ariellemerperle
New member
can someone please post a link to a free birth/natal chart that does 13 sign astrology?
Adding Ophiuchus to your Chart
- Thread starter Cosmiccradle
- Start date
waybread
Well-known member
No, but if you want to try a constellational astrology that includes Ophiuchus, check out the Astrodienst fix star chart option at www.astro.com.
ariellemerperle
New member
I am so stupid I can't find it anywhere on the site you're going to have link me directly to it thanks
waybread
Well-known member
1, Go to www.astro.com
2. Log in.
3. Click on the top bar that says, "free horoscopes."
4. Scroll down to the lower right. Click on "extended chart selection."
5. If you haven't already constructed your own chart at Astrodienst, do so now. This will start a file of charts for you. If you have several charts already on-file, make sure your name is the one appearing in the uppermost box.
6. "Natal chart wheel" is the default chart. That's fine if you wish to look at your birth chart.
7. Under "chart drawing style" find the box that says "web default style". Scroll down on it. The 6th one down is "Astrodienst fixed stars."
8. Hit the bar that says, "Click here to show the chart."
That should do it. Look for Ophiuchus the constellation near Sagittarius and Scorpio.
Note that you can alter the house system if you wish (say from the Placidus default house system to whole signs, &c.) of throw in additional points like the part of fortune or asteroids.
Good luck with this.
2. Log in.
3. Click on the top bar that says, "free horoscopes."
4. Scroll down to the lower right. Click on "extended chart selection."
5. If you haven't already constructed your own chart at Astrodienst, do so now. This will start a file of charts for you. If you have several charts already on-file, make sure your name is the one appearing in the uppermost box.
6. "Natal chart wheel" is the default chart. That's fine if you wish to look at your birth chart.
7. Under "chart drawing style" find the box that says "web default style". Scroll down on it. The 6th one down is "Astrodienst fixed stars."
8. Hit the bar that says, "Click here to show the chart."
That should do it. Look for Ophiuchus the constellation near Sagittarius and Scorpio.
Note that you can alter the house system if you wish (say from the Placidus default house system to whole signs, &c.) of throw in additional points like the part of fortune or asteroids.
Good luck with this.
CapAquaPis
Well-known member
Hey...it isn't interfering with traditional or tropical astrology at all. The astro.com horoscope feature has the updated 12 houses natal star chart, including Ophiuchus connected with Scorpio, as well the 2 constellations Cetus and Orion as the parazodiacs. Ophiuchus has the Serpens divided to 2 constellations and Libra seems to extend into the constellation Hydra's "tail or head". Note the irregularity of the sun traveling the ecliptic places the sun occassionally 10 degrees farther south or north every few years...and Ophiuchus' "left leg" is well entrenched in the ecliptic.
Last edited:
Cap
Well-known member
I doubt that there is a place for 13th sign. And what would 13th sign stand for?
According to Frawley from his "Real Astrology", the Zodiac reflects three modes of creation, cardinal (out-going), fixed (expansive) and mutable (returning) working through the four fundamental distinctions in which the prime matter manifests: hot, cold, moist and dry. This combination 3x4 is blueprint of creation. Hot, cold, moist and dry are principles that are not in themselves capable of entering manifestation, To do this they combine into the four elements of traditional science: fire (hot and dry), air (hot and moist), earth (cold and dry) and water (cold and moist).
So, Zodiac signs are not so much about actual constellations in the sky as they are description of everything manifested in its endless diversity.
According to Frawley from his "Real Astrology", the Zodiac reflects three modes of creation, cardinal (out-going), fixed (expansive) and mutable (returning) working through the four fundamental distinctions in which the prime matter manifests: hot, cold, moist and dry. This combination 3x4 is blueprint of creation. Hot, cold, moist and dry are principles that are not in themselves capable of entering manifestation, To do this they combine into the four elements of traditional science: fire (hot and dry), air (hot and moist), earth (cold and dry) and water (cold and moist).
So, Zodiac signs are not so much about actual constellations in the sky as they are description of everything manifested in its endless diversity.
waybread
Well-known member
Which other 7 constellations?
We have to keep in mind that the ecliptic (path of the sun) is not always identical with the other planets; let alone the asteroids, which can go way off it. If you look at the tables associated with horoscopes at Astrodienst, you can see just how far off the ecliptic they go (declination.) A planet with a wide delination can touch the tip of the constellation Orion, or get into Cetus. One of my my major asteroids is even in Coma Berenices.
Apparently the Babylonians switched from charting planets against the constellations to 30-degree signs because they were easier to use in their base-60 arithmetic system for calculating eclipse locations. The zodiacal constellations are of varying width along the ecliptic. Ophiuchus does cross the ecliptic but just doesn't occupy many degrees. Virgo occupies 47 degrees and Cancer, 15 degrees. So switching to signs (back when the sidereal and tropical zodiacs were roughly equivalent) made a certain amount of sense.
We have to keep in mind that the ecliptic (path of the sun) is not always identical with the other planets; let alone the asteroids, which can go way off it. If you look at the tables associated with horoscopes at Astrodienst, you can see just how far off the ecliptic they go (declination.) A planet with a wide delination can touch the tip of the constellation Orion, or get into Cetus. One of my my major asteroids is even in Coma Berenices.
Apparently the Babylonians switched from charting planets against the constellations to 30-degree signs because they were easier to use in their base-60 arithmetic system for calculating eclipse locations. The zodiacal constellations are of varying width along the ecliptic. Ophiuchus does cross the ecliptic but just doesn't occupy many degrees. Virgo occupies 47 degrees and Cancer, 15 degrees. So switching to signs (back when the sidereal and tropical zodiacs were roughly equivalent) made a certain amount of sense.
Remember that we don't have to be siderealists in order to use the constellations when a planet or a cusp in our Tropical chart happens to be conjunct (close) or in parallel of declination, with a star of a particular constellation. This allows us to use all the 48 constellations of ancient times, as potential modifiers to elements of our Tropical chart, without abandoning our fundamental Tropical outlook regarding the zodiacal matrix of our charts...
How do you get more than 360 degrees in a circle? Not even Einstein can do that.
The constellations are wholly arbitrary chunks of the sky. Go out and look at Orion tonight. Easy to see....two shoulder stars, two foot stars, three belt stars. It makes a "picture".
But those stars have only two things in common. They lie in the same general direction as seen from Earth. And the human mind, the imagination, sees them as forming a picture. The constellation of Scorpio makes a very fine stick-drawing of a scorpion. Very little imagination is needed. But most constellations require a good deal of imagination. And their shapes and sizes are completely arbitrary.
So...on what basis do we consider "constellations" to be superior to "signs"? Both are abstract, not real. But at least the signs are mathematical constructs. The constellations are in no way different from seeing pictures of dragons, ships, and castles in the clouds.
Wikipedia (just type "ophiuchus" into google) says Ophiuchus /ɒfiˈjuːkəs/ has sometimes been used in sidereal astrology as a thirteenth sign in addition to the twelve signs of the tropical Zodiac, because the eponymous constellation Ophiuchus (Greek Ὀφιοῦχος "Serpent-bearer") as defined by the 1930 IAU constellation boundaries is situated behind the sun between November 29 and December 17.
This then places that Constellation on the ecliptic between roughly 8 Sagittarius (tropical zodiac) and 27 Sagittarius (14 Scorpio-3 Sagittarius, sidereal zodiac, Lahiri ayanamsa). These positions are good only for Sun; planets with longitude may vary somewhat from the given degrees.
I wonder how it is that someone with so little knowledge and skill in astrology that s/he can't find "ophiucus" in wikipedia believes s/he can decipher ophiucus in a horoscope.
And again from the article in Wikipedia: Based on the 1930 IAU constellation boundaries, suggestions that "there are really 13 astrological signs" because "the Sun is in the sign of Ophiuchus" between November 29 and December 17 have been published since at least the 1970s. The quotation is from Shapiro, and Shapiro is in error...he calls Ophiucus a "sign"; it is not a sign, but a constellation. We can of course create a sign of Ophiucus, but signs as presently understood in astrology are 12 and the serpent-bearer is not among them.
Note that the boundaries of the constellations were not set by astronomers until 1930, and that Ophiucus does not appear as a proposal until 1970. I find it scandalous that for nearly 100 generations astrologers were so unthinking (and inaccurate in their work) that they never included Ophiucus among the signs. Thank God, Schmidt, Shapiro and Berg came along to correct this gross oversight.
Because both signs and constellations (which are not the same thing) are completely arbitrary divisions of the 360-degree circle (never more, never less than 360...consult your high school geometry text), this means we can say that there are 27 signs (or any other number) in the sky if we so choose....Which is exactly what Hindu astrologers have been doing for the past 2000 years or more. Hmmm. (They are called "nakshatra"....try Wikipedia).
The constellations are wholly arbitrary chunks of the sky. Go out and look at Orion tonight. Easy to see....two shoulder stars, two foot stars, three belt stars. It makes a "picture".
But those stars have only two things in common. They lie in the same general direction as seen from Earth. And the human mind, the imagination, sees them as forming a picture. The constellation of Scorpio makes a very fine stick-drawing of a scorpion. Very little imagination is needed. But most constellations require a good deal of imagination. And their shapes and sizes are completely arbitrary.
So...on what basis do we consider "constellations" to be superior to "signs"? Both are abstract, not real. But at least the signs are mathematical constructs. The constellations are in no way different from seeing pictures of dragons, ships, and castles in the clouds.
Wikipedia (just type "ophiuchus" into google) says Ophiuchus /ɒfiˈjuːkəs/ has sometimes been used in sidereal astrology as a thirteenth sign in addition to the twelve signs of the tropical Zodiac, because the eponymous constellation Ophiuchus (Greek Ὀφιοῦχος "Serpent-bearer") as defined by the 1930 IAU constellation boundaries is situated behind the sun between November 29 and December 17.
This then places that Constellation on the ecliptic between roughly 8 Sagittarius (tropical zodiac) and 27 Sagittarius (14 Scorpio-3 Sagittarius, sidereal zodiac, Lahiri ayanamsa). These positions are good only for Sun; planets with longitude may vary somewhat from the given degrees.
I wonder how it is that someone with so little knowledge and skill in astrology that s/he can't find "ophiucus" in wikipedia believes s/he can decipher ophiucus in a horoscope.
And again from the article in Wikipedia: Based on the 1930 IAU constellation boundaries, suggestions that "there are really 13 astrological signs" because "the Sun is in the sign of Ophiuchus" between November 29 and December 17 have been published since at least the 1970s. The quotation is from Shapiro, and Shapiro is in error...he calls Ophiucus a "sign"; it is not a sign, but a constellation. We can of course create a sign of Ophiucus, but signs as presently understood in astrology are 12 and the serpent-bearer is not among them.
Note that the boundaries of the constellations were not set by astronomers until 1930, and that Ophiucus does not appear as a proposal until 1970. I find it scandalous that for nearly 100 generations astrologers were so unthinking (and inaccurate in their work) that they never included Ophiucus among the signs. Thank God, Schmidt, Shapiro and Berg came along to correct this gross oversight.
Because both signs and constellations (which are not the same thing) are completely arbitrary divisions of the 360-degree circle (never more, never less than 360...consult your high school geometry text), this means we can say that there are 27 signs (or any other number) in the sky if we so choose....Which is exactly what Hindu astrologers have been doing for the past 2000 years or more. Hmmm. (They are called "nakshatra"....try Wikipedia).
Last edited:
And there are even differences with the nakshatras (Lunar mansion asterisms)! Arabic and Chinese have 28, the main tradition (stemming from the Rig Veda) in Vedic astrology uses 27 (with 1 used only in horary), and another tradition (stemming from the Atharva Veda) in Vedic uses 28.
waybread
Well-known member
Who is getting more than 360 degrees in a circle, greybeard? Who is confusing signs and constellations? I am not clear on the source of the confusion here.
To clarify:
The zodiac constellations have varying widths along the ecliptic. Some occupy more than 360 degrees. Some occupy less. There are a few spaces with no constellations touching them. Some constellations (like Aquarius and Capricorn) overlap spatially, but the sidereal sign system developed by the Babylonians gave preference to the sign closest to the ecliptic.
According to John Lash, Quest for the Zodiac, the constellation Ophiuchus occupies 14 degrees along the ecliptic at degrees number 254 to 267 (counting from 0 Aries) or 14 to 27 Sagittarius (rounding error?)
The moon has her own pathway. It is slightly different from the sun's, and was the one the Babylonians used.
The 360-degree circle is actually an inheritance from the Babylonians. It is a cultural construct that has become an accepted convention. But obviously, you could divide up the degrees any old way you want. It is 360 degrees because the Babylonians used a sexagisimal (base-60) arithmetic system. Had they used base-10 like we do, they might have made it 100 degrees. Or some other number, who knows?
The beauty of the base-60 system is that it lends itself to more multiples and fractions than our base-10 system. 1/2 of 60 is our 30-degree sign. So is 1/12 of 360. We have 60 minutes in an hour, and 60 seconds in a minute. Lines of latitude and longitude are based on this system, as well. But this is all custom and convention.
The signs are not inherently more logical than the constellations. Signs were a convenience to the Babylonians (who had been using constellations for centuries) because with their sexagisimal arithmetic system, they were a much more convenient way to predict eclipses.
Once you learn to visualize pictures in the sky, the arbitrary nature of constellations seems a lot less arbitrary. In ancient times before paper calanders were invented, stars, asterisms, and constellations served as ancient people's clocks and calendars. We can do this today. This time of year, Orion first appears in the evening further and further in the West. A sign that spring is coming. Farmers in Antiquity looked at risings and settings to calculate times to plant and harvest.
Sailors who navigated by the stars located the Big Dipper, and from it, the pole star. That's how they could tell which direction was north.
I invite anyone to go outside on the next clear night without a clock or ephemeris, and point out the signs, however.
greybeard, I don't get the significance of your official list of constellations from 1930, but I recommend the Phaenomena of Aratus (ca. 310-240 BCE), the Astronomica of Manilius (ca. 100 CE), or Ptolemy's Almagest (ca. 150 CE) as star catalogues of the ancient Greeks. We know these constellations today. All of them list Ophiuchus. I also recommend Gavin White's book on Babylonian constellations, which were slightly different; or various Renaissaance planispheres which all show Ophiuchus.
The constellations have varied slightly since ancient Greeks described them, and telescopes subsequently allowed new ones to be identified. But the major ones have been our western cultural legacy for at least 2500 years. Ophiuchus did go by different names, notably Serpentarius.
Aratus gave a kind of backyard astronomy guide to the constellations, including Ophiuchus:
"mark near at hand the head of Ophiuchus, and then from it you can trace the starlit Ophiuchus himself: so brightly set beneath his head appear his gleaming shoulders. They would be clear to mark even at the midmonth moon, but his hands are not at all so bright; for faint runs the gleam of stars along on this side and on that. Yet they too can be seen, for they are not feeble. Both firmly clutch the Serpent, which encircles the waist of Ophiuchus, but he, stedfast with both his feet well set, tramples a huge monster, even the Scorpion, standing upright on his eye and breast. Now the Serpent is wreathed about his two hands – a little above his right hand, but in many folds high above his left."
Ptolemy (Tetrabiblos I:9) described the influences of fixed stars according to the nature of planets. He wrote that the stars in Ophiuchus resembled resembled Saturn and to some degree Venus; with the stars in his serpent, Saturn and Mars. Since Saturn and Mars were considered malefic, perhaps Ophiuchus was not seen as an auspicious sign for candidacy in the zodiac.
For any astrologers inclined to work with fixed stars, there is no problem in adding those of Ophiuchus, or any other constellation. There are some decent guides on the Internet, like http://www.constellationsofwords.com/ .
To clarify:
The zodiac constellations have varying widths along the ecliptic. Some occupy more than 360 degrees. Some occupy less. There are a few spaces with no constellations touching them. Some constellations (like Aquarius and Capricorn) overlap spatially, but the sidereal sign system developed by the Babylonians gave preference to the sign closest to the ecliptic.
According to John Lash, Quest for the Zodiac, the constellation Ophiuchus occupies 14 degrees along the ecliptic at degrees number 254 to 267 (counting from 0 Aries) or 14 to 27 Sagittarius (rounding error?)
The moon has her own pathway. It is slightly different from the sun's, and was the one the Babylonians used.
The 360-degree circle is actually an inheritance from the Babylonians. It is a cultural construct that has become an accepted convention. But obviously, you could divide up the degrees any old way you want. It is 360 degrees because the Babylonians used a sexagisimal (base-60) arithmetic system. Had they used base-10 like we do, they might have made it 100 degrees. Or some other number, who knows?
The beauty of the base-60 system is that it lends itself to more multiples and fractions than our base-10 system. 1/2 of 60 is our 30-degree sign. So is 1/12 of 360. We have 60 minutes in an hour, and 60 seconds in a minute. Lines of latitude and longitude are based on this system, as well. But this is all custom and convention.
The signs are not inherently more logical than the constellations. Signs were a convenience to the Babylonians (who had been using constellations for centuries) because with their sexagisimal arithmetic system, they were a much more convenient way to predict eclipses.
Once you learn to visualize pictures in the sky, the arbitrary nature of constellations seems a lot less arbitrary. In ancient times before paper calanders were invented, stars, asterisms, and constellations served as ancient people's clocks and calendars. We can do this today. This time of year, Orion first appears in the evening further and further in the West. A sign that spring is coming. Farmers in Antiquity looked at risings and settings to calculate times to plant and harvest.
Sailors who navigated by the stars located the Big Dipper, and from it, the pole star. That's how they could tell which direction was north.
I invite anyone to go outside on the next clear night without a clock or ephemeris, and point out the signs, however.
greybeard, I don't get the significance of your official list of constellations from 1930, but I recommend the Phaenomena of Aratus (ca. 310-240 BCE), the Astronomica of Manilius (ca. 100 CE), or Ptolemy's Almagest (ca. 150 CE) as star catalogues of the ancient Greeks. We know these constellations today. All of them list Ophiuchus. I also recommend Gavin White's book on Babylonian constellations, which were slightly different; or various Renaissaance planispheres which all show Ophiuchus.
The constellations have varied slightly since ancient Greeks described them, and telescopes subsequently allowed new ones to be identified. But the major ones have been our western cultural legacy for at least 2500 years. Ophiuchus did go by different names, notably Serpentarius.
Aratus gave a kind of backyard astronomy guide to the constellations, including Ophiuchus:
"mark near at hand the head of Ophiuchus, and then from it you can trace the starlit Ophiuchus himself: so brightly set beneath his head appear his gleaming shoulders. They would be clear to mark even at the midmonth moon, but his hands are not at all so bright; for faint runs the gleam of stars along on this side and on that. Yet they too can be seen, for they are not feeble. Both firmly clutch the Serpent, which encircles the waist of Ophiuchus, but he, stedfast with both his feet well set, tramples a huge monster, even the Scorpion, standing upright on his eye and breast. Now the Serpent is wreathed about his two hands – a little above his right hand, but in many folds high above his left."
Ptolemy (Tetrabiblos I:9) described the influences of fixed stars according to the nature of planets. He wrote that the stars in Ophiuchus resembled resembled Saturn and to some degree Venus; with the stars in his serpent, Saturn and Mars. Since Saturn and Mars were considered malefic, perhaps Ophiuchus was not seen as an auspicious sign for candidacy in the zodiac.
For any astrologers inclined to work with fixed stars, there is no problem in adding those of Ophiuchus, or any other constellation. There are some decent guides on the Internet, like http://www.constellationsofwords.com/ .
Last edited:
Aratus poem (the first part of which is about the constellations) was taken (some say copied) from a now-lost work by Eudoxus of Cnidus (c 368 BC), who flourished about a half century prior to Aratus; it appears (from the historical record about the life of Eudoxus) that Eudoxus in turn derived his knowledge of the constellations during his 16 month sojourn in Heliopolis, Egypt, to which he had journeyed with the intent of studying astronomy and mathematics.
We find a clear and precise differentiation in Ptolemy's works, between SIGNS and constellations; Ptolemy mentions (in the Tetrabilios, circa late 1st century AD) that "...the ancients..." had also maintained the same, ie, a difference between signs and constellations...
We find a clear and precise differentiation in Ptolemy's works, between SIGNS and constellations; Ptolemy mentions (in the Tetrabilios, circa late 1st century AD) that "...the ancients..." had also maintained the same, ie, a difference between signs and constellations...
waybread
Well-known member
Good point, Dr. Farr-- and the Greeks used many constellations as time-keepers for farmers and mariners much earlier. From Hesiod, of the 8th century BCE (Works and Days):
"(ll. 383-404) When the Pleiades, daughters of Atlas, are rising (10), begin your harvest, and your ploughing when they are going to set (11). Forty nights and days they are hidden and appear again as the year moves round, when first you sharpen your sickle. This is the law of the plains, and of those who live near the sea..."
"But when Orion and Sirius are come into mid-heaven, and rosy-fingered Dawn sees Arcturus (30), then cut off all the grape-clusters, Perses, and bring them home.... But when the Pleiades and Hyades and strong Orion begin to set (31), then remember to plough in season: and so the completed year (32) will fitly pass beneath the earth.
(ll. 618-640) But if desire for uncomfortable sea-faring seize you; when the Pleiades plunge into the misty sea (33) to escape Orion's rude strength, then truly gales of all kinds rage. Then keep ships no longer on the sparkling sea..."
http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_text_hesiod_worksanddays.htm
The Greeks also used inscribed wooden boards, called parapegmata, together with the celestial calendar to mark times to begin various agricultural activities.
"(ll. 383-404) When the Pleiades, daughters of Atlas, are rising (10), begin your harvest, and your ploughing when they are going to set (11). Forty nights and days they are hidden and appear again as the year moves round, when first you sharpen your sickle. This is the law of the plains, and of those who live near the sea..."
"But when Orion and Sirius are come into mid-heaven, and rosy-fingered Dawn sees Arcturus (30), then cut off all the grape-clusters, Perses, and bring them home.... But when the Pleiades and Hyades and strong Orion begin to set (31), then remember to plough in season: and so the completed year (32) will fitly pass beneath the earth.
(ll. 618-640) But if desire for uncomfortable sea-faring seize you; when the Pleiades plunge into the misty sea (33) to escape Orion's rude strength, then truly gales of all kinds rage. Then keep ships no longer on the sparkling sea..."
http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_text_hesiod_worksanddays.htm
The Greeks also used inscribed wooden boards, called parapegmata, together with the celestial calendar to mark times to begin various agricultural activities.
Last edited:
vasilis
Well-known member
Dear Cosmiccradle you may get your 13 Zodiac Horoscope here: http://www.astrology13.com/en/13-zodiac-chart
I'm a 13 Zodiac Astrologer and use the 13 Zodiacs every single day of my life. Of course you don't need more than 360 degrees to engulf all 13 Zodiac Signs in the Ecliptic. You will notice that when you'll make your first 13 Zodiac Horoscope.
In the Chart you will see the old Ascendant (AS in the Chart) and the new Ascendant that is depicted by the place of the Moon. This addition was introduced by me in order to adapt old Astrology to new scientific facts.
Vasilis Kanatas
I'm a 13 Zodiac Astrologer and use the 13 Zodiacs every single day of my life. Of course you don't need more than 360 degrees to engulf all 13 Zodiac Signs in the Ecliptic. You will notice that when you'll make your first 13 Zodiac Horoscope.
In the Chart you will see the old Ascendant (AS in the Chart) and the new Ascendant that is depicted by the place of the Moon. This addition was introduced by me in order to adapt old Astrology to new scientific facts.
Vasilis Kanatas
Sonkido
Member
Hi there! :-D
I'm sorry if I'm reviving an old topic, but I'm also incorporating Ophiuchus and I've been looking for ways to calculate it into my "normal" chart.
I actually started on this path listening to Athen Chimenti (here is his site) and I've found all the new developments in Astrology really interesting.
And btw, I would like to thank everybody on this topic, it has been most informative!!! :-D
I'm sorry if I'm reviving an old topic, but I'm also incorporating Ophiuchus and I've been looking for ways to calculate it into my "normal" chart.
I actually started on this path listening to Athen Chimenti (here is his site) and I've found all the new developments in Astrology really interesting.
And btw, I would like to thank everybody on this topic, it has been most informative!!! :-D
Sonkido
Member
Thanks for this! ^^
I've been studying Tarot before I really started seriously learning about Astrology, and I understood by that that each reader has his/her own system which may or may not coincide with the mainstream way of doing things (like using reversed cards, deck storage, interpretation - classical, intuitive, literal, etc.) and choose the things that ring the bell most for me. :-D
---
About the degrees, I do have a question. I've been searching online, is there a resource where I can find the exact degrees of Ophiuchus in the chart wheel? The - rather inflamed - debate is everywhere, no matter how much I rephrase the search, as opposed to the more technical information.
I've been studying Tarot before I really started seriously learning about Astrology, and I understood by that that each reader has his/her own system which may or may not coincide with the mainstream way of doing things (like using reversed cards, deck storage, interpretation - classical, intuitive, literal, etc.) and choose the things that ring the bell most for me. :-D
---
About the degrees, I do have a question. I've been searching online, is there a resource where I can find the exact degrees of Ophiuchus in the chart wheel? The - rather inflamed - debate is everywhere, no matter how much I rephrase the search, as opposed to the more technical information.
waybread
Well-known member
This is from John Lash, Quest for the Zodiac, a proposal for a constellation-based astrology. Note the serious differences between a constellation and a sign! Also, that a constellation-based astrology would be much closer to sidereal than western tropical astrology.
Degrees 254 to 267 where the constellation Ophiuchus crosses the ecliptic. This 14-degree slice would take out the 14th through the 27th degrees of Scorpio.
Note that the entire constellation of Ophiuchus is much larger, but mostly well above the ecliptic.
Degrees 254 to 267 where the constellation Ophiuchus crosses the ecliptic. This 14-degree slice would take out the 14th through the 27th degrees of Scorpio.
Note that the entire constellation of Ophiuchus is much larger, but mostly well above the ecliptic.