How many sun-moon squares are there for each sun sign?

I am just realizing that there are at least 4 sun-moon squares for each sun sign. Is this right? For example: for water signs suns, i would say that there are 8 squares involving the 8 fire and air signs...Thanks everybody!!

Actually, there are two squares possible per sun, and you have to go by degrees, not just the entire 30-degree sign itself. If you reverse the signs of your sun and moon, however, that would give you your four.

Each sun-moon pair could possibly also have a conjunction and opposition (180 degrees) within the same or "compatible" element. Then if the sun or moon is near the beginning or end of a sign, you could have a square that is out-of-sign. For example, 2 degrees Sagittarius and 28 degrees Taurus would be 94 degrees apart, and thus counted as in-orb by most modern astrologers. Traditional astrologers generally only count aspects that are "in sign."

Of course many planets are in signs of the same modality (cardinal, fixed, mutable) but the orbs are too great for them to make a square.

Click on Barack Obama's thumbnail chart, and see what you make of his aspects.

In the chart i see the sun in Leo and the Moon in Gemini. Each one is somewhat turned to the left (the Gemini moon almost at the end of Gemini orb). Is this right?

Roughly, i would say that there are about some 70 degrees between them. So, this seems to be rather enough to take them as in square (i have just got the reason why, as you said, there can only be 2 squares...looking at a particular chart...!).

The other point you mention (complementary?) as to the aspects that the sun-moon pair could have, is beyond my understanding capabilities at the moment...

In particular, i would ask for instance if Scorpio sun Aquarius moon are in square or, to put it more accutely, if they are likely to...Idem. for Pisces sun Aries moon (this one now seems not to be so, but anyway). Thank you a lot!!

ps: looking again at the chart it seems clear that, taking the square to be some around a 90 degree aspect, then it should be pretty sine qua non to priorly take the degree at which the sun (for instance) is defined in a particular chart...this might "soften" my, so far "absolute" approach as to aspects (generally).

I posted Obama's chart quickly, simply because he is such a well-known figure. You are correct that his sun and moon are roughly 70 degrees apart. This is how aspects or the lack of aspects between planets are determined. We find out how many degrees separate two planets, and then:

0 degrees is a conjunction (two planets are "twinned")
60 degrees is a sextile (usually favourable)
90 degrees is a square (usually stressful)
120 degrees is a trine (usually favourable)
180 degrees is an opposition (usually stressful)

However, aspects usually are not exact. The extra room astrologers will give an aspect before ignoring it is generally:

up to 10 degrees on either side for the sun and moon
up to 7 degrees on either side for the other planets

However, some astrologers prefer wider orbs, and some prefer narrow or "tight" orbs.

Signs, houses, and house angles are not heavenly bodies, so they cast no orb. Once upon a time, signs were named for constellations, but the overlap was always only approximate, and it no longer pertains in western astrology due to the precession of the equinoxes.

Some astrologers work with so-called minor aspects, because basically you can divide the 360-degree horoscope any way you want. For example, if you divide it by 5 you get an aspect called the quintile, of 72 degrees. Barack Obama nearly has a sun quintile moon aspect: some astrologers would allow it, given that both the sun and moon are involved; others would not.

But.... we do see that Obama's sun squares Neptune, with 94 degrees of separation: a square with a 4-degree orb. His moon in Gemini squares Pluto in Virgo. (Astrodienst apparently allows a 12-degree orb for the moon, showing his moon also squaring Uranus. But note that this square is out-of-sign.)

Planets that are squared in-sign would go by the following categories:

cardinal: Aries, Cancer, Libra, Capricorn
fixed: Taurus, Leo, Scorpio, Aquarius
mutable: Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius, Pisces

Some squares are more difficult for the individual than others. The moon and Venus are apt to be gentler. However, the closer the orb, the more the individual is likely to feel it.

Thanks a lot!! i have a couple of questions to make...

What about conjunctions, regarding the "favourable/unfavourable" issue: i have my moon conjunct neptune, for instance...

Regarding the tight/narrow subject, i recall the Euclidean/Non-Euclidean (and afterwards, Newtonian/Einstenian) dichotomy in mathematics first, and in physics later (or the other way round!). A 90 degree angle (perpendicularlity) is said to mean (represent) independent events (so to speak...borrowing a little and rather roughly from probalility theory); but it suffices to add another dimension to the picture (Einstein theory) in order to lessen the strenght at works of the likely clash that arises as a consequence of the independent objects...and so on...(this is not but a digression, obviously, and a sample of my sagittarian rising "eagerness for knowledge" vein...)

I still don´t get the "In-sign/out-of-sign" point of view. For instance, you speak of an out-of-sign square between Obama´s moon and uranus. Uranus is in Leo, Moon in Gemini...i counted some 80 degrees between them...so where is the out-of-sign fact coming from here?

Are you meaning that an in-sign square should be anyone between two signs sharing one of the categories given above? If so...it wouldn´t seem to be an ungrounded rule...so to speak...thanks!!

I suppose you could say it is an "ungrounded rule" but since it dates back to Hellenistic times it has become part of astrology's "deposit of faith" for the past 2000 or so years.

What can i say...? There is a song of Laurie Anderson (she uses very much to make a sort of philosophical talks within her songs...) where she say something like "...and they spoke about a time when sharks come out of the water and...". (It might be Sharkeys Day...or something like that...). You have also Carl G. Jung point of view (probably borrowed from someone else´s...in its turn...) about Time as some journey towards the Past...and so on...What do i mean? I can´t help but take whatever knowledge as valuable quite regardless of the point in time to which it might be traced back...Just another point of view

Fair enough... however, just to draw a finer point on this:

Each sign has a quality or modality: cardinal, fixed, or mutable. Each sign also has an element, according to the ancient Greek thinking: earth, air, fir or water.

These are also called quadruplicites and triplicities.

So we get:

Aries: cardinal fire
Taurus: fixed earth
Gemini: mutable air
Cancer: cardinal water
Leo: fixed fire
Virgo: mutable earth
Libra: cardinal air
Scorpio: fixed water
Sagittarius: mutable fire
Capricorn: cardinal earth
Aquarius: fixed air
Pisces: mutable water.

Signs in the same element tend to form trines if the degrees are in-orb.

Then the earth and water signs are "feminine", while the air and fire signs are "masculine."

So planets in the same gender can also form sextiles (for example, Pisces and Capricorn) if they are in-orb. These tend to be the easier ones for people to handle.

However, the exception is the opposition, because even though the elements might be compatible, the qualities might not. For example, a planet in Leo (fixed fire) opposite one in Aquarius (fixed air) might cause trouble for the person, as fixed signs tend to be stubborn and inflexible.

There is a logic to all this-- if you think like an ancient Greek.

Thank you!! Your comments are insightful to my little knowledge on the subject and, as i have previously stated, brought in very much light!!