Rob Brezsny's statement to the New York Times on all this astrological drama is pretty good. But I also enjoy last night's statement to the media by the Washington State Astrological Association. (Also, I remain completely confused about all of this.)
Statement Regarding Zodiac Signs by the Washington State Astrological Association
In response to the recent attention regarding the movement of astrological signs, the Washington State Astrological Association would like to share these facts with the media:
• There are two zodiacs: the tropical zodiac and the sidereal zodiac.
• Western astrology uses the tropical zodiac. Vedic (Indian) astrology uses the sidereal zodiac, which is fixed to the constellations.
• The tropical zodiac has been a part of astrological tradition for millennia. The signs of the zodiac have differed from the constellations since Aristarchus of Samos in 230 BCE. It was codified in the 2nd century by Ptolemy, who wrote about 12 astrological signs.
• Western astrology is based on the seasons of the year. It is not based upon the constellations. There are three signs in each of the four seasons.
• Seasonally-based astrology has not changed. The seasons have a dramatic influence on our lives and on Earth.
• Sun sign horoscopes, commonly found in the media, are based on the tropical zodiac.
• Ophiuchus is a constellation. It is not a zodiacal sign.
• Ophiuchus is not newly discovered. It was on Ptolemy’s list of recognized constellations in his classic Tetrabiblos.
• Vedic astrology, which uses the sidereal zodiac, does not recognize Ophiuchus as an astrological sign.
Washington State Astrological Association