david starling
Well-known member
Since Carter used the 12 Age-divisions along with a timeline of events, he must have picked an ayanamsa. I looked him up but his choice wasn't listed as far as I could tell.
A Voyage of Discovery: Astrological Ages for the Tropical Zodiac
- Thread starter david starling
- Start date
Opal
Premium Member
I am pretty sure, he went with 0 AD. Actually, I believe he is looking at division of the zodiac ruling each set of 180 years. I will have to check, starting with Aries for the first 180 years. Then Taurus.
I can see how some might think of his writing as a skeptic. His humour, reads through, dry straight humour, I would have enjoyed his company. I don't think that of many writers.
I can see how some might think of his writing as a skeptic. His humour, reads through, dry straight humour, I would have enjoyed his company. I don't think that of many writers.
david starling
Well-known member
Since there was no year 0 in the A.D. dating system, that would be the Year 1 A.D. Robert Hand is using it, with the result being a sidereal Aquarian Age beginning in 2149.
Entirely by coincidence, the astronomically-based, tropical Aquarian Age I've been delineating begins its full-effect, Mean-setting in 2149. (Although its nutational, True-setting, which swings back and forth due to the Moon's orbit, will first ingress tropical Aquarius in the year 2047.)
david starling
Well-known member
Applying Carter's method to the tropical Age of Capricorn with its effective beginning in 406 A.D., that would be the Aries cycle of the Age, from 406->586 A.D. This is when the Dark Ages began in Western Europe following the Fall of the Roman Empire; the establishment of the Catholic, Eastern, Byzantine Empire; a horrendous plague that wiped out over a quarter of the population in the Middle East and Southern Europe; and the birth of Muhammad, who founded the Islamic religion in the early part of the Taurus cycle from 586->766 A.D. The use of 0 as an actual, 10th digit, began in India and Arabia during this Taurus cycle, and ushered in the base-ten, decimal numbering system now in use during this tropical Age of Capricorn, the 10th Sign.
I'll run it along the timeline and look at the correlations.
I'll run it along the timeline and look at the correlations.
leomoon
Well-known member
I wondered about dividing by 13 -
https://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com/2020/04/06/dodekatemoria-in-alfonso-deste-anonymous-horoscope/
leomoon
Well-known member
From Quora:
Standardization of Lahiri ayanamsa by Lahiri commission formed by Indian government led to some uniformity over the last few decades, but still Vedic astrologers use many ayanamsas differing by a few degrees.
Tropical vs Sidereal Zodiacs
Sun's transit through tropical zodiac brings seasons and is associated with observable phenomena. For example, entry of Sun into tropical Aries is always aligned with spring equinox (when daytime and night time are of equal duration) and Sun's entry to tropical Cancer is always aligned with summer solstice (when daytime duration reaches a maximum). Tropical zodiac is tied to seasons and can be reliably fixed based on observable phenomena. Thus, some cultures started using it in astrology.
However, zodiacal signs are supposed to be aligned to nakshatras, which correspond to constellations of stars in the sky. Nakshatra stars are farther than Sign stars so they appear almost fixed while Zodiac Sign stars being nearer , drift with Earth’s wobbling motion .
Now , the sign of Aries should contain Aswini nakshatra, Bharani nakshatra and a part of Krittika nakshatra. If we use the tropical zodiac, signs will slowly shift with time and point to different nakshatras in different in thousand year. This is totally inconsistent with the teachings of Rishis and That led to the concept of Ayanamsh correction in tropical Zodiac to get sidereal Zodiac.
Chitrapaksha Ayanamsha is Most widely Used Ayanansh in Indian Astrology
Chitrapaksha ayanamsa, popularly known as Lahiri ayanamsa, takes Chitra nakshatra as the anchor of the zodiac. As per Surya Siddhanta, the yogatara of Chitra nakshatra is the brightest star in the constellation and its longitude is 180° from the start of Aries and its latitude is 2° south of the ecliptic plane.
Spica (Alpha Virgonis)is the brightest star in the constellation corresponding to Chitra nakshatra. Thus Chitrapaksha ayanamsa fixes the start of Aries such that Spica is always at 0Li0.
There is no philosophical or esoteric justification for why Chitra nakshatra, whose deity is Tvashta, should be the anchor of the zodiac. Possibly, Lahiri commission searched for a bright star near the start of Aries and went for the start of Libra when they found none near the start of Aries.
KP system developed its own Ayanamsha as they go for minute calculations for sub and sub sub lord . Astrologer B V Raman also came with his own Ayanamsha. And there is Pushya Paksha Ayanamsha based on Pushya Nakshatra ( just like Chitra ) .
Finally , it is up to the astrologer to accept one of the Ayanamsha based on accuracy in prediction . Like most astrologers , I also use Chitra Pakshiya Lahiri Ayanamsha and most astrology software have Lahiri Ayanamsha , tropical ( western astrology) system and KP for KP system calculation .
david starling
Well-known member
To use this 180 year cycle for the tropical Ages, which are about 400 years shorter than the sidereal, there won't be a full 12-cycle division per tropical Age. I don't really see that as problem, since it's a full 360 degrees around the entire Zodiac, with 144 such divisions. For example, given the current rate of Equinoctial precession, which can only be averaged as 2160 years per Age, the 180 year cycles beginning at the year 1 A.D. spills over into the sidereal Aquarian Age by 11 years (2149->2160).
david starling
Well-known member
Leomoon, is it correct to say that the concept of a precessional Age of Aquarius is an entirely Western concept, that can be adapted to a Vedic setting of the 12 equal Signs, but isn't really part of Vedic astrology?
leomoon
Well-known member
Leomoon, is it correct to say that the concept of a precessional Age of Aquarius is an entirely Western concept, that can be adapted to a Vedic setting of the 12 equal Signs, but isn't really part of Vedic astrology?
Yep!
That's why I'm leaving the problem in your capable hands.
Yep!
That's why I'm leaving the problem in your capable hands.david starling
Well-known member
Leomoon, is it correct to say that the concept of a precessional Age of Aquarius is an entirely Western concept, that can be adapted to a Vedic setting of the 12 equal Signs, but isn't really part of Vedic astrology?
Yep!
I was able to bypass the Ayanamsas by using an astronomically-located, 30 degree Age Window originally deduced from Western sidereal, but which then coincided with a way to determine the Ages tropically with no need to refer to the sidereal Zodiac.
It doesn't seem right to me for tropical astrologers to mess with the sidereal Zodiac just to "get" the Aquarian Age that their tropical intuition is shouting at them about.
Last edited:
david starling
Well-known member
The Age Window concept is crucial to understanding the astrological Ages, both tropical and sidereal. Since I was first to recognize it as a real and necessary astrological instrument, I have the responsibility for explaining why it HAS to be included in order to make sense of the Ages themselves.
It's "hidden in plain sight", and I credit Cyril Fagan, founder of Modernistic sidereal astrology, for enabling me to recognize it in the first place. He insisted that the Ages everyone was talking about are one Sign ahead of what he saw them manifesting: From his scholarly point of view, what is conventionally labeled the Age of Aries, was to him, an Age of Taurus. Since it's a retrograde sequence through the sidereal Zodiac, that meant the next Age, conventionally labeled the Age of Pisces, was his Age of Aries, and the famous Aquarian Age would be his Age of sidereal Pisces.
He had reasons for it, based on his knowledge of history, and I could understand what he meant, even though I preferred the conventional version. The Age Window makes it possible to look at the sidereal Ages BOTH ways, which is necessary to reconcile his opinion of the Ages with the standard opinions.
So, "hidden in plain sight"--and, another of Fagan's controversial ideas. He completely rejected the tropical Zodiac, and therefore disliked calling the standard Age-indicator (the one that began the Aquarian Age concept), the "First Point of Tropical Aries". Instead, he went to the astronomical label, the "Vernal Equinoctial Point", more simply abbreviated as the "Vernal Point", or VP. He found the VP useful for only one thing, which was for comparing the various settings of the sidereal Signs. His setting, using the star Aldebaran, in the middle area of the constellation Taurus, for centering the constructed, 30 degree Sign by that name, differed from the various settings used in Vedic siderealism. And the VP could be, and is used, to differentiate them.
Modernistic siderealists, although followers of Cyril Fagan for the most part, do consider the VP as an Age-indicator, but they devalue it as such, and the Ages as well. And, with the Fagan-Bradley setting of the sidereal Signs they employ, the VP won't ingress sidereal Aquarius until the year 2376--too far off to even bother with.
As a tropicalist, putting all this together, I used a tropical definition of the First Point of Aries, which is, "a constructed, 30 degree Sign-interval, with its first point located on the VP". That means that there's a LAST point of Aries, thirty degrees BEHIND the leading, first point, as the tropical Zodiac rotates in retrograde fashion through the sidereal Signs.
Now, separate the two Zodiacs, working only with the sidereal version, but KEEP that constructed 30 degree interval. And instead of calling it "tropical Aries" , call it the "Age Window". And now, we have both a first point , sidereal Age of Aries, conventionally speaking, using the leading point of the Age Window, which is on the VP. AND a last point Age of Taurus, as Cyril Fagan saw it, using the trailing point of the Age Window, located 30 degrees behind the VP. This last point is about the traditions that are vital to an Age--that's what he was looking at. And the first point is about the actions of individuals who create the new developments of the Age, in contrast to the traditional background.
To fully understand an astrological Age, both the traditional underpinnings and the new manifestations have to be taken into account. This is the ONLY path to fully grasping the SYNERGY of an Age. The Age Window gives us a clear view of what's involved.
It's "hidden in plain sight", and I credit Cyril Fagan, founder of Modernistic sidereal astrology, for enabling me to recognize it in the first place. He insisted that the Ages everyone was talking about are one Sign ahead of what he saw them manifesting: From his scholarly point of view, what is conventionally labeled the Age of Aries, was to him, an Age of Taurus. Since it's a retrograde sequence through the sidereal Zodiac, that meant the next Age, conventionally labeled the Age of Pisces, was his Age of Aries, and the famous Aquarian Age would be his Age of sidereal Pisces.
He had reasons for it, based on his knowledge of history, and I could understand what he meant, even though I preferred the conventional version. The Age Window makes it possible to look at the sidereal Ages BOTH ways, which is necessary to reconcile his opinion of the Ages with the standard opinions.
So, "hidden in plain sight"--and, another of Fagan's controversial ideas. He completely rejected the tropical Zodiac, and therefore disliked calling the standard Age-indicator (the one that began the Aquarian Age concept), the "First Point of Tropical Aries". Instead, he went to the astronomical label, the "Vernal Equinoctial Point", more simply abbreviated as the "Vernal Point", or VP. He found the VP useful for only one thing, which was for comparing the various settings of the sidereal Signs. His setting, using the star Aldebaran, in the middle area of the constellation Taurus, for centering the constructed, 30 degree Sign by that name, differed from the various settings used in Vedic siderealism. And the VP could be, and is used, to differentiate them.
Modernistic siderealists, although followers of Cyril Fagan for the most part, do consider the VP as an Age-indicator, but they devalue it as such, and the Ages as well. And, with the Fagan-Bradley setting of the sidereal Signs they employ, the VP won't ingress sidereal Aquarius until the year 2376--too far off to even bother with.
As a tropicalist, putting all this together, I used a tropical definition of the First Point of Aries, which is, "a constructed, 30 degree Sign-interval, with its first point located on the VP". That means that there's a LAST point of Aries, thirty degrees BEHIND the leading, first point, as the tropical Zodiac rotates in retrograde fashion through the sidereal Signs.
Now, separate the two Zodiacs, working only with the sidereal version, but KEEP that constructed 30 degree interval. And instead of calling it "tropical Aries" , call it the "Age Window". And now, we have both a first point , sidereal Age of Aries, conventionally speaking, using the leading point of the Age Window, which is on the VP. AND a last point Age of Taurus, as Cyril Fagan saw it, using the trailing point of the Age Window, located 30 degrees behind the VP. This last point is about the traditions that are vital to an Age--that's what he was looking at. And the first point is about the actions of individuals who create the new developments of the Age, in contrast to the traditional background.
To fully understand an astrological Age, both the traditional underpinnings and the new manifestations have to be taken into account. This is the ONLY path to fully grasping the SYNERGY of an Age. The Age Window gives us a clear view of what's involved.
Last edited:
david starling
Well-known member
Although my focus is on the tropical Ages, I began by studying the sidereal, and follow the opinions concerning them. The sidereal Aquarian Age start-dates vary according to the different settings of the sidereal, equal-Sign boundaries.
Tropicalists prefer to see the sidereal Ages as the result of the entire tropical Zodiac rotating through the sidereal Zodiac. But, with the Age Window method, that's not necessary. It's the Age Window alone, which is coincidental with only one tropical Sign, Aries, that matters; so, the other tropical Signs are superfluous regarding the sidereal Aquarian Age, and tropical Aries becomes the Age Window--no tropical terminology included.
The Age Window is a Sign-like interval, transiting retrograde through the sidereal Zodiac. When it converges with a sidereal Sign, only that Sign can be seen in the Window. So, whichever start-date is chosen based on the Sign-placements, that's when the Age Window has reached convergence with the leading point Age-sign, and is about to ingress the next Age-sign.
Tropicalists prefer to see the sidereal Ages as the result of the entire tropical Zodiac rotating through the sidereal Zodiac. But, with the Age Window method, that's not necessary. It's the Age Window alone, which is coincidental with only one tropical Sign, Aries, that matters; so, the other tropical Signs are superfluous regarding the sidereal Aquarian Age, and tropical Aries becomes the Age Window--no tropical terminology included.
The Age Window is a Sign-like interval, transiting retrograde through the sidereal Zodiac. When it converges with a sidereal Sign, only that Sign can be seen in the Window. So, whichever start-date is chosen based on the Sign-placements, that's when the Age Window has reached convergence with the leading point Age-sign, and is about to ingress the next Age-sign.
Opal
Premium Member
Yeah he uses the 1 AD, but, he does mention, in my perceived wry humour that he is not sure he believes it, and is using it because of its supposed meaning through biblical writings.
LeoMoon, I won't be going back to the other thread, I was interested in the threads actual subject matter, not in the religious debate. As I always have maintained, to each his own belief system.
LeoMoon, I won't be going back to the other thread, I was interested in the threads actual subject matter, not in the religious debate. As I always have maintained, to each his own belief system.
Last edited:
david starling
Well-known member
As I mentioned, Robert Hand is listed as using 1 A.D. as well.
Using that as the start-date of the sidereal Age of Pisces, and a standard 2148 year sidereal Age-length, the sidereal Aquarian Age will begin in 2149 A.D.
By an amazing coincidence, using an entirely different method for determining the effective start-date of the TROPICAL Age of Aquarius, which has an Age-length of 1743 years, that also comes out to the year 2149 A.D.
I see it as two, highly respected, tropical astrologers intuitively choosing their own tropical Zodiac's Aquarian Age start-date by using a sidereal ayanamsa that few, if any, actual siderealists are using--pure synchronicity.
Using that as the start-date of the sidereal Age of Pisces, and a standard 2148 year sidereal Age-length, the sidereal Aquarian Age will begin in 2149 A.D.
By an amazing coincidence, using an entirely different method for determining the effective start-date of the TROPICAL Age of Aquarius, which has an Age-length of 1743 years, that also comes out to the year 2149 A.D.
I see it as two, highly respected, tropical astrologers intuitively choosing their own tropical Zodiac's Aquarian Age start-date by using a sidereal ayanamsa that few, if any, actual siderealists are using--pure synchronicity.
david starling
Well-known member
Ray Grasse is another highly respected tropical astrologer whose intuition concerning the Ages is amazingly accurate in the light of these nutational tropical Ages he presumably doesn't know about (yet). But, it doesn't fit the constantly retrograde movement of the sidereal Ages.
In fact, I'm borrowing his intuitive description of an astrological Age as "tidal" in nature, moving in and out before becoming established. It fits the tropical Age nutation perfectly: The Mean-setting is constantly Direct, at the rate of 1+ minute of arc per year. But the True-setting is moving back and forth, transiting into closer and closer proximity to 0 degree tropical Aquarius, then back again. This is due to the Precession of the Perihelion utilized for the tropical Age. It's NOT a characteristic of the Precession of the Equinox used for the sidereal Age. So, intuitive ability comes through again.
This year, the leading point of the tropical Age Window is at 29+ degrees tropical Capricorn, a little more than 30 arc-minutes away from 0 Aquarius. That's as close as it's come yet. Then, it jumps back about a degree into Capricorn until the year 2033, when it will reach within less than half an arc-minute of 0 Aquarius, then back again. Finally, it will actually but temporarily INGRESS tropical Aquarius (at 0 degrees 3 minutes) for the first time in over 20 thousand years.
By 2149, the constantly Direct, Mean-setting, will ingress Aquarius, and that marks the EFFECTIVE beginning of the tropical Age of Aquarius, which is when its Uranian rulership becomes the dominant Age-ruler.
In fact, I'm borrowing his intuitive description of an astrological Age as "tidal" in nature, moving in and out before becoming established. It fits the tropical Age nutation perfectly: The Mean-setting is constantly Direct, at the rate of 1+ minute of arc per year. But the True-setting is moving back and forth, transiting into closer and closer proximity to 0 degree tropical Aquarius, then back again. This is due to the Precession of the Perihelion utilized for the tropical Age. It's NOT a characteristic of the Precession of the Equinox used for the sidereal Age. So, intuitive ability comes through again.
This year, the leading point of the tropical Age Window is at 29+ degrees tropical Capricorn, a little more than 30 arc-minutes away from 0 Aquarius. That's as close as it's come yet. Then, it jumps back about a degree into Capricorn until the year 2033, when it will reach within less than half an arc-minute of 0 Aquarius, then back again. Finally, it will actually but temporarily INGRESS tropical Aquarius (at 0 degrees 3 minutes) for the first time in over 20 thousand years.
By 2149, the constantly Direct, Mean-setting, will ingress Aquarius, and that marks the EFFECTIVE beginning of the tropical Age of Aquarius, which is when its Uranian rulership becomes the dominant Age-ruler.
Last edited:
david starling
Well-known member
leomoon
Well-known member
Good call Hkk . I'm sooo old, that I STILL think of the toy I bought my kids for Christmas back in 1979 or so, a robot, (it was a cassette tape player, lol) my husband keeps reminding me
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-XL
david starling
Well-known member
I'm so old, I remember when the Aquarian Age was going to start right away and solve ALL of our problems! 
Opal
Premium Member
I'm so old, I remember when the Aquarian Age was going to start right away and solve ALL of our problems!
All ages are mixed blessings.