This might be a bit rambling as it's late for me and I'm suitably lubricated from a cocktail. I figure I'll just start this out and see what happens. I was an old member from many years ago. I posted the "astrology concepts" megathread that is a sticky in this forum. I have no idea what my old e-mail was, so here I am under a new identity. It's funny reading that. I was comparatively a newbie, and fired up by learning new things. So. What is traditional astrology? It's the astrology that was practiced before the start of the 18th century. This is a rough date, and there are some exceptions here, but it's a generally good cut off date. When did it start? Astrology as we know it was most likely began in the Hellenistic world, possibly Hellenistic Egypt, some time in the 2nd century BC. This is according to written record: we have little, if anything before that. Didn't the Babylonians invent this? Sort of. Their astrology was different. Some call this "omenal astrology". They made records of planetary positions, but there was little record of houses, signs, aspects, or elemental configurations. Also, no natal astrology! Sooooo what changed? Some time in the Hellenistic period in some murky time in the 2nd century or so, someone figured figured out the math to determine the degree of the sign rising. We take this for granted now, but it was a new concept. This is the real meaning of horoscope - the degree of the sign that rises at birth. What's so different about this astrology? FIrst of all, all of traditional astrology is predictive. Period. You want to know what's going to happen? The tools are there. The distinction in a nutshell: modern astrology sees the birth chart as you. You You You. Traditional astrology sees the birthchart as your place in the world. Only part of the chart is you. The rest is how the world and you interact. So why did this change? Some time in the 19th century, as a result of changing ideas of science and worldview, there was a push to change astrology from prediction to psychological analysis. This was a bit gradual. Another reason was that few astrologers could read the old source texts, as they were in Greek or Latin. As a result, vast swaths of astrology was invented from scratch, with little reagard to previous logic. What about Sun signs? Sun signs as a way to describe people was invented in the early 20th century to sell newspapers. I have over 200 pre-modern books on astrology, and literally none of them talk about Sun signs. Period. What about outer planets? We discovered more planets starting in the 18th century. The astrological logic of rulership and why planets do what they do was mostly forgotten by the 19th century, so a new logic was invented. I don't argue this too deeply, but I have my reasons. Some modern traditional astrologers use outer planets, and some don't. Aren't these ideas archaic? Aren't we more evolved? I think this is a straw man argument. Suffice it to say that I think people are people, and human nature doesn't change. Despite the centuries, we still look for love, recognition, posterity, fun, and security. Anyhoo that's a start.
Greetings Almadel, glad to see you posting here again! It's time we resurrected this forum to the importance it has for everyone in these trying times. The astrology of the moment is less than great, tragic might be a better term. I find meaning and understanding of current events in the frame of history... and of history repeating itself due to 'outside' influences. I am particularly interested in the mundane sphere of astrology and don't give a hoot for 'horoscopes' as they are almost always just entertainment. It is the mundane sphere that shapes our lives in the world and how people react.
