Draconic Chart - Why not count back to 6° Pisces?

13.Fairy

Member
Hey all,

[FONT=&quot]I study astrology for some years now but one question that doesn't give me ease. Why is in the draconic chart counted back to 0° Aries instead of 6° Pisces? I thought that through the precession of the equinox it begins now at 6° Pisces and not 0° Aries. So don't we have to count back to 6° Pisces to get the real draconic chart?[/FONT]
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Hey all,
I study astrology for some years now but one question that doesn't give me ease. Why is in the draconic chart counted back to 0° Aries instead of 6° Pisces? I thought that through the precession of the equinox it begins now at 6° Pisces and not 0° Aries. So don't we have to count back to 6° Pisces to get the real draconic chart?
Hey 13.Fairy - 0° Aries is simply a symbolic degree.

Interestingly, the 'Thema Mundi', an ancient teaching device, illustrates the symbolic ascendant of the chart of 'the beginning of the world' as
0°Cancer.

I have attached a chart of the 'Thema Mundi'
- There's also a discussion that may interest you at http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52099 :smile:
 

Attachments

  • ThemaMundi.jpg
    ThemaMundi.jpg
    73.5 KB · Views: 4
Last edited:

13.Fairy

Member
Hey Jupiterasc,

Thank you for your reply and interest in my question. The 0° Cancer sounds interesting too and makes some sense, because of the mother goddess archetype, since we all come from the womb but it's something else as it's connected with the houses.

Back to the draconic and 6° degrees pisces... I counted back my chart and finally found myself in that, not to mention that all those years I wondered about the signs and always said I'm in real like the chart that I counted now, the draconic to 6° degree pisces. Because my chart was an extremely contradictory case, and I had to be honest with myself and admit that it wasn't me, I researched till I came to that knowledge.

Try it out for yourself just to see and tell me your opinion about your draconic 6° Pisces if you want to. You have to count back the houses too.
 
Last edited:

13.Fairy

Member
What makes you say this? I have never found this to be the case with any chart, unless the astrologer is relying on cookbook definitions for the aspect relationships.

Hey Zarathu,

In my case, I see myself only in that chart.
The draconic chart corresponds to the tropical chart, but the draconic sidereal corresponds to the sidereal chart. If you look at the actual planets positions in the sky, Pluto for example isn't in Capricorn yet, it's in Sagittarius. In my opinion the sidereal is accurate concerning the planets positions in the sky, because the precession of the equinox is real, but the real chart is the sidereal draconic.
I'm absolutely sure and even consider writing a book about it, but am still researching the details of the relation between the sidereal and the sidereal draconic chart and their field of influence.

The reason you or other astrologers don't consider this is exactly the fact that you stick to the cookbook concerning astrology.
I research by myself, am always skeptical, analytical and profound.
I'm not saying you or any other are lesser skilled in astrology, there probably are things you know better than I, and I had the chance that my chart was a more extreme case and I couldn't see myself in it and so I researched because it didn't give me ease.

Thanks for your interest in the topic I opened. I would gladly share my view with you and maybe we could analyse each others charts together and come to some new conclusions if you like to.
 
Last edited:
Top