Signs and Constellations Are Not the Same Thing!

The signs are not constellations!

End of article. Oh you’re expecting some more explanation? Ok, have it your way.

About once a year or so, an article make its rounds in social media saying that NASA has discovered a 13th sign. This sign is Ophiuchus, and is nestled between Scorpio and Sagittarius. This has mostly caused confusion with people not as knowledgeable with astrology, and has acted as a straw-man argument from sceptics to show how astrologers are clueless. 

The truth of this argument has nothing to do with whether you believe in astrology. This is a misunderstanding of terms.

The Ecliptic

First we have to understand what the ecliptic is.

The ecliptic is the path of the Sun as it travels across the sky from our perspective. The rest of the planets and the Moon also travel along this path, although slightly above or below at times. In the background along the ecliptic, there is a band of stars. Some of these stars were grouped together into constellations. Here is where the confusion lies.

Constellations

Constellations are groupings of stars. The ancients gave them names, typically based on their culture’s mythology. In some cases, these constellations were grouped together to tell a story. They also act as a way to locatek individual stars within or near them. This locational use of constellations is still done today with astronomers as an easy shorthand.

Constellations vary in size and are irregularly shaped. Some constellations lie along the ecliptic, sometimes straddling it, sometimes only a small piece touches it, and others are far above or below the ecliptic.

Signs

Signs are 30-degree measured divisions of the ecliptic. Each sign is even and regular. Since the ecliptic is a circle, and if you divide the 360 degrees of the ecliptic circle by twelve, you get 30. This gives us 12 signs.

Signs Versus Stars

In the graphic below is a 16th century depiction of the Ptolemaic universe. There are differences between various astrologers on the number of spheres – some being added to account for precession of the equinoxes and so on. To generally summarize:

Above the Earth are spheres for each of the seven planets.

Above Saturn is the sphere of the stars.

Above the sphere of the stars is usually another sphere to account for the signs.

There may be other spheres, but all agree that Heaven (not necessarily the Christian one) is the outermost.

The signs are above the stars. You can see the stars and constellations. You cannot see the signs. Astrology, at least in part, is an expression of a philosophy. In this way, the signs are non-physical physical archetypes that dwell in the realm of the Forms as described by Plato and Aristotle (with differing opinions).

The Unfixed Stars, the Precession of the Equinoxes 

The stars, from our perceived perspective appear to move as a united background behind the planets, rising and setting daily. However, over time, the stars appear to be slowly moving backwards, against the order of the zodiac. This is due to a phenomenon called the precession of the equinoxes. It is caused by a slight wobble in the axis of the Earth, like a spinning top. This means that the spring equinox, while it used to happen when the Sun was somewhere in Aries, now happens in Pisces. This is the precise point that sceptics use to ridicule astrologers. 

In reality, astrologers have noticed this for a very long time. Ptolemy wrote about it in the 2nd century, and the math accounting for precession was included in calculation tables. Today it is in every piece of astrology software.

The issue isn’t whether astrologers know or don’t know that the stars and zodiac don’t line up. It’s about how you measure the zodiac.

The Three Zodiacs

This issue with precession and the zodiac is handled in the main ways in astrology:

The Tropical Zodiac: This is the most popular in the West, and dates back to at least Ptolemy. This is a seasonally-based zodiac. The spring and autumn equinoxes always fall at 0 degrees Aries and Libra respectively, and the summer and winter solstices always fall on 0 degrees Cancer and Capricorn respectively. The main rationale is to allow the elemental natures of the signs to align with the seasons.

The Sidereal Zodiac: This is most popular in Indian astrology, but has some adherents in the West. This is based on precession. Typically, a point in the Aries sign is “pinned” to a particular star. This means that as precession moves backwards, so does the difference between Sidereal and Tropical astrology. One thing to keep in mind: there are different opinions about where the starting point of the Sidereal zodiac begins. These different opinions are called ayanamsas. In other words, the Sidereal zodiac doesn’t necessarily have a united consensus. 

The Constellational Zodiac: This is the least popular among astrologers. This zodiac attempts to divide the ecliptic according to the approximate size of the constellations. For instance, Scorpio will be quite small, Libra quite large, and there will most likely be 13 signs. Again, opinions will vary here.

About Tropical and Sidereal Zodiacs:

Here is a hard truth: neither the Tropical or Sidereal zodiacs show exactly what is in the sky. 

The reason for this goes back to my first statement that a sign is always 30 degrees and a constellation is irregular. To illustrate this, I made some colorful graphics. The one on the top-left shows the 12 signs. The one on the bottom-right shows the approximate number of degrees each constellation uses in the ecliptic. This isn’t even exactly correct because, since the constellations are irregular, it’s difficult to say sometimes how many degrees they cover. Some constellations overlap, bending over another one, or fitting into another one like a puzzle piece. 

If you use 30 degree signs, they will be different than the sky. Period. Granted, Sidereal is slightly closer since it accounts for precession.

Why 12? 

There are two reasons: one is astronomical, and the other is philosophical.

The astronomical answer is simple: there are 12 lunations in a year, each of which last just shy of 30 days.

The philosophical answer is more complicated: The ancients placed great importance on certain numbers. Certain numbers tend to reoccur: one, two, three, four, seven, ten, and twelve. These numbers are extremely important to astrology:

Twelve signs.

Three signs are assigned to each of the four elements.

Four signs are assigned to each of the three modes (cardinal, fixed, mutable).

There are six possible sextile aspects.

There are four possible square aspects.

There are three possible trine aspects.

There are two possible oppositional aspects.

All of this fits in a model of a twelvefold division. Adding a thirteenth essentially unbalances the system. Again, astrology has a non-physical and philosophical component, and this balance, in my opinion at least, is important.

Putting this together. 

To summarize, it comes down to four points:

If you prefer the elements of the signs matching the seasons, choose the Tropical zodiac.

If you prefer the signs to account for precession, choose the Sidereal zodiac.

If you prefer the physical constellations, choose the Constellational zodiac.

If you’re a skeptic, all of these are bogus, but at least understand a zodiac as a way of dividing the ecliptic.

At its simplest, the signs are a measuring system. If we say Saturn is at 3 degrees Gemini, we are also saying it is at 64 degrees of the ecliptic. It is a shorthand, really not much different than the shorthand astronomers use today.

NASA has never proclaimed Ophiuchus as the 13th sign – or at least it doesn’t have the authority, any more than Home Depot has the authority to proclaim a yard now contains four feet.

Oh, and Ophichus wasn’t recently discovered either. This was part of Ptolemy’s star list. It does touch the ecliptic.

It is a bit of a chicken and the egg whether the signs were named after the constellations or vice versa. We just don’t know.

Mercury in Haterade

I’ve been talking about doing a blog post on this for quite some time. What better time than when Mercury is in retrograde? I like to live dangerously.

I’ve made a few drive-by posts on Facebook about retrogrades, some with thought, and some a bit trollish. What seems to come out from this is that some people think that I am saying that retrogrades aren’t important or don’t mean anything. I think Facebook is a horrible medium for longer writings, so here we are.

This piece is really about how traditional astrology views any planet in retrograde, and in my mind, it also speaks about how we view how current planetary positions affect us – universally or individually.

What is a retrograde?

A retrograde is when a planet appears to move “backwards”. This is caused by the different sizes of each of the planets’ orbits relative to ours. This causes an illusion from our terrestrial perspective where each of the planets appear to periodically slow down, stop, then slowly start to move backwards, and then eventually slow down, stop, and move forwards again. Since we orbit the Sun, and the Moon orbits us, the Sun and Moon never go retrograde (we hope).

Mercury, as the fastest planet, and goes retrograde the most often, about three or four times a year for a few weeks. It is because of this frequency, that Mercury in particular retrograding seems to always be fresh in our minds. 

What does it mean?

I’m going to split this into two sections: modern and traditional. I realize “traditional astrology” is a broad term that covers roughly the 2nd century BCE to about the 18th century, and this covers a multitude of practices. Please allow the generalization for now, and I don’t think what I’m saying in this post varies too much from most sources.

Modern:

Retrogrades mean the planet cannot function as well as it usually does. Modern and traditional agree here. This is pretty much where the agreement ends.

Popular astrology says that Mercury retrograde causes communication problems, and electronics start failing. In extreme cases, some people avoid doing business and signing contracts. 

I have noticed a sharp increase of talk about Mercury retrograde since the internet started. I believe this is simply because it’s easier to disseminate information on the web, and over the last 25 years or so, and it is now “conventional wisdom”. At this point we are now talking about a span of time longer than the career of most astrologers practicing today. 

I do believe, but haven’t proven it to myself yet, that there ARE texts predating the internet agreeing with the popular opinion. It’s probably a safe statement, but I just haven’t spent the time tracking it down. I can definitely say that this opinion wasn’t popular in the pre-modern era. 

Traditional:

The effect of a retrograde depends on the context. In a natal chart, a retrograde is considered a somewhat minor affliction. Planetary strength comes in two major categories: essential and accidental. Essential strength (or dignity) is based on sign placement. Accidental strength is based on everything else the planet happens to be doing – including time of day or aspects. 

In addition, strengths and afflictions are cumulative. Not exclusive. 

Retrogrades are considered “accidental”. Other factors such as sign placement can either accentuate or detract other effects.

The distinction here is that sign placement acts as foundational strength or weakness, whereas accidental factors act as more ephemeral strengths and weaknesses. Accidental dignities matter, but the interpretation will be affected by the planets’ sign placements. 

Why this matters in predictive astrology:

Interpretation in traditional astrology typically involves more than one “testimony” or occurrence of a phenomena to declare an event. Some modern astrologers do this as well. In other words, a planet in a transit, solar return, etc. by itself is not enough to make a prediction. Astrologers would typically look at several tools to check for patterns. For instance, if a particular planet in a solar return is in the same house or sign as the natal chart, we would expect that planet to manifest what is promised in the natal chart that particular year. 

Another major point here is that when a natal chart is in X condition, a planet in any current position will either accentuate or detract from that natal interpretation. Sometimes there is little noticeable effect. Some older astrological texts such as Jean Baptiste Morin’s Astrologica Gallica, and Abu Mashar’s On the Revolutions of the Years of Nativities, explain this in detail.

In other words, we use planetary and chart placements of any given year and compared to the person’s natal chat to determine how delineate events in people’s lives.

And one last point: planets can rule things in a chart in two primary ways: by sign, and by house. The five traditional planets rule 2 signs, and the Sun and Moon rule one each. This means that most planets can speak for up to three things in the chart: the two houses the planet rules, and the one house the planet is placed in. The planet will achieve these things in the way that planet does – Saturn in saturnian ways, Mercury in mercurial ways.

For instance, if Mercury rules the 7th and 10th houses, and is in the 9th, then there will be a connection between relationships, career, through travel in a mercurial way. Throughout the person’s life Mercury will especially signify these things. This is another layer of meaning that we need to consider. If Mercury is in any given place, whether good or bad, retrograde or not, we cannot simply say that Mercury just rules communication. In the example above, we would also say relationships and career will be particularly affected.

Additionally, retrogrades are not universally afflicting. In the case of horary astrology, a retrograde planet signifying a lost possession means that it will come back to you.

Making electional charts are also possible while Mercury or any other planet is retrograde. Make sure the planet isn’t signifying the things you want. Tuck it away where it’s not bothering anyone.

Putting this together:

As stated at the beginning of this article, this really isn’t about Mercury in retrograde in particular. This is because Mercury is only one of five traditional planets that go retrograde. Anything you say about Mercury you can say about the others. If the Sun or Moon go retrograde, then we should panic.

Figuring out what a planet is saying is not a simple generic answer. Like most things in our lives the real answer is subtle and more individualistic. This does not fit into pop astrology.

I am saying this through the lens of traditional astrology, but many modern astrologers delineate charts in a similar way. This is the difference between real astrology and pop astrology. Professional astrologers I have talked to typically agree that current transits do not affect all people the same way, and in some cases, hardly at all.

My advice: have your chart read by a professional astrologer, and don’t panic when Mercury is retrograde. Make your plans, use the bus, use your printer, talk to people, and live your life.

An Explanation on the Traditional Rulership of Signs

For my first blog post, I thought I’d write about a subject that is sometimes taken for granted: sign rulerships. There is a marked difference in the logic between pre-modern astrology and modern astrology as to why a planet rules a sign. By the 20th century, this difference became more marked.

First of all, what does this mean? Each of the 12 zodiac signs is governed by a planet. At its simplest, this planet will act as a significator, or actor for the sign. For instance, if someone’s career (10th house) is in Aries, then one can look to Mars, the ruler of Aries, as the primary planet that speaks about career.

Starting in the 20th century, an increasingly popular way of interpreting signs started to surface: sign=ruler=house. For example, Aries is like Mars is like the first house (since Aries is the first sign). This has resulted in confusion.

First a little bit of background.

Ancient History

The Thema Mundi

Early astrological books described sign rulerships slightly differently, and most importantly, they described why a planet rules a sign in clear language. In Firmicus Maternus’ 4th century Matheseos, book 3, sections 9-10, he describes the Thema Mundi.

The Thema Mundi is a theoretical chart for the beginning of the universe. It was most likely used as a teaching device. This particular chart describes several basic astrological concepts, including sign rulership.

In this chart, Cancer rises. Each of the seven planets is placed in their ruling signs in the bottom half of the chart at 15 degrees each.

We can see a specific pattern here.

Planets and aspects are divided into two categories: malefic. Things that benefic are considered conducive to bringing life and happiness and malefic are antithetical to life and happiness. I will categorize these below.

• Jupiter Greater benefic Trine aspect

• Venus Lesser benefic Sextile aspect

• Mars Lesser malefic Square aspect

• Saturn Greater malefic Opposition aspect

• Mercury Either malefic or benefic Conjunction

The Sun and Moon are not part of this, but traditionally can also be benefic or malefic.

The Thema Mundi shows us this same pattern through sign relationships.

Cancer and Leo are the “pivot” of the chart. Cancer aspects planets on the upper half of the chart, and Leo aspects the lower half.

Keeping this in mind, we will see a similar arrangement in the list above:

• Cancer and Leo aspect Sagittarius and Pisces by trine.

• Cancer and Leo aspect Taurus and Libra by sextile.

• Cancer and Leo aspect Aries and Scorpio by square.

• Cancer and Leo aspect Capricorn and Aquarius by opposition.

• Cancer and Leo are conjunct Virgo and Gemini.

Putting this together

This shows that originally sign rulership was related to an aspectual relationship to the signs of the Sun and Moon. The reason for this logic is that the Sun and Moon were considered the king and queen of heaven, and the planets acted as a sort of “court”. The signs were sometimes called “houses” which is not the same thing as topical houses. Seen in this way, the signs show two things: graphically illustrating the nature of the royal heavenly court, and showing what signs the planets are comfortable in.

The house analogy is a good one. It is not about affinity – i.e. Aries IS Mars, but rather Mars can be himself in Aries. This is contrasted with the modern approach where sign and planet and topical house become merged into a soup of meaning. This is how the confusion of Scorpio with 8th house meaning sex comes from – whereas the traditional view of the 8th is primarily death. Sex would be somewhere else – generally the 5th (though traditional natal techniques would be more complex than house rulership).

Traditional astrology keeps a clear division between the roles of planet, sign, and house. Signs by themselves do not say very much. However, a planet in a sign in a particular house can say a lot. Here is my simple analogy:

• A planet is a character in a play.

• The sign tells us how that character behaves.

• The house tells us what the character is doing.

• Aspects tell us how the character interacts with other characters.