Heavily afflicted Venus and Mars

tobby

Well-known member
By looking at the chart of a female friend of mine, I noticed that Venus and Mars are in opposition and also squared by Saturn, Uranus and Neptune thus forming 3 T-squares. On the other hand the both planets are in the signs of their rulership. Still I found it to be a quite interesting pattern and I would really like to hear what you guys would say about it and if possible your comments about the chart in general.
Thank you. :)
 

Attachments

  • c.jpg
    c.jpg
    72.5 KB · Views: 28
By looking at the chart of a female friend of mine, I noticed that Venus and Mars are in opposition and also squared by Saturn, Uranus and Neptune thus forming 3 T-squares. On the other hand the both planets are in the signs of their rulership. Still I found it to be a quite interesting pattern and I would really like to hear what you guys would say about it and if possible your comments about the chart in general.
Thank you. :)

It's a difficult generational stellium in Cappi, plus T Pluto is currently squaring natal venus, showing intense problematic times

This major transit challenges you to find meaning in your life through romantic connections and partnerships. You now must uncover a new layer or level to your life -- one that goes more deeply than you have heretofore experienced. Sometimes this transit is associated with divorce or separation, and sometimes new relationships begin. Other times, the attitude towards partnership undergoes a major transformation
http://www.cafeastrology.com/plutotransits.html
to read the full article click on link..

mars square saturn is all about doing ones duty in a cautious anc constructive manner, but also creates stop/go situations and frustrations in actions.

mars square Neptune
Mars‑Neptune Square Mars‑Neptune Opposition
Painful things either ignored ie self‑deception, or hypochondriac type, imaginary things (Neptune) Deceive or be deceived
http://www.astrologyindepth.com/Mars_square_Neptune
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13104&page=2
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11521
http://astrology.astrozoom.com/index.php?title=NEPTUNE_PARALLEL%2C_CONJUNCTION%2C_SQUARE_OR_OPPOSITION_TO_MARS

When Saturn and Uranus fall in the same sign or house we get caught in a cleft stick, wanting to make changes but fearing to let go of the old.

venus square neptune is classic rose tinted glasses and romantic and poss finaancial confusions, illusions and deception.

T saturn will conj mercury towards the end of the years, maybe good for studying or research and she may want to withdraw from communicating.
 

tobby

Well-known member
Thanks a lot for your insightful reply astrologer50, I appreciate it. :)

Any other comments are welcome as well.
 
Last edited:

Lin

Well-known member
How come you didn't use a time chart? The houses concerned makes a difference as to how the planets dynamics work.
LIN
 

miquar

Well-known member
Hi Tobby. I'm assuming that the birth time isn't known. I think the first thing is to look at Mars in Aries and Venus in Libra and check that these are being owned and expressed as fully as possible. They are given a lot to do in this chart because they form a (single) T-square (rather than 3) to a very complex stellium. If your friend is highly aware of what her personal tastes and values are, and also of what arouses her to action, and if she can deal with any inhibitions or conflicts in these areas, then she will be better placed to deal with the demands of Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.

If you include Chiron its a Grand Cross. Its hard to even guess how this will work out in real life. Saturn and Chiron are both to do with woundedness, Chiron and Neptune can both reflect a sense of victimisation and helplessness (while Saturn and Uranus are both more self-relaint), and Uranus and Chiron both seek understanding. So its difficult to see which of these planets will be more conscious and which will be friends.

The resiliance shown elsewhere in the chart (Sun conjunct Pluto in Scorpio and Mars being in Aries) suggests that Saturn and Uranus will speak the loudest in the Grand Cross, but its far too complicated a configuration to say anything with certainty about without knowing something about the person, except that relationships are probably not always easy (partly due to confusion about how much to give and how much to take), and that there is a dynamism about your friend due to the Cross falling in cardinal signs and involving Mars.
 

tobby

Well-known member
Thank you so much for all the information miquar, your post was extremely helpful and interesting! :smile:
From what I can tell everything you mentioned is pretty accurate.

How come you didn't use a time chart? The houses concerned makes a difference as to how the planets dynamics work.
LIN
Unfortunately the birth time is unknown, but since I noticed the unusual planetary configuration in the chart I thought to ask for some comments on it nevertheless.
 

tobby

Well-known member
By the way, in the particular chart Mars is at the exact point of entering Aries, placed in the 0 degree of the sign. Would this mean that in a case like that when a planet appears to be in the 0 degree of e.g. Aries, it would be also influenced to some extent by the previous sign (Pisces in the particular occasion)?
 
Last edited:

miquar

Well-known member
By the way, in the particular chart Mars is at the exact point of entering Aries, placed in the 0 degree of the sign. Would this mean that in a case like that when a planet appears to be in the 0 degree of e.g. Aries, it would be also influenced to some extent by the previous sign (Pisces in the particular occasion)?

I would say not, and I haven't heard anyone claim this to be the case. There is a school of thought that says planets in the final degree of a sign are unstable in some way, or are starting to express the next sign already.

However, some astrologers consider the first point of Aries to be very significant. Since in he tropical zodiac the first point of Aries is defined by the intersection of the plane of the earth's orbit around the Sun and the earth's equatorial plane, it is essentially a nodal axis, like the Ascendant/Descendant axis or the lunar nodes which are similarly derived from the intersection of two planes.

Astrologers who use this point take aspects to it, so obviously in this case Mars is conjunct it. But I think only small orbs are used for aspects to this point so Venus would be out of orb of an opposition.

I don't know enough about the point to offer a proper interpretation, but its something to do with the way that the person approaches the universe/collective.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I would say not, and I haven't heard anyone claim this to be the case. There is a school of thought that says planets in the final degree of a sign are unstable in some way, or are starting to express the next sign already.

However, some astrologers consider the first point of Aries to be very significant. Since in he tropical zodiac the first point of Aries is defined by the intersection of the plane of the earth's orbit around the Sun and the earth's equatorial plane, it is essentially a nodal axis, like the Ascendant/Descendant axis or the lunar nodes which are similarly derived from the intersection of two planes.

Astrologers who use this point take aspects to it, so obviously in this case Mars is conjunct it. But I think only small orbs are used for aspects to this point so Venus would be out of orb of an opposition.

I don't know enough about the point to offer a proper interpretation, but its something to do with the way that the person approaches the universe/collective.
The intersection of the plane of the earth's orbit around the Sun with the earth's equatorial plane that you have mentioned, in fact occurs twice annually at the Spring and Autumnal Equinoxes and the 'Aries Point' is another name for the Vernal Point aka the Spring Equinox

Interesting historical note re: the above mentioned 0º Aries point
It is now more than two thousand years since the Sun at the Spring Equinox was (at sunrise on the first day of Spring) in conjunction with the constellation of Aries at the 'Aries Point' – now, due to precession/regression that is no longer true.

Instead – for example - at Sunrise on the Spring Equinox of 2011 the Sun was in fact conjunct 5[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT] Pisces 5' 55” relative to the constellations. The precise location of the 'Tropical Zodiac's' 0º Aries Point is therefore now symbolic - not actual.

The reason for that is that the Vernal Point is drifting/precessing/regressing slowly and gradually westwards towards alignment with the constellation of Aquarius – which is why there is so much discussion regarding the 'Dawning of the Age of Aquarius' :smile:
 

miquar

Well-known member
Yes, thanks JupiterAsc. I referred to the nodal axis that defines the tropical zodiac and then I only mentioned one pole of it as though were an isolated point.

At the risk of being pernikity, but for the benefit of beginners, I just also wanted to clarify that the first points of Aries and Libra are always there as abstract points on the zodiac, and that what happens at the March and September equinoxes is that the Sun crosses these points.

I also wanted to say that yes the axis is symbolic, but then so is the Ascendant/Desendant axis, as this similarly involves the intersection of two planes (the plane of rational horizon of the birth/event place, and the plane of the Earth's orbit around the Sun - ie the zodiac plane).

You obviously know a lot more about the sidereal zodiac than I do. Would it be true to say that meanings were attributed to the constellations while they coincided with the tropical zodiac? My astrology history is sparse to say the least I'm afraid.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Yes, thanks JupiterAsc. I referred to the nodal axis that defines the tropical zodiac and then I only mentioned one pole of it as though were an isolated point.

At the risk of being pernikity, but for the benefit of beginners, I just also wanted to clarify that the first points of Aries and Libra are always there as abstract points on the zodiac, and that what happens at the March and September equinoxes is that the Sun crosses these points.

I also wanted to say that yes the axis is symbolic, but then so is the Ascendant/Desendant axis, as this similarly involves the intersection of two planes (the plane of rational horizon of the birth/event place, and the plane of the Earth's orbit around the Sun - ie the zodiac plane).

You obviously know a lot more about the sidereal zodiac than I do. Would it be true to say that meanings were attributed to the constellations while they coincided with the tropical zodiac? My astrology history is sparse to say the least I'm afraid.
Miquar there is currently ongoing discussion of this very topic at this link http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=41281&page=4 and I recall posting in some detail on the Vernal Point and its relation to the sidereal background of constellations. :smile:

Briefly,two thousand years ago, at the time of Hipparchus, Valens, Ptolemy et al the predominating Church-state's imposition that "The Sun and planets all orbit Earth" led to astrologer-astronomers fearing for their lives (being burnt at the stake for heresy) and therefore 'failing to mention' either the precession of the equinoxes or the fact that the Earth orbits the Sun! The Vernal Point was observed to be gradually drifting westwards which was 'the inconvenient truth of that time'. The matter was 'hushed up'. A quote from the discussion follows: :smile:
The crossing of the Ecliptic by the Celestial Equator occurs twice a year at two points directly in opposition to each other – these two points demarcate the Spring Equinox and/or Vernal Point and the Autumnal Equinox and/or Autumnal Point - (Unfortunately, when our Sun is at these points we must not look at it – in fact we must never look directly at the Sun)

Approximately two thousand years ago (or thereabouts) a few hundred years prior to the time of Valens, Claudius Ptolemaeus, Hipparchus et al one of these two points was indeed 0º Aries.

That point is or was the Vernal Point
however - since then - because
(a) Earth orbits the Sun
(b) Earth is tilted on its own axis

the result is
- no matter how 'distinct exact mathematical and actual' the crossing of the great circle of the Ecliptic by the great circle of the celestial Equator may be –

(c) that event no longer takes place at 0º Aries or thereabouts as it once did over two thousand years ago a few hundred years prior to the time of Valens, Claudius Ptolemaeus, Hipparchus et al.

instead
(d) the crossing of the Ecliptic by the celestial Equator currently occurs at approximately 6º Pisces (exactly 5º Pisces 05' 31”)

Nevertheless Tropical astrologers continue to describe this point as 0º Aries.

The error originates from the controlling Church-state view two thousand years ago that insisted that the Sun orbits Earth and is presumably not tilted on its axis.

Historical note
Hipparchus (190 BC – 120 BC) had compiled a catalogue of 850 stars and then decided to compare his catalogue of stars with the star catalogues of two earlier observers Timocharis and Aristillus detailing observations covering the previous 150 years. Timocharis and Aristillus had created their own different methods of keeping track of the sky: Hipparchus realized that in order to compare data and/or discuss observations with others - as well as pass accurate observations to later generations - there was a need for a common or conventional map of the sky.

The most fundamental point on a map is the “Origin” – the (0) location.

Hipparchus selected the Vernal Equinox as the Origin for his map of the sky and fixed it at 0º Aries even though he did observe and also recorded that the Vernal Equinox was drifting very slowly westward (being by then at approximately 12º Aries or thereabouts

Hipparchus noticed as well that all the stars seemed to continually change their places with reference to his Origin (0) point – the Vernal Equinox - but he offered no written explanation. Hipparchus and others undoubtedly conjectured that an explanation was that our Earth must have moved - but all refrained from mentioning that officially for fear of the Church-state retribution which - two thousand years ago - would have burned them at the stake for the sin of Heresy.

Robert A Powell's book “History of the Zodiac” contains the information that an agricultural calendar of seasons based on the Vernal Point and developed at Athens by the astronomers Meton and Euctemon gradually merged with Hipparchus astrologically orientated map of the sky which had also based itself on the Vernal Point As time passed, the original calendar months merged with and/or were replaced by the twelve signs of the zodiac. Unfortunately however, due to the precession of the equinoxes, the Vernal Equinox (aka Aries aka The Vernal Point aka The Aries Point) has moved about 30 degrees toward the west since the time of Hipparchus and is now (September 2011) located precisely at exactly 5º Pisces 05' 31” . These are the origins of 'The Tropical Zodiac' of modern astrology.

The average time it takes for the Vernal Equinox to move from one constellation of the zodiac into the next is known as an Astrological Age. Astrological Ages exist as a result of precession of the equinoxes. Approximately every 2,150 years the sun's position at the time of the vernal equinox will have moved into a new zodiacal constellation. dr. farr has previously advised us that zodiacal constellations are not uniform in size and also that there is overlap between zodiacal constellations which has led some astrologers to surmise that the corresponding ages should also vary in duration. In 1929, the International Astronomical Union defined the edges of the 88 official constellations and the edge established between Pisces and Aquarius technically locates the beginning of the Aquarian Age around the year 2600. However this is a contentious issue amongst astrologers.

Link to diagram http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/Seasons1.svg :smile:
 
Last edited:
Top