.....
However, the seasonal considerations joke is not applicable to Taurus with the Pleaides, which appears in the paleolithic Lascaux cave. The 6000 years old or more constellations of Scorpio and Leo would also not as tightly align with Ptolemaic logic.
What happened with the Pleiades is that they were used in phenology and in the ancient celestial calendars. Though faint, they are usually easy to find. It's hard to say how Paleolithic people understood the heavens.
The point being that a celestial calendar is not merely or only one kind of zodiac or calendar vs. another. The Babylonians did both. Did they have a problem? On your sidereal thread, I posted all kinds of information on how critical solar positions were to the henge and barrow builders of the Bronze Age-- and even earlier; and how the solstices, equinoxes, and their midpoints were important holidays in historic times.
You can't just blow off evidence simply because you dislike it.
The evidence of constellations long before seasons around the 2nd century Mediterranean make me highly doubt Ptolemaic rationale.
Hardly. Ancient people were entirely aware of the seasons, although the seasons varied based on location. How could they not have been? The seasons were different in Scandinavia than in the Mediterranean islands, but summer and winter are quite different, regardless.
If it was seasonal, then it would make the astrological sign POWERLESS in the Southern Hemisphere (and arguably in high latitudes and the equator). For those reasons I completely reject the powers of Ptolemy and prefer to ascribe them to the sidereal images, as the Babylonians and early Hellenistic, Persian and Indian astrologers did.
Again, Petosiris, you simply ignore solid information that you don't like.
1. The Hellenistic astrologers essentially had a northern hemisphere project. They doubted that the equator and antipodes (as anciently defined) were habitable by humans. Maybe you shouldn't even try to apply Hellenistic astrology to the southern hemisphere if you wish to retain your loyal adherence to ancient astrology.
2. High latitudes definitely have seasons. Have you ever been to the Arctic? What doesn't work so well at high latitudes are house systems.
3. Actually, there is no evidence that signs have power. Planets have power. They are the actors, like the subject noun in a sentence. Signs work like adjectives or adverbs. (Or is this too modern for you?)
4. Then you have to explain why southern hemisphere astrologers have long used the northern-based zodiac with good results in chart-readings.
5. Equinoxes and solstices occur on the same dates in both hemispheres.
There is not a single coherent reason from a divinatory or naturalistic standpoint to continue to use the tropical zodiac for me astrologically. It might be divinatory in some numerological or lots sense, but it is not astrology rationally. Whenever tropical astrologers today present rationales and arguments, they are always logical fallacies and not indicative of their practice. To some extent, Ptolemy had good reasons for his astrology and cosmology at the time, today astrologers do not.
Oh, sure there are coherent reasons. Nobody says you have to use tropical. It's just a bit much, however, for you to scold people who prefer tropical.
The main reason is that
the tropical system yields good readings, whether traditional western or modern. Or would you simply erase centuries of Muslim, western Medieval and Renaissance traditional astrology? Is it all rubbish, in your opinion, because they used a tropical zodiac?
Divination, for a number of ancient astrologers, was based on establishing the proper relationship with the god (usually Hermes) through preparation and prayer. You may be familiar with
theurgy, whereby the adept astrologer actually thought he became the god. Whereas a mere mortal might err, the god's knowledge would be perfect.
If astrology truly is a form of divination, then it would be seem to be based upon something far more profound than which zodiac you used.
http://www.medievalastrologyguide.com/theurgy.html
http://www.astrozero.co.uk/articles/DefiningtheMoment.pdf
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10004&view=next&sid=f8968e9a9a54d46e498ba469e8bde1b4
On Neo-platonism in astrology:
http://www.astrolom.no/wp-content/uploads/1443_2451P2695439.pdf
Well, if there are deeper truths underpinning astrology, the cosmos, and everything, astrology cannot be so feeble or shallow so as to hinge simply upon one particular method.
If you find sidereal astrology to be profoundly meaningful on a personal level, that's great.