I'm thinking.

Did you check your geocentric sidereal chart?

Honestly I'd prefer using the chart with the planet's real placements but I don't. I wonder why...

As for Horoscope, you might to try : ''Phil booth Horoscope'' website. He is usually very much on target!

Maggie :)
 

willowfox

Progression of the Equinoxes Takes 25920 years to complete.
 

Maggiemay

willowfox said:
Progression of the Equinoxes Takes 25920 years to complete.

You lost me at .... 'Progression'! lol

Do you have time to explain it (progression of equinoxes) to me? If you do not, it is ok, I will do the research.

Maggie :)
 

willowfox

This is what the thread start is talking about, the slow progression of the signs
 

Maggiemay

willowfox said:
This is what the thread start is talking about, the slow progression of the signs

The slow progression of the signs, ie: slow progression of the constellations in the sky, right?

If that is correct, how does the fact that it takes 25920 years to complete affect us?

Shouldn't we be using the vedic system as a reference of what is accurate and true? ( even if the constellations are progressing) Or is it safer to stick to the yearly date and time to establish a chart.

Apology for any mumbo jumbo on my part , I must concede, I feel very much out of my depth here.

Maggie : )
 

Minderwiz

Plus ca change.....

We've run over the precession of the equinoxes several times. In simple terms
it's due to wobbles in the Earth's orbit around the Sun. These wobbles cause the stellar background to shift at a slow but predictable pace.

One of the effects of this wobble is that over a period of 72 years the position of the Earth against the stellar background shifts backward by one degree. So the (Northern) vernal equinox which used to occur at 0 degrees Aries has now shifted back into Pisces.

Yes Vedic Astrologers allow for this and keep to a stellar measuring rod. Western Astrologers use the seasons of the year as the measuring rod - thus the Vernal equinox is defined as 0 degrees Aries in the Tropical Zodiac. In effect Western systems place great emphasis on seasonal changes, Indian ones do not place as much emphasis.

Both systems are actually artificial constructs, because each divides the zodiacal circle into 12 equal segments or signs. Neither system accurately reflects the constellations because the constellations are not neatly divided into equal sizes.

Neither system is superior to the other both are equally valid and work well for skilled practioners. What needs to be born in mind is that mixing the two can lead to significant problems.
 

SkadisPhoenix

Maggiemay said:
Did you check your geocentric sidereal chart?

Honestly I'd prefer using the chart with the planet's real placements but I don't. I wonder why...

As for Horoscope, you might to try : ''Phil booth Horoscope'' website. He is usually very much on target!

Maggie :)

From what I've worked out, true astrological charts need an exact time and place of birth. I was adopted, so I only know that I was born somewhere in London, and that it was around 6pm in the afternoon. It's unfortunately made it hard for me to get proper charts drawn up, which is something I would really like to have done. Also, because of the adoption, I don't have a BIRTH certificate as such, rather an adoption certificate, from what I can work out.