Sun sign and Ascendant

Reply

You are right, Minderwiz, about the many factors that could influence ones appearance from an astrological perspective. We are ignoring here the DNA of personal and family nature, the racial component, the location of our living habitat, and so many other factors.

This is why after just a few months into learning about astrology I decided to drop the use of signs for many applications. For the record, this is how I presently use "signs":

** I use them for mundane/political charts. The TROPICAL signs as they relate to government, military, political, agricultural, trade and other world affairs seem to work quite well. The following web site is provided by one of my astrological software providers --- the astrologer who reports on world events and celebrities is very capable and accurate in his assessments. I would recommend that all list participants follow this site which is updated every Tuesday. http://www.halloran.com/astnews.htm

** I'm gravitating to the practice of Joytish astrologers in applying only the basic sense of influence in terms of Cardinal-Fixed-Mutable keywords or for Fire-Earth-Air-Water keywords. While I don't use keywords as such, these designations behind sign meanings (Fire can be assertive, Earth pragmatic or productive, for example) are enough to shade the expression of a planet such that it is useful and dependable. I don't like to make complex sign assertions of a paragraph or two --- they are most often wrong because they say and cover too much.

For this list where there are so many new-to-astrology participants or those who know a reasonable amount of natal chart applications but are still trying to sort out the synthesis end of it all, keeping these views and opinions short and focused is similar to building a wall. We work with one brick at a time. I'd advise against the complex delineation process now unless it was for a well known celebrity with a unique personality that we could all relate to. Like Miss Piggy. I have her actual "birth chart" for when she first appeared on TV thanks to another list member.

If anyone wishes to pursue sign influences for the Ascendant, I can continue that over time. Dave

EDITED to ADD: Even this narrow approach has some twists and turns. Does anyone realize that one sign's appearance qualities seems to borrow attributes from the sign that is five signs ahead of that sign? Virgo-Aquarius, Sag-Taurus, for example. Interesting. We can get into that.

Lilly's physical description of A Merchant

I've attached the chart that Lilly uses as his example for his natal reading. I have left out the outer planets for the moment because Lilly clearly was unaware of them. For the moment I'll simply say that none of them is in the Ascendant, which lies in early Capricorn.

I apologise in advance for the 17th Century English and punctuation but I've tried to leave it as near the original as possible. Lilly uses glyphs for signs and planets, so I've put the relevant sign or planet in brackets.

Form and Stature

'Designated principally from the Sign horoscopating, viz (Capricorn,) and (Saturn) Lord of that sign commixed with the radiations of such Planets as in partile behold either the Ascendant or Lord thereof; the sign and other Significators represent a body somewhat dry, macilent, [excessively thin] erect and straight, if not inclining to fullness by the Orientality of (Saturn), the visage near to an oval, his complexion somewhat brown or dusky because (Saturn) is under the earth; naturally more clear and lovely because (the Sun) and (Venus) especially behold the house, which naturally signifies the Face and Head[both are in Libra opposite Aries, the head and face], the Hair neither black or brown; for though Saturn cause black, yet (Sun) and (Venus) lighter. Planets give lighter Hair being also above the earth: there's properly a reception betweeen (Saturn) and (Venus) whereby (Venus) in a manner comes to have almost sole dominion of the corporature neither permitting dryness or heat to domineer solely but interposing her moisture;[the mutual reception is Saturn in Taurus ruled by Venus and Venus in Libra, Saturn's exaltation] for she as well in manners causes him to be less Saturnine, so in Stature she causes the members to be more neat compacted, decent, active and agile, by means of her being Cazimi[Venus is actually not Cazimi which is within 17 minutes of the Sun, this might be due to his inaccurate tables or difficulties due to the swich from Julian to Gregorian calendars for the modern chart] So that unless (Saturn) Lord of the Ascendant being in the ninth of Taurus, which is a deficient degree do give some blemish on or in the throat (I can find none).

I perceive that the Native takes much after his Parents and the father because (Venus) is Lord of the fourth house, viz of the Father and so prevalent in the scheme, therefore more of the Father than the Mother.

Lilly uses the term 'deficient' for the 9th degree of Taurus as this was an old 9in his time) classification of certain degrees of signs and as the name implies, it's not a good placement. I'm not sure that he believes in that system, given his comment, which shows that he physically checked his description against the actual person.

He doesn't seem to have bothered with Saturn being retrograde at all

For modern Astrologers, Saturn was in partile conjunction with retrograde Pluto (at 9 degrees 12 minutes) and Neptune squares the Ascendant (from Libra 2 degrees 57 minutes) and Uranus sextiles Saturn and Pluto (from at Cancer 10 degrees 14 minutes)

He doesn't make reference it this description to eyes, nose, mouth and lips though he does in his description of Saturn:

eyes little and black
great ears
lowering eye brows
thick lips and nose
a rare or thin beard
a lumpish unpleasant countenance either holding his head forward or stooping
shoulders broad and large and many times crooked
belly somewhat short and lank, thighs spare, lean and not long, his knees and feet indecent, many times shovelling or hitting against another.

I suspect he took the line of not being disparaging about a paying client's appearance LOL.

Minderwiz said:

Lilly and other traditional Astrologers did attibute physical characteristics to signs. For example he says that the shape and description of Taurus is:

'short but of of a full strong and well set stature, a broad forehead, great eyes, big face, large, strong shoulders, great mouth, and thick lips, gross hands, black rugged hair'

Now reading Lilly's work on Natal Astrology it is clear that he did not just take the basic sign physical descriptions in his nativities, he adjusted for a variety of planetary conditions. He takes (in order):

1. Planets in the Ascendant
2. Ascendant sign, (and intercepted sign if any)
3. Ascendant ruler
4. Planet or planets aspecting the Ascendant ruler (in partile degree)
5. Fixed stars rising with the Ascendant
6. Temperament

On this basis the Sun would have a role in the process, if it were in the Ascendant, otherwise it would not have any role to play except to the extent it contributes to Temperament.

Moreover, he recognised that whilst it might work well for natives from England, it didn't work anywhere near as well if you were dealing with a native of Southern Spain or someone from North Africa. In his day, I guess the number of 'non-standard' types an Astrologer met, was miniscule - these days we live in multi-cultural societies and one cannot be anywhere near as certain as Lilly was - assuming he invariably got it right.

Lilly would only have agreed with the modern interpretation of the Ascendant as how others see us in a literal sense and even then he'd say it was far too simple an approach. Of course psychological Astrologers would argue that it's much more than that.

Click to expand...

How funny though - glancing through the posts & threads in this forum because I feel remiss, I really do need to learn this stuff!

I wanted to say - that description matches a particular person I know who is a Taurus to the HILT - absolutely perfecto! He is a Black Irishman, haha!