Proof Aquarius is ruled by uranus AND Saturn?

[Ancar]

We have three ways of dealing with the outer-most planets - 1) Mods fully accept them as full fledged Domicile rulers of , , and /2) Hybrids partly accept them as "influences" in the chart, perhaps as "co-rulers"/and, 3) Trads reject them entirely.

From all my discussions with practicing astrologers (mostly Modernists), David's summaries here are the definitive situation. In Modern Astrology, the outer planets are full-blown domicile rulers. There's no such thing as "co-rulership" of a Sign. Uranus alone rules Aquarius. Everything about Aquarius that has been blamed on Saturn is actually the result of the nature of Uranus - the rejected rebel, the misunderstood genius - feeling alone in a crowd - but at one with the Universe. That's not really Saturn at work.

Some Modernists bluntly refer to the Hybrid as a messy pasting of the new on top of the old, or they quote the Bible about not pouring new wine into old jugs, or sewing new cloth to patch the old.

The greatest living physicists say that there is always a clean, elegant aesthetic to the Universe.

The Hybrid (co-rulers, etc.) does seem like a clumsy cobbling of old and new together. And Traditional is just plain "Flat Earthism".

The most progressive astrologers I've listened to anticipate a determination of two additional domicile rulers to separate the doubling up of Taurus and Libra under Venus, as well as Gemini and Virgo under Mercury. And voilà: A single domicile ruler for each of the 12 signs. Nice and elegant.

Just how this will come about still seems under hot debate. But the consensus is that somehow astrological research will realize that a major asteroid is actually a domicile ruler and/or another planet will be discovered. When I mention Chiron as a possibility, some say it doesn't really "fit" any of these four Signs. However, Barbara Hand Clow, in her impressive book Chiron (1993: Llewellyn), makes a good attempt at proving Chiron rules Virgo. That would be one down, one to go.

I scanned a thread here that suggested the Earth is the actual ruler of Taurus. I like that. I have nothing to back it up with, but it sounds "right" somehow. That would wrap the whole rulership thing up. And there would be no more boundary disputes, no two rulers claiming the same territory. We've got way too much of that destroying our world right now. It would be nice to have the astrology of our Solar System all straightened out at least.

 

[david starling]

From all my discussions with practicing astrologers (mostly Modernists), David's summaries here are the definitive situation. In Modern Astrology, the outer planets are full-blown domicile rulers. There's no such thing as "co-rulership" of a Sign. Uranus alone rules Aquarius. Everything about Aquarius* that has been blamed on Saturn is actually the result of the nature of Uranus - the rejected rebel, the misunderstood genius - feeling alone in a crowd - but at one with the Universe. That's not really Saturn at work.

Some Modernists bluntly refer to the Hybrid as a messy pasting of the new on top of the old, or they quote the Bible about not pouring new wine into old jugs, or sewing new cloth to patch the old.

The greatest living physicists say that there is always a clean, elegant aesthetic to the Universe.

The Hybrid (co-rulers, etc.) does seem like a clumsy cobbling of old and new together. And Traditional is just plain "Flat Earthism".

The most progressive astrologers I've listened to anticipate a determination of two additional domicile rulers to separate the doubling up of Taurus and Libra under Venus, as well as Gemini and Virgo under Mercury. And voilà: A single domicile ruler for each of the 12 signs. Nice and elegant.

Just how this will come about still seems under hot debate. But the consensus is that somehow astrological research will realize that a major asteroid is actually a domicile ruler and/or another planet will be discovered. When I mention Chiron as a possibility, some say it doesn't really "fit" any of these four Signs. However, Barbara Hand Clow, in her impressive book Chiron (1993: Llewellyn), makes a good attempt at proving Chiron rules Virgo. That would be one down, one to go.

I scanned a thread here that suggested the Earth is the actual ruler of Taurus. I like that. I have nothing to back it up with, but it sounds "right" somehow. That would wrap the whole rulership thing up. And there would be no more boundary disputes, no two rulers claiming the same territory. We've got way too much of that destroying our world right now. It would be nice to have the astrology of our Solar System all straightened out at least.

Remember, when we're talking about Aquarius, it's mostly about the characteristics of Sun Aquarians,, and we ignore the fact that Sun in Aqua is opposite the Sun's Domicile sign, for better or for worse. Personally and generally speaking, I tend to like and trust them.

 

[Ancar]

Remember, when we're talking about Aquarius, it's mostly about the characteristics of Sun Aquarians,, and we ignore the fact that Sun in Aqua is opposite the Sun's Domicile sign, for better or for worse. Personally and generally speaking, I tend to like and trust them.

Whoa, do I know about that Sun Leo ruled by the Sun! The most dangerous and life-destroying ex-friend I ever had was a Leo whose Sun was in close opposition to my Sun. With a synastry like that, the Sun Aquarian can only run when the Leo starts to supernova - the Aquarian will lose, there's no other option. It will be "scorched earth" when the fires finally go out. It just occurs to me that he was the only Leo I ever got close to in my life, and I'm sure it's only because he had a Gemini Moon in a stellium in his 11th house.

 

[waybread]

aqualovebot, On the Aquarid meteor shower:

| EarthSky

May's Eta Aquariid meteor shower is good over several mornings. But the best time is around May 5, 2025, in the hours before dawn.

earthsky.org

Ancar, You raise some interesting points. Like most Oldies who learned astrology prior to the re-emergence of traditional western astrology, the astrology that I learned was modern. The modern Outers did indeed replace the traditional rulers of Scorpio Aquarius, and Pisces, ca 1990.

Now for a personal journey into hybrid astrology.

The more I got into astrology, the more I learned some really helpful techniques that originated prior to the 20th century rise of modern astrology. A major one was the use of house cusp rulers (lords.) Just out of curiosity, I tried using the traditional rulers of Scorpio, Aquarius, and Pisces. I found that they also worked well. I think it is important to distinguish between the action of Saturn vs. Uranus, Mars vs. Pluto, and Jupiter vs. Neptune. The traditional and modern rulers are not interchangeable --as planets. But I liken the 3 signs to a child with two parents.

I'm happy to to discuss the Bible, but all kinds of things in life a are blend or old and new. One example that comes to mind are retrospective styles in architecture. We have words for them like :neoclassical. One thing the Bible does not do is condone horoscopic astrology of any description.

I used to be very skeptical of traditional western astrology, mostly because of its deterministic and often negative approach to human nature. I have developed more of an appreciation of it, over the years. Ten years ago when I decided to learn horary astrology, I decided to look into traditional horary, by way of killing two birds with one stone. I describe my system as a simplified version of traditional horary.

So when reading a nativity, I definitely look at Uranus. In reading a horary chart, I view the modern outers as supplementary data points, but not as sign rulers and not in aspects.

Re: your point on potential modern rulers of the other signs. A sign ruler as a house cusp ruler has definite work to do in a horoscope. A simple affinity might be suggestive, but we have to see if the new planet really pulls its weight in chart interpretation. In Greco-Roman mythology, the goddess Demeter/Ceres was affiliated with the constellation Virgo. In seeing whether dwarf planet Ceres worked as a house cusp ruler for Virgo, I finally concluded that it didn't do much. Mythologically Chiron was associated with Sagittarius, not Virgo. The earth is our standpoint, not a planet visible up in the sky. Its horoscope position can be plotted, but it is always opposite the sun. So there is still work to do.

Ancar, thanks for a thought-provoking post.

One interesting thing about Aquarius in a natal horoscope is that, in a quadrant house system, you would normally get either Aquarius or Capricorn on the house cusp. If it's Capricorn, that would give the house a more Saturnine cast. If it's Aquarius, I would look at the location and condition of both Saturn and Uranus.

 

[ElenaJ]

a Leo whose Sun was in close opposition to my Sun. With a synastry like that, the Sun Aquarian can only run when the Leo starts to supernova - the Aquarian will lose,

Actually this was probably the work of other factors in the. charts.
Leo/Aquarius oppose and compliment each other.
Aquarius is so good at putting up with the drama and self-centredness of the Leo sun, while Leo is just the energy needed to pull Aquarius out of its ivory tower to play with the mortals.

 

[ElenaJ]

the Aquarid meteor shower:

Thanks for the background.
The image of an Aquarian pouring out the stars of a meteor shower, the idea of the philosopher Aquarian pouring out the knowledge of the universe for the rest of us to drink from. Amazing imagery.

 

[Ancar]

I'm happy to to discuss the Bible, but all kinds of things in life a are blend or old and new. One example that comes to mind are retrospective styles in architecture. We have words for them like :neoclassical. One thing the Bible does not do is condone horoscopic astrology of any description.

Oh, I did not mean to leave the impression that I or these astrologers were quoting the Bible as "gospel" law re astrology - simply that these sayings are handy, well-known expressions that provide metaphors for their feelings about the potential problems created by trying to insert the new into "old containers". I should have just skipped any Biblical reference.

To address your second sentence with an example in my own environment - I live on a street where there are brand-new houses built in fine upright 19th-century style (not restorations), and there are also a couple of Frank Lloyd Wright houses that have been restored to their incredibly innovative beauty. To me, the new houses built in traditional style seem "same old same old", quaint and colorful but not worth gazing at; but worse is that they are very inharmonious with the very natural, rocky, woodsy landscape of this street, more like garish intrusions on the wild beauty rather than an enhancement of it.

This is loosely analogous to the inharmonious natures of the old rulers of Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn for the "landscapes" of Scorpio, Pisces, and Aquarius. These traditional rulers now seem to have been "imposed" on these three signs rather than truly in harmony with the vibrations we know of these signs.

But the Frank Lloyd Wright houses are so original, so aesthetically beautiful, that you can't take your eyes off of them - most important about this is that, as with most FLW houses, they are very organic in design; i.e., they blend into their natural settings as if stunning outgrowths of the land itself, not intrusions on it.

This is analogous to the non-traditional planets of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto harmonizing so much better with the "environments" of Aquarius, Pisces, and Scorpio.

With increasing insensitivity to locating new traditional-style houses -- flatter lots with no rock outcropping, dense forest, or rocky meandering streams, etc. -- my naturally beautiful street has been excavated and hacked up into a hodgepodge of upright, right-angled neo-Victorian houses (that actually required flattening lovely hills and rock outcroppings to build) interspersed with naturalistic mid-20th C. modern art built into the landscape.

The street now looks and feels like an inharmonious mess...much like hybrid astrology looks and feels to me.

Mythologically Chiron was associated with Sagittarius, not Virgo. The earth is our standpoint, not a planet visible up in the sky. Its horoscope position can be plotted, but it is always opposite the sun. So there is still work to do.

Do read Clow's book on Chiron. Chiron was associated with Sagittarius for one flimsy reason - Chiron was a centaur. But the Sagittarius centaur is a strong, unwounded centaur with a bow and arrow at the ready, while Chiron was the only gentle, peaceful centaur with a wound that would never heal - whose mission was to teach and to heal others. Hardly a ruler for Sagittarius.

You're certainly right about the cosmological problems in working out how the Earth could possibly be the ruler of Taurus; I can only wait and see if somebody can accomplish that. I can't. But there's still something appealing about it to me - Taurus is the earthiest of the earth signs and not as much into pure Venusian beauty and and the more abstract concept of Libran balance as into pure pleasure of the material (earthly) senses.

One interesting thing about Aquarius in a natal horoscope is that, in a quadrant house system, you would normally get either Aquarius or Capricorn on the house cusp. If it's Capricorn, that would give the house a more Saturnine cast. If it's Aquarius, I would look at the location and condition of both Saturn and Uranus.

THAT is an excellent point! It explains so very well why many Aquarians exude a Saturnine demeanor and approach to life, thus encouraging the belief that Saturn co-rules Aquarius, when it is actually ruling the Capricorn Ascendant of so many Aquarians. Good observation! Thank you!!

 

[waybread]

Actually this was probably the work of other factors in the. charts.
Leo/Aquarius oppose and compliment each other.
Aquarius is so good at putting up with the drama and self-centredness of the Leo sun, while Leo is just the energy needed to pull Aquarius out of its ivory tower to play with the mortals.

My sun is in Aquarius and my moon is in Leo. Let's hope I get the best of both worlds.

 

[waybread]

Hi again, Ancar -- Thanks again for a good discussion.

As someone who loves old houses and once owned some in a National Historic District, I am very sorry about what happened to your street.

Maybe architecture was a an unfortunate choice of analogy on my part, but I was partly thinking of the neighborhood where I grew up. It was developed in the 1920's when "neo" ("revival") styles were very popular: neocolonial (Georgian,) neo-Dutch Colonial, neo-Tudor. (I was too far north for Spanish colonial revival.) Today these older homes have a lot of charm about them.

I read Clow's book on Chiron a few decades ago. I still have it in a store room.

We probably need a new thread on Chiron's sign rulership, if any. Briefly, I think Chiron shows "where it hurts," but where, if we stay open to those hurts, we gain in wisdom and compassion. Wisdom has a strong 9th chord theme to it, unlike Virgo (which I also like, having Virgo rising.) I don't recall Clow working with house cusp rulers.

My feeling about those modern astrology books popular in the 1970s-1990s is that some of them are really good books to put into practice, like Robert Hand's early series, and Stephen Forrest, The Inner Sky and The Changing Sky. For me personally (and not necessarily for you or anybody else,) I've become cynical about the evolutionary astrology trend. I prefer works that have more practical utility in chart-reading. I think there is such a thing as higher consciousness: I just don't see astrology as the best path to get there. except as an adjunct to some other more established belief system.

My sun, Mercury, and Venus are in Aquarius, with my sun trine Uranus. In most house systems, Capricorn is on the cusp of my Aquarian planets' house; with Saturn in Capricorn. I feel some affinity for both planets.

Saturn can rightly be called all kinds of negative names, but the good side of Saturn teaches patience, hard work, frugality, and other beneficial character traits. Saturn rules loneliness but its beneficial side teaches resourcefulness and the gifts of solitude.

Speaking of old houses, Saturn does have an affinity for the past.

The time orientation of Uranus is in the future. So careful Saturnine patience and hard work can lead to the future one wants.

I don't see Aquarius, as such, as having a group orientation; except insofar as Aquarians would find a "bestie" or super-close group of friends to be stifling. That's 11th house territory. Aquarius does have the capacity for detachment, and a herd mentality would belong to some other sign. Consequently Aquarians are fine with larger groups and associations that allow for social interaction without inducing claustrophobia. I think that's both Saturnine self-sufficiency and Uranian love of freedom talking.

Uranus is the modern ruler of science, but it takes a lot of Saturnine work to produce meaningful scientific results. In fact, I see Uranus and Saturn as being a terrific combination for engineers.

I get a chuckle out of this Saturnine-Uranian saying, that there is no one so conservative as an old liberal.

The earth in a horoscope is symbolized by the AC (sunrise) and DC (sunset) axis, if not the entire lower hemisphere. Viewed differently, the earth is one's standpoint in a geocentric, topocentric model of the cosmos. If it's merely the zodiac degree opposite the sun, we can use it as a polarity, already.

 

[david starling]

The Earth/Sun, precessional, astrological Age, is representative of the Earth's current sign location.[IMO] These Ages are Mod, because they became a known astrological phenomenon beginning in the 19th Century. This puts the Earth's representative retrograde in either Pisces or Aquarius using a sidereal zodiac, and direct in Capricorn using the tropical zodiac.

Strangely enough, many otherwise knowledgeable astrologers don't even know just how the much-talked-about sidereal Ages are being determined.

 

[david starling]

Like it or not, according to NASA research, Saturn's rings are disintegrating - a good metaphor regarding Saturn's inevitable loss of astrological influence once the Earth's Aquarian Age finally takes full effect under Uranian rulership.

 

[david starling]

Modern-day astrologers are much more likely to believe in the upcoming Age of Aquarius than Trads and Hybrids.

 

[ElenaJ]

Like it or not, according to NASA research, Saturn's rings are disintegrating - a good metaphor regarding Saturn's inevitable loss of astrological influence once the Earth's Aquarian Age finally takes full effect under Uranian rulership.

But Saturn will still retain rulership of Capricorn.

 

[david starling]

But Saturn will still retain rulership of Capricorn.

Yes, thank you. I meant that it will lose much of its current strength of influence, not that it will become powerless. I also believe Pluto's strength will increase.

 

[david starling]

We all tend to think of Saturn as being about delays, rules, restrictions, etc. But it's also about Linear Time Measurement (Cronus + Chronos) - Saturn, god of Time (Chronology). It's a time-ruled Age. There's plenty of evidence for that, compared to previous Ages.

 

[ElenaJ]

We all tend to think of Saturn as being about delays, rules, restrictions, etc. But it's also about Linear Time Measurement (Cronus + Chronos) - Saturn, god of Time (Chronology). It's a time-ruled Age. There's plenty of evidence for that, compared to previous Ages.

Well said.

 

[aqualovebot]

I had a miserable time when trSaturn was in Aquarius. It felt like an attack rather than a homecoming! Anyway, we"ll have to "agree to disagree"" on Mod rulership assignments since I'm neither Hybrid nor Trad and have no objection as to how they were made. What "works for me" doesn't necessarily "work for you". Is your Moon in Aqua? We had a thread for members with Aqua Moons and as I recall, none of us liked the last Saturn transit through Aquarius.

No my moon is in Sag. I have an Aqua Sun and Venus. As for my experience with Saturn in Aqua transit I will not lie - it was not bad at all if anything it built the foundations for one of the best years of my life. I must admit however I do have a dignified Saturn in my chart as its in his own triplicity, and face.

I'm pretty sure one characteristic of "Modern day astrology" now, is full acceptance of the outer-mosts as Domicile rulers, with no "co-rulerships" needed.

I'm in no way arguing that it isn't - as I understand it is one of the foundations of Modern Astrology.

 

[david starling]

No my moon is in Sag. I have an Aqua Sun and Venus. As for my experience with Saturn in Aqua transit I will not lie - it was not bad at all if anything it built the foundations for one of the best years of my life. I must admit however I do have a dignified Saturn in my chart as its in his own triplicity, and face.

I'm in no way arguing that it isn't - as I understand it is one of the foundations of Modern Astrology.

Moon in Sag is a great placement as long as it's well aspected! I usually like my Aquarius Moon, but not when it was conjunct the "Lord of the rings".

Then too, there was the worldwide "Pandemic" mess, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine during that Saturn transit.

 

[aqualovebot]

Moon in Sag is a great placement as long as it's well aspected! I usually like my Aquarius Moon, but not when it was conjunct the "Lord of the rings".

Then too, there was the worldwide "Pandemic" mess, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine during that Saturn transit.

Well that’s quite interesting itself and might spark an interesting factor into this topic. Ukraine birth chart has a Capricorn Ascendant and Aquarius moon. I believe a Leo stellium as well. From what I remember at the time of declaration of War Saturn was in almost exact conjunction with the moon.

 

[ElenaJ]

it was conjunct the "Lord of the rings".

What is that all about?