update for the age of aquarius

[Ravenswing]

well--

i'm not too well versed in all the ins and out of the fine science, but...

since we have/are going to (i'm not sure of the when of this occasion) enter the aquarian age, should the house rulers be updated? ie-- should we start with pisces in the first house?

perhaps a little more than just idle thoughts....

fly well
raven

 

[Minderwiz]

well--

since we have/are going to (i'm not sure of the when of this occasion) enter the aquarian age, should the house rulers be updated? ie-- should we start with pisces in the first house?

I think we've had posts elsewhere about the 'Age of Aquarius' so I'll try to be brief in my answer. Technically it's the situation where the Spring Equinox (Northern Hemisphere) occurs against the backdrop of the constellation of Aquarius. As there is no authoritative answer to the question where one sign begins and the others end, this may be about to begin or has already begun.

I think those Astrologers using the Sidereal Zodiac still reckon that the Spring Equinox is in Pisces (about 5 degrees Pisces). However the sidereal zodiac assumes that all signs occupy an equal segment of the zodiac, this can be and is disputed.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by updating the House Rulers but if you are talking about 'natural houses' (as opposed to natal houses) with the first corresponding to Aries under the tropical zodiac, then when the Age of Aquarius begins we should look at the first as corresponding to Aquarius. As far as I know, even those Astrologers that use the Sidereal Zodiac still have Aries as the natural first house, however if anyone has seen them using Pisces please let me know.