great books to learn astrology

more resources suggested by members here:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15205

Robert Hand's _Horoscope Symbols_ is a jewel. It is written at many levels, beginner (with some background) to advanced. The reviews of this book at amazon.com are spot on. It explores the why's of modern astrology and its very foundations.

I have Rob Hand's book and I would second the above comments, it's excellent. I would point out though, that it is 'early' Hand and he has change some of his views since the book was written. In particular he is now highly involved in the re-discovery of some of the oldest texts in Astrology.

Minderwiz ... Thanks. Do you know if there's any book by Robert Hand that essentially updates _Horoscope Symbols_ to reflect his current views? It doesn't look like it, though. (It's true what you say about this book being early Hand. For instance, in that book, he indicates that he "currently prefers" the Koch house system, while I understand that now he currently prefers Whole Sign houses.)

It's interesting that, on Hand's own website, _Horoscope Symbols_ isn't listed among his "major books to date".

http://www.robhand.com/bio.htm

Rusty Neon, I heard Rob Hand speak at a conference a couple of years ago and he stated that he never uses anything but classical Greek and Arabic techniques now, including the whole-house system and classical rulers. To the best of my knowledge, the only books reflecting this development are the ones he translates and edits by classical authors. I so long for a new text from him, reflecting what he has learned in a concentrated form -- perhaps a several-volume set. In the meantime, I think that the broad principles he discusses in Horoscope Symbols, such as aspect theory, midpoints and dials, etc. would still be relevant -- at least in a general way.

(Edited to add that Hand still inserts the outer planets in charts, but views them as energies and not as sign rulers.)

A new Hand book (groan) would be most welcome - and I really envy Astraea being able to hear him in person. He's been over here to the Astrological Association conferences but unfortunately they insist on holding them during September, when I cannot get time off work.


At the moment the Project Hindsight website is being redeveloped but this is a good source of Rob Hand's work as well as that of others.


Also there are some useful websites recommended by him at:

http://www.robhand.com/urls.htm

One thing struck me when I looked back over the thread - and that is that we all identified 'Astrology' as a whole with Natal Astrology - birth charts. There is a lot more to Astrology than the natal branch but this has become so much the focal point of the modern writer that we tend to forget the other branches.

The Campion book I mentioned is an honourable exception as it has chapters on the other branches. In traditional times you used to start out with horary and when you got proficient at that you moved on to more complex issues like natal charts or mundane matters.

So if you want some books that are not concerned with Natal matters:

'Mundane Astrology' Michael Baigent, Nick Campion, Charles Harvey

Marcia Starck has written many books on Health issues one of the latest is Medical Astrology: Healing for the 21st Century. Also of interest is Casenotes of a Medical Astrologer by Margaret Millard MD

Horary Astrology Rediscovered by Olivia Barclay is one of the seminal books which brought this branch of Astrology back to life, and is interesting for people versed in other forms of divination.

There are other good Horary books by Lee Lehman - The Martial Art of Horary Astrology and by Tony Louis, Horary Astrology Made Simple.


These are just the tip of a very large iceberg of non-natal books and others may wish to add to the list.

I am becoming increasingly fascinated with Horary Astrology and it's probably the branch that might appeal most to Tarot readers, used to dealing with answering questions such as, Will I be happy in my new job?, or where has my cat gone?, rather than simply giving people descriptions of their personality.

I've just received my copy of Horary Astrology Rediscovered by Olivia Barclay. Interestingly, the Forward is written by Rob Hand, some ten years after he wrote Horoscope Symbols.

At this stage in his development he explicitly does not reject the Humanistic Astrology developed by Rudhyar and others. Rather his issue is that much of the new Astrology lacks a clear basis, though offering fresh insights and opportunities. He also seems to prefer non-psychologically based descriptions. His Forward really looks to the need to establish 'symbolic rigour' - that planets range of symbolism is clearly explained and used, rather than planets being taken to mean anything and everything.

It looks like he decided that the traditional approach could lead to that 'symbolic rigour', whilst acknowledging that many traditional sources are simply copies of previous sources which parrot rather than provide explanations and critical appraisal. Heading back to the origins of Astrology seems to be the way in which the original reasoning can be deteremined.

He also acknowledges that Astrology has a mystical element to it and sees the more concrete symbolism encountered in horary as a way of gaining a clearer knowledge of the divine.

Hi, Minderwiz. In the same talk referred to above, Hand said that he thinks the study of "esoteric astrology" as a separate discipline is superfluous, because classical astrology encompasses all levels of being. Hand is now completely immersed in Greek philosophy and neoplatonism. He said that the seven classical planets yield equally good results for investment horaries as for natal questions about deep spiritual concerns.

Thanks Astraea,

In his Forward he says that Astrology is not just a device for dealing with human potential but is a 'language' that gives insignt into all aspects of the workings of the world, a world in which ourselves and our consciousnesses are integral parts.. He says of mysticism 'it is the understanding that beneath the apparent diversity of the universe and despite the seming alienation of all beings from each other and nature, it is all One. He uses the notion that, for example Saturn can signify not just an aspect of the human ego but also anything old, rejected, solid, lacking in glamour, bones, teeth, rocks, etc. to claim that everying bears the signature of Astrological symbolism and therefore eveything is part of the One.

At this stage he does not appear to have rejected the use of the outer planets, or Chiron (which he says is 'obviously of Astrological significance') but he does seem to seriously question modern symbolism as being muddy and ill thought out.

From your account of his lecture he seems to have fully returned to basics. I think that is all very well, and I can see in myself a similar 'voyage' but once the basics are clear in mind then is the time for venturing forth in a reasonably new direction.

That being said our ignorance of early Astrology is (or rather was) so huge that establishing those basics is perhaps the job of a lifetime. Rob Hand has certainly enabled us to learn more about the early Astrologers than most other Astrologers. It's because of him, in that sense, that I'm reading Al-Biruni and Dorotheus, rather than Dane Rudhyar. Again that is not to say Rudhyar is irrelevant but to say that in order to understand the present, we must first understand the past.