david starling
Well-known member
Re: The Possibility of Tropical Ages
I was already hooked on my identity per tropical astrology and the concept of a bright new future thanks to the Aquarian Age concept in 1972. A group of sideralists, followers of Cyril Fagan's school of modern siderealism, came on a radio show that had what came to be known as a "New Age" format; and, they had a rather vociferous complaint that Fagan himself had voiced and written about that really made sense to me: The Age of Aquarius is SIDEREAL, not tropical. Hey, tropicalists, leave our Age alone!!!
Without going into the astronomy of the matter, I'll just say, they appeared to be absolutely correct. It didn't matter a whit, however, because tropicalists were, and are, operating on what I like to call the "Tinkerbell Theory" of how the Ages work: See, a faery, or perhaps a flock of faeries, are going to fly around the Earth and sprinkle the Aquarian stardust, spilling out from the pitcher held by the figure in the constellation known as Aquarius, all around the world. So, while the Zodiacal constellations aren't used to locate the tropical Signs, they do have extraordinary power and authority when it comes to this one phenomenon.
Well, the Tinkerbell Theory just wasn't working for me, and I had to agree with Mr. Fagan, with one very significant reservation: It's true that the Ages as they were, and still are, being conventionally argued about, are manifestly sidereal. But, [IMO], that in no way precludes the very real possibility that there's ANOTHER way to determine them in a tropical fashion.
So, my question for Modern astrologers of the tropical zodiac is, have you absolutely ruled out this possibility? And, if so, can you explain why?
This is intended as a laidback discussion, not an acrimonious debate. Logical thinking would be appreciated, but isn't a requirement.
No diagrams please, text only. It's not all about the astronomical mechanics, it's about whether, in theory, there should or should not be a tropical version of the Ages.
I was already hooked on my identity per tropical astrology and the concept of a bright new future thanks to the Aquarian Age concept in 1972. A group of sideralists, followers of Cyril Fagan's school of modern siderealism, came on a radio show that had what came to be known as a "New Age" format; and, they had a rather vociferous complaint that Fagan himself had voiced and written about that really made sense to me: The Age of Aquarius is SIDEREAL, not tropical. Hey, tropicalists, leave our Age alone!!!
Without going into the astronomy of the matter, I'll just say, they appeared to be absolutely correct. It didn't matter a whit, however, because tropicalists were, and are, operating on what I like to call the "Tinkerbell Theory" of how the Ages work: See, a faery, or perhaps a flock of faeries, are going to fly around the Earth and sprinkle the Aquarian stardust, spilling out from the pitcher held by the figure in the constellation known as Aquarius, all around the world. So, while the Zodiacal constellations aren't used to locate the tropical Signs, they do have extraordinary power and authority when it comes to this one phenomenon.
Well, the Tinkerbell Theory just wasn't working for me, and I had to agree with Mr. Fagan, with one very significant reservation: It's true that the Ages as they were, and still are, being conventionally argued about, are manifestly sidereal. But, [IMO], that in no way precludes the very real possibility that there's ANOTHER way to determine them in a tropical fashion.
So, my question for Modern astrologers of the tropical zodiac is, have you absolutely ruled out this possibility? And, if so, can you explain why?
This is intended as a laidback discussion, not an acrimonious debate. Logical thinking would be appreciated, but isn't a requirement.
No diagrams please, text only. It's not all about the astronomical mechanics, it's about whether, in theory, there should or should not be a tropical version of the Ages.
Last edited:
