libra man

dadsnook2000

PS

I'm going to initiate a thread to explore the issue of how one's chart, if born a day earlier or later or an hour earlier or later, would change or not-fit because Moon aspects or angular placements might change. Looking at what changes, looking and thinking about how we don't reflect those alternative charts, will actually help us to understand the manner in which we do reflect our actual charts. "What if" games are great tools for learning.
*** Then, I might initiate a thread that looks at planetary pair cycles, the prior conjunction point and where it falls in our charts, and the way the chart position points out how we can fulfill our role in the universe by expressing our place in the overall cycle.
*** I am partially on vacation for the next five weeks, but I will be able to stay in contact every few days or so. Dave.
 

Royal Cat

I argree totally with what Dave and Minderwiz have said about "you can't just go by the sun sign alone" - but, I still wanted to add my little comment....
I'm a Scorpio, my husband is a Libra and we're very compatible... it's as if we were truely made for each other. :)

Cat
 

dadsnook2000

A basis for compatibility

Royal Cat; may I ask where each of you have your Sun, Moon, Venus and Mars? Are they forming cross aspects? Sometimes one will have their Moon on the other's Ascendant degree. Dave.
 

Royal Cat

I'm not well versed in astrology so I'm not sure if this is quite what you were asking, but...

We have composite Sun and Venus in the first house and composite Moon in the tenth house.

Cat
 

Minderwiz

One thing that strikes me from this thread is not only the over-emphasis that the Sun sign is given - and this I'm sure is rooted in the Newspaper/Magazine approach to Astrology, The Sun does not rule marriage, or for that matter amarous liaisons. The positions of Venus and Mars might be more relevant and what's going on in the fifth or seventh houses and what their rulers are up to.

Secondly the Newspaper apporach and the psychological approach has turned our view of the signs into 'mini' personalities. Traditionally the main role of the sign was to give information about how strong the planets were - their essential dignity. As Dave has said on many occasions, it is possible to carry out Astrology with little emphasis on the signs at all.

The signs are basically made up of two components.

The first is their elemental nature which in turn is derived from whether they are Hot or Cold or Dry or Moist. So Fire signs are Hot and Dry and Water signs are Cold and Wet.

The second is their mode - whether they are initiating - Cardinal signs, Expanding and establishing - Fixed signs or Adaptable and Willing to change - Mutable signs.

The major aspects reflect these 12 (4 elements x 3 modes). If you consider the four cardinal signs, Aries opposes Libra - both wish to initiate but they have differences in what they want - Aries is Hot and Dry, Libra is Hot and Moist - but there is some 'understanding' there. With the Square aspect, say Aries and Cancer - again both wish to initiate but in totally diverse ways, Aries is Hot and Dry, Cancer Cold and Moist. These two will literally square up to each other in terms of what direction to take.
The same holds for Fixed sign and Mutable sign inter aspects. (though the degree of incompatibility might vary through the nature of the mode).

Trines are aspects between planets of the same element, energy flows easily because they both have the same temperature and the same moisture content.

Sextiles are a little more difficult than trines. They are between the same temperatures, Hot or Dry but there is a difference in moisture. They are also either Cardinal/Mutable or Fixed/Cardinal relationships. They can work together for example in the latter one sign can initiate the other has the ability to see it through but they are clearly not as 'easy' as trines.

There is little psychology implied here but there is a wealth of matter for contemplation - just how do these characteristics blend to produce an overall outcome.
 

dadsnook2000

Basic planetary expression

I find that one's Sun, when aspecting another's angles or Moon, Venus or Mars, activates and enlivens that expression in another. The Moon of one often shows how the expectations and needs of another are focused (my wife's Moon is on my Asc. and she expects me to be sensitive -- Ha.). Mars and Venus, relative to each other and relative to the partner's chart can be very telling -- but aspects to either partner's Sun and Moon are important. Now, there are many other factors to consider, and these are not the only ones but I look for them first to give me a sort of shorthand view of inter-relationships. I don't bother with all the signs, houses and stuff that Minderwiz uses although I am quite familiar with them -- I just have more direct ways of doing my astrology, ways that serve my other astrological work. So, with a little time we should, as a group effort, cover many broad aspects of astrology. That's the great thing about a community like this, it all works so well together. Dave.
 

Minderwiz

Too true Dave!!!!

The ability to bring together a wide range of views and opinions is one of the strengths of this site.

However, I'm sure the signs play some role in your Astrology - even if only to give some placement to the planets and meaning and placement to the Angles. And of course thereby you have four houses LOL.

I think we are both of the opinion that signs are over played in the simple sign compatibility approach. Indeed one point that occurs to me is that the sign can only have meaining (assuming it does have any at all) if there is a planet or significant point in it and that entity aspects another planet or point in another sign. In which case the discussion centres on the planets concerned rather than purely on the sign. Therefore I would fully agree with you that Sun / Moon, Sun / Venus, Mars / Venus will be more significant than simple Sun / Sun. I also think we would both look for Mercury contacts as well - the two people need to be able to communicate easily with each other for the relationship to flourish.
 

dadsnook2000

Mercury

Mercury has a peculiar quality or qualities associated with it in my view. Mercury is first of all "perception without context." It sees, then categorizes, then seeks to understand. Mercury is, however, considered a trickster -- probably because it tends to be divorced from other things like values, like emotions. It takes a while for some people to integrate Mercury well into their chart as Mercury can be influenced in how it works by contact with other planetary energies. With Venus, which is quite common for Mercury, it tries to blend, harmonize and creatively blend form with function and concept. With Mars it tends to over articulate. With Moon it often trys to experience everything in detail and over sensitize one's feelings and reactions.
*** As for Signs, yes, they don't count unless there is planetary energy that seeks expression through their qualities. Again, the signs were first an annual/seasonal reference tool associated with visible star patterns but actually associated with orbital mechanics of the Earth relative to the Sun. Fixed Stars, which used to be heavily used by astrologers, gained a reputation that was superficially related to signs at one time, but became independent as the precession factor came into play. Dave.
 

Minderwiz

A good point about Mercury Dave,

A description of Mercury,

'a great lier, a boaster, prattler, busybody, false, a tale carrier, ...constant in no place or opinion, cheating and theiving everywhere...'.

Mercury the trickster as described by William Lilly. Lilly said that the trickster nature comes out when Mercury is ill placed or dignified. That is it lacks essential dignity or its accidental debility outweighs any dignity it does have.

The idea of Mercury as a trickster survives into the present, Erin Sullivan mentions it in her book on retrograde planets, though she carefully says that retrograde Mercury is not nescessarily a Trickster.

Lilly also makes the point that you do - Mercury's nature changes depending on what planet he is 'joined to'.

The issue of fixed stars is one I haven't really gone into much but clearly they did have a significant role in Astrology, one which is unfortunately rarely seen in modern Astrology. My understanding is that the Stars tended to have either the characteristics of planets or combinations of planets, rather than signs and this was so in ancient times. I believe there are good books by Bernadette Brady and Vivian Robson on fixed stars - the latter being taken as something of a classic work. Have you read either of them?
 

dadsnook2000

Fixed Stars -- a wandering discussion

I haven't read Brady's book of fixed stars, I have read Robinson's BUT that was included in the 200+ astrology books I took to the town dump last fall. Had to make room for other stuff. Some of those books were less than a few months old. I kept about 50. Ebertin-Hoffmann's Fixed Stars and their interpretation is one of them.
*** Relative to Mercury, I have Robert Wilkinson's "A New Look At Mercury Retrograde" which I have scanned but not yet read. I suppose I'll end up with a new 200 books in a while.
*** To not ignore "cycles" I'll mention that I use a shorthand version that I picked up from Rudyhar and Marc Robertson that uses several planetary combination in terms of their "phase" (1/8, 1/4, 3/8, 1/2, 5/8, 3/4, 7/8 and 8/8) from conjunction. This follows the concept laid out in Rudyhar's "Lunation Cycle" which was not invented by him but was popularized by him. I use Sun-Moon, Moon-Saturn, Venus-Mars, Mercury-Jupiter, Jupiter-Saturn, and Saturn-Uranus as quick-pick pairs to evaluate. You can virtually do a full natal reading without doing chart calculations this way. I also use a lot of other unconventional but effective tricks. (Yes, I have Mercury conjunct Venus, natally) Dave.