As We Face the Future - 2
What is the solution of the problem in so far as an astrology based on the tropical-seasonal zodiac is concerned? The simpler solution is that Aries becomes Libra in the south hemisphere. Southern-hemispheric birth-charts should therefore have all their zodiacal signs reversed, so that if a person in Buenos Aires is born in early August his Sun is in Aquarius.
This solution has been strongly advocated by the now deceased French engineer-astrologer, D. Neroman, who founded in Paris the College A strologique de France, wrote impressive, large volumes, and used a very remarkable gadget, the Domigraphe, to show clearly the state of the celestial sphere and the zodiac at every time for a number of latitudes. When I presented this solution in a magazine, one of the most vocal "siderealists" scornfully commented that this was absurd, because two men born at the same time less than a mile apart, but on either side of the exact equator, would have their natal Suns, one in Aries, the other in Libra. It is true that this seemingly does not make too much sense; but what this siderealist did not take into consideration is the possibility that actually the equatorial zone of the globe should have its own astrology — and so should have, for other reasons, the polar zones. If the two hemispheres have each their own pole star, why should they not have, each, their own astrology? Why should there be only one astrology? This is the basic issue.
Stated this way, the problem takes on a greater and very significant scope, which, however, is partially modified by a second solution to the hemispheric difficulty just mentioned. This solution, stressed by Marc Edmund Jones, is that our present-day civilization is indeed "north hemispheric." It was born north of the Tropic of Cancer — even in India — and below the Arctic Circle.
What Marc Jones means, of course, is that our civilization brought its basic, not only conscious, but unconscious patterns of mind — its fundamental symbols — to the southern hemisphere. There may have been south-hemispheric centers of civilization in South America (the Incas) and in South Africa, but these no doubt had their own symbols, their own weltanschauung, and therefore their own astrology if they were actually born in this southern hemisphere. Any culture south of the equator which accepts our "north hemispheric" astrology thereby reveals its essential dependence upon societies which built these mental concepts and ways of life in more or less temperate northern regions. This is true today of Australia, New Zealand, White South Africa, and even South America; they really are all as yet cultural colonies of European nations and almost totally dependent upon social, mental and artistic patterns of Europe.
A geographical observation tends to confirm this approach in terms of our geomorphic interpretation of the shapes of the continents. Not only can South America and Africa be considered to be downpointing triangular masses, but practically all peninsulas are also pointing downward from the northern regions — witness Indo-China, India, Greece, Italy, Florida. In some cases, like Denmark and Normandy, which seem to be exceptions to the rule, we are probably dealing with regions which had been fairly recently parts of other lands just to the north.
Of course, this does not "prove" anything; but it suggests that there are definite "lines of force" tending to flow southward from the north pole and to pull land masses in this southerly direction. This would mean that, indeed, our planet receives cosmic forces in the north polar regions, and that these forces are streaming southward, even below the equator. The point is here that this may be true at any time; so that, if a great original civilization should be found now located in the southern hemisphere, this would mean that when it was started, the poles were so placed that it actually was in the northern hemisphere of that time. In other words, it may very well be that all great civilizations originate in the northern hemisphere, that the southern hemisphere is like the negative polarity of the globe, that therefore astrology should be "north hemispheric." The location of the poles is not fixed; they were once at the place of what is now our equatorial belt and Antarctica and Northern Siberia were long ago warm lands. Thus it is always possible that the poles will shift again.
All this of course makes everything very confusing, unless one takes a strictly relativistic attitude and one does not consider whatever represent to us vitally significant symbols absolutely valid for the whole globe and for all times. This relativistic approach to knowledge, and to astrology among other manifestations of a particular civilization, is the one I have taken throughout my life. The zodiac of signs is our zodiac, now. It was probably not that of the Egyptian or Chaldean civilizations, and in India various systems are co-existing, very likely because Northern India and Southern India have basically two rather different cultures and two different groups of languages; but this need not be of any concern to us. Perhaps what concerns us today will not concern our descendants during the Aquarian Age, for then perhaps the whole concept of zodiac may appear meaningless.
By permission of Leyla Rudhyar Hill
Copyright © 1969 by Dane Rudhyar
and Copyright © 2001 by Leyla Rudhyar Hill
All Rights Reserved.
Web design and all data, text and graphics appearing on this site are protected by US and International Copyright and are not to be reproduced, distributed, circulated, offered for sale, or given away, in any form, by any means, electronic or conventional.
for full copyright statement and conditions of use.
Web design copyright © 2000-2004 by Michael R. Meyer.
All Rights Reserved.