Tarot and Astrology

Senecar

Well-known member
This thread has been created for follow up of the Tarot Discussion originally emanated from the Help and Suggestion Forum.

No: the book I was referring to is hardback and contains over 500 pages of text.

PS: the famous American astrologer Crowley was talking about in the little book you have, was Evangeline Adams (see eg her entry @ wikipedia)

I see. I did not know about the book then. Never knew Crowley had been into Astrology in serious way.

Didn't know about Evangeline Adams either.
 
Last edited:

Senecar

Well-known member
I just Googled the book "The General Principle of Astrology" by Crowley, and it seems getting great reviews.

It must be a heavy tome of 640 pages. Scanned through some pages of the book online, and yes, it looks very interesting and a great book by Crowley, although kinda pricey.

But these classic books of Crowley seem go up the price all the time. I bought the Book4 Magick, and Visions and Voices in Hardback about 3 year ago, and they are far more expensive than when I got them.
 
Last edited:

dr. farr

Well-known member
Crowley was a decided Modernist in his astrological approach, and used the tropical zodiac (zodiac of signs) as his astrological basis. His was a different approach to that taken by the GD, which was much more traditionalist in its astrological methodology; another point is that GD head S.L.M. Mathers (along with some of his GD associates) used the SIDEREAL zodiac (zodiac of constellations) as his astrological basis.
 

Zaphod

Well-known member
I have "The General Principles of Astrology." It's a re-edit and repackaging (apparently with additional material) of Evangeline Adams' two books, "Astrology, Your Place in the Sun," and "Astrology, Your Place Under the Stars," which - according to the head of the O.T.O, who did the editing - were largely ghost-written by Crowley. The style is certainly AC's, there seems little doubt about that, which made it enjoyable to read. Was it worth the $60 I paid for it? Probably not, since the "hard-cover" I thought I was getting turned out to be some kind of heavy-duty cardboard with glossy printing on it.
 

Senecar

Well-known member
Crowley was a decided Modernist in his astrological approach, and used the tropical zodiac (zodiac of signs) as his astrological basis. His was a different approach to that taken by the GD, which was much more traditionalist in its astrological methodology; another point is that GD head S.L.M. Mathers (along with some of his GD associates) used the SIDEREAL zodiac (zodiac of constellations) as his astrological basis.

What I recall from my casual readings is, that Crowley studied and wrote about Astrology ardently at one point (maybe when he was visiting America), then dropped it to concentrate on Magick - but I am not sure if this story is correct.

I have not seen much Astrological writings in other parts of his books - such as Book of Thoth or other Magickal writings, although he mentions "stars" sometimes.

Certainly, it would have been great, had he given more detailed Astrological descriptions on each cards in his Book of Thoth.

So I used to think he was not big in astrology, but now I am thinking of reading his astrological books in the future.
 
Last edited:

Senecar

Well-known member
I have "The General Principles of Astrology." It's a re-edit and repackaging (apparently with additional material) of Evangeline Adams' two books, "Astrology, Your Place in the Sun," and "Astrology, Your Place Under the Stars," which - according to the head of the O.T.O, who did the editing - were largely ghost-written by Crowley. The style is certainly AC's, there seems little doubt about that, which made it enjoyable to read. Was it worth the $60 I paid for it? Probably not, since the "hard-cover" I thought I was getting turned out to be some kind of heavy-duty cardboard with glossy printing on it.

Strange that other hb books of Crowley I own are very good quality, e.g. Vision and Voices, Magick: Book4, Liber ABA - these two books are well bound heavy and good printing.

GEMS from the EQUINOX is a hardback with a bit of flimsy cardboard covers, but then it is almost 1200 pages book - good value for money.

The price of "The General Principle of Astrology" now in Amazon seems around $100.
So you reckon the book is not worth that money? :)
 
Last edited:

Zaphod

Well-known member
Strange that other hb books of Crowley I own are very good quality, e.g. Vision and Voices, Magick: Book4, Liber ABA - these two books are well bound heavy and good printing.

GEMS from the EQUINOX is a hardback with a bit of flimsy cardboard covers, but then it is almost 1200 pages book - good value for money.

The price of "The General Principle of Astrology" now in Amazon seems around $100.
So you reckon the book is not worth that money? :)

I have many of Crowley's hard-bound books and I recall that Weiser once put out a rather slim volume on his astrological ideas (apparently included here) that I didn't have and wanted, so in that sense it was worth it. I don't recall finding much that was revelatory in it from an astrological standpoint, although it's certainly sound. The binding is very similar to Gems from the Equinox, although seemingly a bit less sturdy.
 

Senecar

Well-known member
I have many of Crowley's hard-bound books and I recall that Weiser once put out a rather slim volume on his astrological ideas (apparently included here) that I didn't have and wanted, so in that sense it was worth it. I don't recall finding much that was revelatory in it from an astrological standpoint, although it's certainly sound. The binding is very similar to Gems from the Equinox, although seemingly a bit less sturdy.

My small paperback copy (dog eared, pages browned to cardboard colour) of "The Complete Astrological Writings" of Crowley only talks about Aspects of planets, and then straight Chapter 2 is about Neptune, then Chapter 3, Uranus.

So the big hb tome deals with all the planets?

He doesn't seem to talk about Pluto either - it would have been well before the discovery of Pluto, when the book was written?

His description on Neptune and Uranus of each house is quite interesting though.
 

Zaphod

Well-known member
There are no Pluto delineations in the book. The only mentions of it are in the introductory footnotes by Hymanaeus Beta, Frater Superior of the O.T.O, and it shows up in some of the charts and tables. The book is predominantly planet/sign/house material demonstrably written by Crowley; all of Adam's more Theosophical ideas were removed from this edition. One valuable feature is the commentary provided by the editor, which puts Crowley's involvement with Adams in context. There is also a large population of historical charts.
 

Senecar

Well-known member
Does he explain why "tzaddi is not the star" in the book? Or would it be a Tarot topic?
Book of Thoth has the brief explanation from my memory.

Apart from that - his Astrological Association to Thoth Tarot is same as the GD's? He might have switched the number sequence of Strength and Justice as well.
 
Last edited:

Zaphod

Well-known member
Does he explain why "tzaddi is not the star" in the book? Or would it be a Tarot topic?
Book of Thoth has the brief explanation from my memory.

Apart from that - his Astrological Association to Thoth Tarot is same as the GD's? He might have switched the number sequence of Strength and Justice as well.

The short answers to your questions are "No" and "Yes."

For the purpose of this book he arranges the Major Arcana according to their order of zodiacal appearance (Emperor, Hierophant, Lovers, Chariot, etc) and dispenses with card numbers. He then sticks with the GD astrological correspondences for interpretation.
 

Senecar

Well-known member
The short answers to your questions are "No" and "Yes."

For the purpose of this book he arranges the Major Arcana according to their order of zodiacal appearance (Emperor, Hierophant, Lovers, Chariot, etc) and dispenses with card numbers. He then sticks with the GD astrological correspondences for interpretation.


Crowley seems taking the outer planets influence in Astrology significantly. He keeps emphasising how Uranus influence could be so important, drastic and major in the charts.

If the full HB copy contains many legacy charts, all other planets descriptions and all that, then yes it might be alright actually. I might try getting one.
 
Last edited:

Senecar

Well-known member
I have many of Crowley's hard-bound books and I recall that Weiser once put out a rather slim volume on his astrological ideas (apparently included here) that I didn't have and wanted, so in that sense it was worth it. I don't recall finding much that was revelatory in it from an astrological standpoint, although it's certainly sound. The binding is very similar to Gems from the Equinox, although seemingly a bit less sturdy.


Just received the book via the post, and your description of the book is spot on. Not very sturdy HB covers and back, no Pluto mention in the book, and all that.

The paper and print quality is superb, although the font size is a bit small side.

Just had a quick glance on Rising Signs chapter, and read a few paragraphs - seems well written with his usual eloquent writing style, and spooky accurate.

Hundreds of horoscope charts of historical people looks great too.

But the part I like most, is his descriptions of each planets in conjunction with Tarot cards.

I feel it is a good resource in Astrological book collection.
 
Top