Bradley on Signs

[Guest guest]

Hi Dave, and anyone else interested in sidereal signs,

 

Dave, going over Bradley's sign notes, I simply don't know where his ideas

came from. Without seeming to be overly critical, many of those notes seem

to have come out of the blue. So much of what he says might be linked to

one planet or another, or perhaps a combination of planets, but certainly

not to any specific zodiac sign.

 

I'm really amazed that Bradley rarely gave any rationale for what he wrote

on the signs. Perhaps he had his own doubts because as far as I know he

didn't publish these notes.

 

So I'm quite puzzled as to how Bradley came upon those sign notes. They

certainly aren't going to help anyone understand sidereal signs. I've

pulled up hundreds of charts in the AstroDatabank, and about the only

constants I can find with signs (tropical or sidereal) are specific

interests or occupations or symbolism related to ruling and exalted

planets, mostly connected to life circumstances. Any depth psychology is

definitely linked to the planets rather than the signs. Lunar mansions come

in second for psychology, and signs are a distant third.

 

As I've said so often before, we'd learn the most about zodiac signs by

studying horoscopes and biographies. One obvious example for Taurus is

Queen Victoria who had Sun, Moon and ascendant in sidereal Taurus. We might

expect Venus-Moon symbolism. Facts of her life: The Moon is exalted in

Taurus, and Victoria's rule was long and brought imperial expansion to the

British empire. Any traditional astrologer who saw the child Victoria's

chart would have known that the exaltation of the Moon on the ascendant

with the Sun would have brought great luster to England.

 

And Venus symbolism: Victoria was devoted to her husband. They were a

domestic couple and the parents of nine children. Now this sign is in the

zodiac area of tropical Gemini. Do the tropical texts discuss these life

patterns in relation to Gemini? The symbolism belongs to the exalted Moon

[conjoined to the royal Sun] and Venus rather than Mercury. The planets are

the keys to sidereal signs.

 

Note: Of course anyone who lists many meanings for zodiac signs is bound to

hit a few that research will show to be correct.

 

Best,

Therese

[Guest guest]

, Therese Hamilton

<eastwest wrote: Hi Dave, and anyone else interested in sidereal

signs. Dave, going over Bradley's sign notes, I simply don't know

where his ideas came from. (snip)

>

> Note: Of course anyone who lists many meanings for zodiac signs is

bound to hit a few that research will show to be correct. Therese

>

REPLY:

Yes, so often we see books with a chapter of writing about a sign. The

sheer luck of numbers means that someone will find something in a

chapter to remind them of a person they know who has that trait. You

noted this issue with your Aries son -- nothing fit.

 

I like my stuff to always work for me. It doesn't always work, but it

works maybe 95% of the time within the expectations I have. And, I'm

always looking for improvement. Thanks for the quick feed back. Dave

[Guest guest]

At 01:07 AM 12/8/07 -0000, Dave wrote:

>

>I like my stuff to always work for me. It doesn't always work, but it

>works maybe 95% of the time within the expectations I have. And, I'm

>always looking for improvement.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Dave,

 

With signs I figure if we have a valid list for each sign (that is

possibilities based on planetary symbolism or whatever...), if one or

another of the meanings fits 80 percent of the time, that's good enough.

Edgar Cayce said that in approximately 20 percent of cases the astrology

won't fit the individual because the person has used will power to walk in

his own direction. I'll go with that. I'd say anything above 80 percent is

asking for the moon and the stars. (There's a children's story about a

greedy wife who asked for the Moon, and she ended up with nothing, having

gone beyond what was reasonable and could be freely given.)

 

So in my book--if we want to use zodiacal signs--the first step is to

compile a list of plausible expressions of that sign, and then hit the

databanks.

 

I don't agree that we can toss signs altogether--at least not until we have

shown in no uncertain terms that signs don't exist, or at least can't be

used in any practical way.

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

Perhaps we could utilize a few basic components to create a simple

listing:

** The cardinal-fixed-mutable and fire-earth-air-water staples.

** A list of expression factors such as 1) personality presented, 2)

expectations of others, 3) family environment preferences, 4) public

posture (all of these reflecting the chart angles), 5) approach to

showing love for another, etc.

 

It would then be possible to construct a model using the basic CFM and

FEAW components to shape the expression factors. This might provide

an outline for what a sign means. To this we could fold in some kind

of tie-in to a ruling planet -- this may or may not be feasible at the

first pass. IS THIS HOW YOU WOULD CONSTRUCT A " SIGN " MEANINGS SET?

Dave.

[Guest guest]

At 09:44 PM 12/7/07 -0500, Don wrote:

>Therese,

>

>Then can anyone here who can work with AstroDataBank print out a list of

everybody with a Sidereal Sun, Moon, and Asc in each of the " signs " ,

starting with Taurus?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Yes, I've already done that and have the charts in file folders. What

surprised me the most is that specific sign traits or areas didn't always

show up even with Sun/Moon/Asc all in one sign. Of course, the problem with

ADB bios is that they are often extremely limited, so a great deal of

information that would be helpful isn't there.

 

I also printed the tropical Sun-Moon-Ascendant charts, as I remember.

Tomorrow I'll take a look at my files.

 

I won't do much before the New Moon. It's been my experience that anything

attempted in the very late Moon period either has to be changed or doesn't

come to fruition.

 

Best,

Therese

[Guest guest]

At 02:10 AM 12/8/07 -0000, Dave wrote:

>Perhaps we could utilize a few basic components to create a simple

>listing:

>** The cardinal-fixed-mutable and fire-earth-air-water staples.

 

Dave,these are staples in the tropical zodiac, but the concepts have to be

changed in the sidereal. Just as a side note, the study of historical texts

has shown us that even the assignment of fire, earth, air and water to the

trigons wasn't mentioned by Ptolemy. He used the qualities: hot, cold, wet

and dry which have different meanings.

 

However, the trigons are a good starting place, but without the tripical

labels. That's why I have an article on the sidereal trigons on my web site.

 

Cardinal-fixed-mutable may relate only to the seasons and may have no

relevance in the sidereal. In Mesopotamia the trigons were used, but not

cardinal-fixed-mutable, which Ptolemy seems to have invented.

 

>** A list of expression factors such as 1) personality presented, 2)

>expectations of others, 3) family environment preferences, 4) public

>posture (all of these reflecting the chart angles), 5) approach to

>showing love for another, etc.

 

If we're talking about signs here, this is already way too complex. Most of

these areas belong to the planets and/or houses rather than the signs. A

house is not a sign as Deborah Houldiing keeps reminding us.

 

As an interesting note, when Edgar Cayce gave instructions for 'Life Seals'

which usually contained astrological symbols, the planets were in

significant colors and embellished, but usually the instruction for signs

was 'make the sign small and in black.' In other words including extensive

factors such as you listed above most likely don't belong to the signs at

all. They have small importance when compared to planets, but they do

influence the planets to some extent. What we really have to look at is

" How does the Sun express in that sign? Or Mars? Etc.

 

>It would then be possible to construct a model using the basic CFM and

FEAW components to shape the expression factors.

 

I have already made the model for polarity and the trigons on my web site.

For the time being I'm not bothering with CFM because they may not apply in

the sidereal zodiac.

 

I have also already begun with the signs, and have drafts for all of them.

But I haven't put much on my site because I wanted to give support to

concepts with charts from the Rodden Databank. You can see where I'm going

if you check out Aries, Taurus, and Gemini on my web site.

 

Of course, if anyone else is interested in this, everything is open to

study and modification. I figure in this new century astrology is 100

percent an exploratory and learning experience. We have many thousands of

charts at our disposal to study. In comparison the early siderealists had

only a few charts of individuals, and they had to use those few charts to

try to construct sign meanings. We no longer have to guess and hypothesize.

We have the horoscopes of real-life individuals to study.

 

If I have time tomorrow, I'll take out my files on Sun-Moon-Asc in signs

and post some info on this site. Don asked about this also. My first

attempt at a sidereal construct is on the web site below. Long-time members

of this site have seen that URL many times!

 

http://users.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

 

Best,

Therese