The Archetypal, Mythological Roots of Astrology

Though the astronomical, historical, and cosmological reasons for the use of the sidereal zodiac are plenty, it is also vital that modern astrologers recognize the archetypal past of the modern zodiac and the value of looking to the true sidereal roots of Western astrology. The modern zodiac subtly vibrates with the the ancient mythological underpinnings of the zodiac, which most definitely originally came from the sky. 

Even though Western tropical astrologers might say the signs “have nothing to do with” the constellations, that is a stretch. Though in the modern era the tropical use of the zodiac is symbolic only, the names of the signs did originally come from the same Babylonian roots, as did the entire practice of Hellenistic astrology. The Babylonians saw the astrological houses as equal to the constellations; the houses were the constellations, in other words. Thus, whether every tropical realizes it and appreciates it or not, the modern tropical zodiac carries the ancient traces of the mythological meanings attached to each constellation. And each constellation is a storehouse of cultural references, mythologies, stories, astronomical observations, and symbolic knowledge that informed the zodiac signs.

The modern day associations with Taurus, for example, are related to a constellation that very clearly appeared to be a bull to the Babylonians - and that same association and the mythological traces of its lore has been passed down to everyone who adopted the system henceforth (the same system that was incorrectly translated from the Babylonian astronomical tablets by the Greeks, and then the Romans - see https://soulfigures.art/blogs/news/the-false-dichotomy-of-the-tropical-vs-sidereal-astrology-debate). The layers of mythology and cultural significance associated with the constellations are baked into astrology, and there is simply no way around it. And yes, you will encounter a certain cognitive dissonance trying to make it make sense when someone says a planet in the solar system is “in” Pisces or Libra, for example, when those are the names of constellations, but the person speaking does not refer the constellations in which the planets can be viewed in the sky. It does not quite make sense, in fact. Using the signs in alignment with the constellations, if only for ease of terminology, makes quite a bit more sense. 

However, working with the archetypal associations with the zodiac (even indirectly, from about 23.5° away...) cultivates an awareness of the human condition and the themes humans have wrestled with for millennia. And astrologers of all stripes are sensitized to these themes, and thus have much to offer people’s navigation of the human experience. 

Perhaps it is actually through an intuitive grasp of the archetypes associated with each planet and constellation that many popular astrologers get their insights as much, if not more so, than their calculations. Archetypes work on a channel of intuitive, often unconscious meanings; since every planet and every sign has an archetype, we “bump up” against these ancient forms whether we realize it or not. That intuitive sense, plus the "invisible" in mundo aspects of a chart, are what many astrologers rely on that helps them yield "accurate" reads on a chart...even with an out of date zodiac!

In any case, when we choose to consciously reconnect with the archetypal resonances of the signs and the planets, the importance of the larger history of astrology and our true moment in cosmological time is clarified. If nothing else, we can all agree that astrology is both an art and a science - and we need both, intuitive reasoning alongside observable astronomical phenomena - to cultivate a vibrant discipline.