Understanding Leos and Leo energy.

The19thLaw

Well-known member
I feel like there is a lot of garbage out there about the sign which ultimately tries to portray the sign as a ditz party animal or a Lion from Wizard of Oz. Modern Astrology in general is not kind to fire signs and it seems like they get mocked a good bit and shown as being easy to anger but quick to forgive.

With Leo, it seems like the perception is a happy go-lucky jolly attitude but I have noticed with almost all Leos I have known in real life, there is this intense ambition and this formidable drive to go after it.

The other thing which has fascinated me about the sign is how it is one of the fixed signs while also being a fire sign. I don't think Leo is really domiciled anywhere except for maybe the Sun, which is not even a planet.

I'd like to know more about Leos and Leo energy.

It seems like they can be a joy to be around but what if they are angry?

Modern Astrology is hellbent on saying they are crybabies who will throw a temper tantrum but I see instant rage being more of an Aries thing. I feel like Leos are actually more cold and calculated in their temper but I'd love for the experts to say more.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Signs are not domiciled. Planets are domiciled in the signs they rule.

The sun is domiciled in Leo. Unlike in astronomy, the sun and moons are planets in astrology. The sun and moon are also called the luminaries.

Astrology beyond the most basic entry levels looks at the sun as only one of hundreds of integrated data bytes-- albeit a really important data byte.

I don't know what you are reading, but it seems like pop-schlock astrology. One book for beginners that I highly recommend is Robert Hand, Planets in Youth (good for all ages.) Also, Steven Forrest, The Inner Sky.

To understand any sign, look at:

1. Its element and modality (earth, air fire, or water? Cardinal, fixed or mutable?)

2. The planet that rules the sign.

3. The nature of the figure for which the sign was named. (For example, the lion.)

Fire indicates energy and initiative. Fixed signs at their best are loyal and persistent. At their worst, stubborn and inflexible.

The sun symbolizes one's basic vitality. One's identity or sense of self. The sun also symbolizes the monarch, father, or leader.

The lion is a symbol of strength and courage, the "king of the beasts."

What is one's basic energy, vitality or self all about? Ideally, it is about happiness, pride in oneself, and joy.

A "misfiring" Leo converts the happy monarch into the bossy tyrant. With wounded pride, the lion retreats to lick its wounds. The "king" who mentally converts everyone else into "subjects." The "queen" who is stuck on looking glamorous.

Of course, any sun sign person will typically have different planets and the ascendant in other signs. These all interact through aspects and show up in different houses.

Which is why we look at entire horoscopes and not sun-sign columns in magazines or popular news apps.
 

ElenaJ

Well-known member
As Waybread wrote, where in the world are you picking up these ideas?
Leo tends to be basically outgoing, it is also the performer, they always feel like they are on stage. They are generous, good fun. They can be offended and blow up, but it blows over quickly.
Taking over the scene and being the centre of their own world and the attention of others may not please everyone, but they are always fun to be with.
All of this, combined with what Waybread wrote, makes for a more accurate picture than the one you painted.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I feel like there is a lot of garbage out there about the sign which ultimately tries to portray the sign as a ditz party animal or a Lion from Wizard of Oz. Modern Astrology in general is not kind to fire signs and it seems like they get mocked a good bit and shown as being easy to anger but quick to forgive.

With Leo, it seems like the perception is a happy go-lucky jolly attitude but I have noticed with almost all Leos I have known in real life, there is this intense ambition and this formidable drive to go after it.

The other thing which has fascinated me about the sign is how it is one of the fixed signs while also being a fire sign. I don't think Leo is really domiciled anywhere except for maybe the Sun, which is not even a planet.

I'd like to know more about Leos and Leo energy.

It seems like they can be a joy to be around but what if they are angry?

Modern Astrology is hellbent on saying they are crybabies who will throw a temper tantrum but I see instant rage being more of an Aries thing. I feel like Leos are actually more cold and calculated in their temper but I'd love for the experts to say more.
https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=920579#post920579

Introduction to Hellenistic Astrology Part I - Zodiac

The zodiac completes a sidereal cycle in 23.93446 hours.


The image of the Lion is masculine, diurnal, solid, terrestrial, quadrupedal, feral,
royal, vocal, semi-infertile, passionate, fierce, running and of the north wind.
It indicates action, reputation, superiors, harsh matters, quarrels, those who are imperious,
stable, haters of evil, beneficent and inflated with lofty thoughts.

Depending on the placement of the houseruler, men born under the influence of Leo
are large, distinguished, independent, reliable, just, despising flattery, haughty,
irascible, daring, with fine face, smooth, small ears because the Lion rarely listens to the talk of others,
higher upper part of the body, thin-set teeth, rugged, flushy and bright.
The front is robust, but the back is weaker.
Domicile of the Sun, it controls the sides, the circulatory system, the nervous system and the eyesight,
especially the right eye, and it indicates blindness on account of the Coma Star Cluster.
It is like-empowered with Aries and like-ascending with Virgo,
tall in the Northern Hemisphere and short in the Southern Hemisphere.
It is summery, hot and dry in the north, and wintry, cold and moist in the south.
Leo commands Libra in the north and obeys it in the south.
Leo controls Italy, Gaul, Apulia, Phoenicia, Chaldaea and Orchenia. T
he head and Regulus are rising up to the 6th degree, the front up to the 11th, the belly up to the 18th,
the back up to the 24th, and the tail up to the 30th.

The first 6° belong to Jupiter - elevation, friendships with superiors
The next 5° belong to Venus - good fortune, friendships with superiors
The next 7° belong to Saturn - magnitude, of many years, infertile
The next 6° belong to Mercury - intelligent, some are winners of games
The final 6° belong to Mars - misfortune, dangers, passionate

Head - Saturn and moderately Mars
Throat - Saturn and moderately Mercury
Regulus - Jupiter and Mars
Hip and Denebola - Saturn and Venus
Thighs - Venus and moderately Mercury


Such, then, are the observations of the effects of the stars
as made by our predecessors.

Bibliography:
Ludwich, A. (Ed.). (1877). Maximi et Ammonis carminum De actionum auspiciis reliquiae:
accedunt Anecdota astrologica. BG Teubneri.
Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/maximietammonisc00ludw/page/n3
Manilius, & Goold, G. P. (1985). Astronomica. BG Teubner.
Robbins, F. E. (1940). Ptolemy: Tetrabiblos.
William Heinmann, London.
Retrieved from http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ptolemy/Tetrabiblos/home.html
Schmidt, R. The Astrological Record of the Early Greek Sages.
Project Hindsight.
Valens, V. Anthologia. Translated by Mark Riley.
Retrieved from https://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius%20Valens%20entire.pdf
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I feel like there is a lot of garbage out there about the sign
I don't think Leo is really domiciled anywhere
except for maybe the Sun,
which is not even a planet.
Leo IS a DOMICILE :smile:






U9Vm2qU.jpg
 

Cary2

Banned
I feel like there is a lot of garbage out there about the sign which ultimately tries to portray the sign as a ditz party animal or a Lion from Wizard of Oz. Modern Astrology in general is not kind to fire signs and it seems like they get mocked a good bit and shown as being easy to anger but quick to forgive.

With Leo, it seems like the perception is a happy go-lucky jolly attitude but I have noticed with almost all Leos I have known in real life, there is this intense ambition and this formidable drive to go after it.

The other thing which has fascinated me about the sign is how it is one of the fixed signs while also being a fire sign. I don't think Leo is really domiciled anywhere except for maybe the Sun, which is not even a planet.

I'd like to know more about Leos and Leo energy.

It seems like they can be a joy to be around but what if they are angry?

Modern Astrology is hellbent on saying they are crybabies who will throw a temper tantrum but I see instant rage being more of an Aries thing. I feel like Leos are actually more cold and calculated in their temper but I'd love for the experts to say more.

Sun-sign astrology has tantalized neophytes with bite-sized tidbits that loosely resemble valid astrology, but it fosters stubborn misconceptions that snag a student in their growth.

It is one thing to recognize that Leo is one of 12 signs, but it is a very, very different thing to assume you are "a Leo" because you were born at a certain time of year without regard to which year or what time of day. When you hear others speak of Leos as people who do such-and-such and speak of Virgos are people who do this-and-that, you are in the presence of a Sun-sign astrologer who is operating on the feeble notion that there are only twelve types of people in the world. What difference does it make if these people should contradict themselves?

Your confusion is that you come from the Sun-sign world, but you have entered a zone about valid astrology, and you don't understand the terms which seem to contradict what you know.

The most ancient of ancients noted that most of the stars had a fixed relation to each other even though the dome of the sky itself shifted with time. But they also noticed the ecliptic, that slice of the sky where the Sun, Moon, and the planets traveled independently of the fixed stars. "Planet" means traveler, those bodies which traveled on the ecliptic, Sun, Moon, Mercury, etc.

The sign your Sun was in at birth is not the most important thing about you. You have been misguided by the gross oversimplification of astrology known as Sun Sign Astrology, or pop astrology. That is the source of your confusion.
 
Last edited:

Cary2

Banned
In serious, valid astrology, there are very few examples of a pure type, a person who personifies the characteristics suggested by one of the 12 signs. A person with Sun in Sagittarius may have a group of several factors clustered together in Scorpio. He will not seem light and enthusiastic like the Sagittarius characteristics. He will be more intense and secretive. Why should we call him a Sagittarius? We should not.

There are people who have a large cluster of factors grouped together in one sign, and we can look to them as nearly a pure type. They have much to teach us about the emphasized sign even if they have Sun in a different sign entirely.

Charles Manson had four factors in Scorpio including Sun. He is one of the most evil people in history.

Marie Curie had four factors in Scorpio including Sun. She doggedly pursued a very dangerous course, the discovery of radium and radioactivity, an activity that eventually killed her.
 

Attachments

  • Charles-mansonbookingphoto.jpg
    Charles-mansonbookingphoto.jpg
    8.3 KB · Views: 43
  • 270px-Mariecurie.jpg
    270px-Mariecurie.jpg
    16.1 KB · Views: 44

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
In serious, valid astrology, there are very few examples of a pure type, a person who personifies the characteristics suggested by one of the 12 signs. A person with Sun in Sagittarius may have a group of several factors clustered together in Scorpio. He will not seem light and enthusiastic like the Sagittarius characteristics. He will be more intense and secretive. Why should we call him a Sagittarius? We should not.

There are people who have a large cluster of factors grouped together in one sign, and we can look to them as nearly a pure type. They have much to teach us about the emphasized sign even if they have Sun in a different sign entirely.

Charles Manson had four factors in Scorpio including Sun. He is one of the most evil people in history.

Marie Curie had four factors in Scorpio including Sun. She doggedly pursued a very dangerous course, the discovery of radium and radioactivity, an activity that eventually killed her.
OP of this thread wishes to focus on "Understanding Leos and Leo energy :smile:
 

Cary2

Banned
OP of this thread wishes to focus on "Understanding Leos and Leo energy :smile:

He has demonstrated that his confusion is due to popular misconceptions about astrology. I showed him an illuminating example about signs, Leo is a sign, that addresses his misconception about signs.

[Deleted attacking comments. - Moderator]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cary2

Banned
I feel like there is a lot of garbage out there about the sign which ultimately tries to portray the sign as a ditz party animal or a Lion from Wizard of Oz. Modern Astrology in general is not kind to fire signs and it seems like they get mocked a good bit and shown as being easy to anger but quick to forgive.

With Leo, it seems like the perception is a happy go-lucky jolly attitude but I have noticed with almost all Leos I have known in real life, there is this intense ambition and this formidable drive to go after it.

The other thing which has fascinated me about the sign is how it is one of the fixed signs while also being a fire sign. I don't think Leo is really domiciled anywhere except for maybe the Sun, which is not even a planet.

I'd like to know more about Leos and Leo energy.

It seems like they can be a joy to be around but what if they are angry?

Modern Astrology is hellbent on saying they are crybabies who will throw a temper tantrum but I see instant rage being more of an Aries thing. I feel like Leos are actually more cold and calculated in their temper but I'd love for the experts to say more.

Following the trend of looking for a good substitute for the pure type, I offer someone who has five factors in Leo including Sun, Mick Jagger. He is not an absolutely pure type of Leo, but he is much closer than average. He tends to put on airs. He is frequently imperious. He is connected with entertainment, a Leo domain. He has star quality (a solar quality) and he is the leader of a rock band. He is a Solar type, a rock star. He is creative; the team of Jagger/Richards has been one of the most profitable of all songwriting teams. He likes to be the center of attention, and he frequently is. Many people have accused him of trying to extend his adolescence, a Leo domain. He is noted for his paramours, his kittens and playthings, a Leo factor.
 
Last edited:

Cary2

Banned
Robert Graves has Sun, Moon, and Mars in Leo with Sun on Asc and a Sun/Mercury/Jupiter (literary scholar) stellium . He wrote 140 books, but he is known as perhaps the greatest love poet of all time (Venus-square-Neptune).

His flamboyance and creativity are classically Leo. His flirtation with love is also Leonine. He's much closer to the pure type because of three factors in the sign, two of which are Sun and Moon. A "double Leo", if you will.

Excuse me, Graves is TRIPLE LEO with four factors in the sign. He has Sun, Moon, and Asc in Leo.
 

Attachments

  • thumb003638.jpg
    thumb003638.jpg
    8.3 KB · Views: 37
Last edited:
Leo here (sun, mercury, venus, and mars). All of those planets are in my 8th house and in the last 6 degrees. The "Introduction to Hellenistic Astrology Part I - Zodiac" in JUPITERASC's post fits. I'm ruled by Mars and I've had a couple of near-death experiences and accidents (also very, very passionate). It's hard to separate what comes from the 8th house influence and what comes from Leo but in general, I'm very creative and love to perform. Offstage though, I'm very shy and quiet and not into parties at all. When I was younger, I did throw temper tantrums but now I will definitely just walk away or even talk it out. It was never an "instant rage" but more like a build up to an explosion.

I haven't met too many other Leos but the ones I have have had a quiet dignity about them. We all seem to be creative at the core and we've all been very ambitious. I definitely think house placement will make a huge difference, though.
 

ElenaJ

Well-known member
Not sure what your point is, but apparently most people who know him agree that whether or not they are politically aligned with him, Bill Clinton is very likeable.
Same said about Trump.
 

The19thLaw

Well-known member
As Waybread wrote, where in the world are you picking up these ideas?
Leo tends to be basically outgoing, it is also the performer, they always feel like they are on stage. They are generous, good fun. They can be offended and blow up, but it blows over quickly.
Taking over the scene and being the centre of their own world and the attention of others may not please everyone, but they are always fun to be with.
All of this, combined with what Waybread wrote, makes for a more accurate picture than the one you painted.

Disagree, it makes no sense, I believe with all fixed signs if it gets to a point of anger it is not something to blow over quickly. You have a sign that is ruled by PRIDE, have you ever stepped on the toes of a truly prideful person or a very prideful group of people?

Do that and tell me how it goes. Let's let the real astrologers here give their input, your post is more in line with the nonsense found on Buzzfeed.
 

The19thLaw

Well-known member
Similar to the case of Bill Clinton who got away with quite a lot, I find that Leos are often in line with a few things.

1. Prestige, that has to be a Taurus as well as a Leo thing. The ones I have known are picky about who they have as friends and don't just loosely go around wanting to be liked by everyone, they want to be liked by the right kinds of people. Snobs and shallow tbh.

2. They don't get their hands dirty, unlike an Aries who will straight up punch you in the face or a Scorpio who would scheme and take credit for his awesome revenge plan, a Leo would have others do it but still have a hand in it. That way when things go south, they can simply pin the blame on someone else.

3. They are tactical and strategic, almost like someone trying to subtlety work their way to the throne. Do not seem to be brash and forward like an Aries but not carefree like a Sag either.

4. Never forgive never forget type of sign. I think Leos are worse than Scorpios when it comes to holding grudges due to how much is tied up to their pride.
 

ElenaJ

Well-known member
My "Buzzfeed" comments are based on my knowledge of astrology, but also experience.
My mother was a Leo, my husband is a Leo, my ascendent is a Leo. I'm constantly surrounded by Leo people.
Sometimes that counts, too.
Sorry my comments didn't help you gain any insights.
 

waybread

Well-known member
ElenaJ is a really good horary astrologer. She doesn't deserve insults from anyone, let alone from someone uninformed about astrology's complexity.

Cary2, thanks for your research!

The trouble is, the19thlaw, that you're not going to get much about human nature or astrology if you persist in reducing astrology and human beings to their sun-signs.

Horoscopic astrology has been in practice for 2000 years. Only relatively recently and due to a popular appetite for schlock psychology, did it focus on the sun-sign and only the sun-sign. Linda Goodman's 1968 book Sun-Signs , although funny and often insightful, did serious astrology a major disservice, because she reinforced the mistaken idea that people neatly divide into sun signs.

Astrologically, Mars represents anger, not the sun. Two signs are ruled by Mars: Aries and Scorpio (traditional ruler.) As a house cusp ruler or sign ruler, Mars can rule a lot of other planets. So we don't want to confuse different planetary signals.

It makes a difference whether a sun Leo has Mars in Scorpio or in Pisces.

The house makes a big difference. People with their sun in the 8th or 12th house tend to be very private, other chart factors being equal.

My sister is a sun Leo. I don't have her birth time, so I can't place its house, but note that she is not out-there-flamboyant, but her home is modest yet beautifully decorated. She is a gourmet cook, and appreciates doing small things with flair. I would describe her as a true homebody, with her home as her castle. As a homebody, she's hardly a snob, looking out for connections with more influential people! She has a few close long-term friends (loyalty being a Leo trait) and family members.

This is very different from solar Leos like Bill Clinton-- or Barack Obama-- sun Leos who led highly public lives.

A wounded Lion is more apt to (metaphorically) retreat to his den and lick his wounds. For this reasons, Leos surprisingly can benefit from a lot of down time to recharge.

I might suggest you drop the sardonic "19th law" business for a while. I think it's getting in the way of your understanding astrology above a newspaper column level; and it's not doing much for your insights into people.
 

waybread

Well-known member
the19thlaw, I'm going to put it to you that, as a young person, you found it very difficult to gain insights into people and what makes them behave as they do. You didn't have the ability to empathize with or intuit how they feel, or to listen to what they said about themselves-- directly or indirectly. This made social relations very confusing, even overwhelming.

Greene's so-called "48 laws of power" cannot possibly be laws, but it's a catchy title. These laws (falsely) appeared to give you insights into social interactions that you couldn't get on your own; and with those insights, some hope for your own personal power.

Ditto with astrology. If you could type-cast people by sun-sign, then you could get a better handle on their behaviour; and thus a competitive edge.

Fundamentally your efforts are about control. If you cannot navigate the world as it is, with all of its messiness and contradictions, acquiring a mental template confers at least some hope of making sense of it all, and of shaping it more to your liking.

Unfortunately, astrology doesn't offer much of a template with its hundreds of data bytes per chart. Each individual and event is unique. We can trace some general themes, but astrology shows us that human beings are not unified internally coherent entities. We operate more like committees or extended families, in which each of the planets and other key points has a distinctive role to play.

I think this is why you doggedly stick to sun-sign astrology, even after learning that it is too simplistic. It offers a rubric.

Greene's 48 laws, are unrelievedly sardonic. The world-- let alone your working environment--would be unbearably horrible if everyone tried to use them in daily life.

There is no joy-of-life, love, affection, spirit of fun, or generosity in these laws. I would suggest, you can follow these rules-- or you can understand Leo. You're not able to do both, because Leo is the antithesis of what these cynical rules represent.

The true Monarch doesn't have to be manipulate, spiteful, or vindictive. He can afford to be magnanimous and optimistic.

Here is Greene's 19th law: "Know who you’re dealing with, do not offend the wrong person."

You can use astrology to know whom you're dealing with, but not at the sun-sign level.
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
Alimal, the19thlaw has been on multiple other threads, often with the same type of OP. This is not his-- or our-- first exchange.

You can read about Robert Greene's "48 laws of power" here: https://www.nateliason.com/notes/48-laws-power-robert-greene

Nobody is arguing that sun signs are unimportant. Merely that if they are the total of one's astrological focus, they are woefully incomplete. Astrology is a complex subject and we do astrology-- as well as anyone whom we try to suss out astrologically-- a big disservice by taking a simplistic approach to astrology.

My desktop reference on planet, sign, and house rulerships is Rex E. Bills, The Rulership Book. Highly recommended. He gives one standard ruler for anger: Mars. And this is widespread. Mars (Ares) was the Roman god of war. His character was warlike.

Taurus is a traditional feminine sign, along with the other earth signs. Taurus is ruled by Venus, not Mars. Venus also rules affection, romantic love, and peace.

It's OK to invent your own astrology, or follow another astrologer who takes a more individualistic view. However, my approach is more conservative. Not sure what you are thinking of in your final paragraph: possibly Rudhyar or Rupterti on planetary cycles?

Insights into someone's motives are not the same as a personal attack. There are no personal attacks in my posts to the19thlaw, only straight talk.

I recognize that "straight talk" to one person can seem too intrusive to someone else. Astrology tells us as much.
 
Top