Llewellyn Worldwide, Ltd.
View your shopping cart Shopping Cart | My Account | Help | Become a Fan on Facebook Become a Fan | Follow Us on Twitter Follow Us | Watch Us on YouTube Watch Us | Subscribe to our RSS Feeds Subscribe
Browse ProductsAuthorsArticlesBlogsEncyclopediaNewslettersAffiliate ProgramContact UsBooksellers
Advanced Search

You’re a Leo? Nope, You’re Wrong.

This post was written by Anna
on January 11, 2011 | Comments (9)

I’ve heard this discussion before, one that broaches the topic of the wobble of the Earth’s axis and the possible one-month “bump” in Sun Signs that resulted, making the Sun in, say, Aquarius rather than in Pisces.  I thought that this article was interesting, especially since it turned up in one of my local newspapers.

The article, “The Stars Might Not Actually Be Aligned in Your Favor,” avers that since the Earth wobbles (known as “precession”), the dates that we consider to be in a Sun Sign actually belong to another. In addition, others have proposed that since the ecliptic passes through the constellation Ophiuchus after Scorpio, the zodiac would now contain thirteen Sun Signs instead of twelve. The cycle of precession is 25,800 years, so though we are now about 1/10 off (about one-month), eventually we will become extremely far from our original Sun Signs before returning to the original placement.

How do we deal with this information? Do we all change our Sun Signs with each year as the earth moves along its ecliptic? Do we ignore? What do you think?

Reader Comments

Written By Ommar
on January 11th, 2011 @ 7:27 pm

I think we must not change our Sun signs. I was born as an Aquarius, and my first reading about my personality traits were describing me in most of the part. Also I haave known people that behaves exactly as they are “supposed” to. I think the sun sign does not depend from the constellation.

Written By Sheryl
on January 12th, 2011 @ 1:17 pm

Have the Anunnaki struck again? Anything written in the newspaper or media driven, I take with a grain of salt as well as anyone or anything trying to mislead you in knowing who you really are. There is so much bull feathers out there that tries to remove you from your Spiritual path. With or without Astrology, you know who you are. It’s within you.

In 1543 it was announced that it was the Sun, not Earth, that was the center of the world. This information lead to the loss and destruction of the common understanding of the universe, the destruction of humans being intune with nature. It’s quite evident what Sun worship has done to the Earth. Gaea/Gaia doesn’t read newspaper articles or books. She knows what she’s doing.

Even though humans are and can be changed by written words, Nature is not changed by the article. If you were a healthy 120 pounds and someone told you that you were fat, that alone could trigger someone into anorexic behavior. Nuff said?

Love and hugs…Have a great day!

Written By Rupert Cameron
on January 12th, 2011 @ 1:36 pm

The motion of wobbling describes a back and forth movement which suggests a temporary motion that resets to the original positional location unless the wobbling is continuant. On that assumption if you were to change something (Sun signs) to a different location permanently it would therefore become incorrect or innaccurate again over the period of the motion or wobble. Suffice to say “temporary”
would be the key indicater that it is most stable to leave as is alone unless and if the extent of the wobble can be measured to it’s extent and on an ongoing basis.

Written By Naya Aerodiode
on January 13th, 2011 @ 10:33 am

There is no grain of salt to take – data is data, whether or not you like what it has to say. All you have to do is look at the stars and their positions to know that this day (January 13), the sun is currently in the quadrant of the sky associated with Sagittarius, not Capricorn. I use Stellarium when I go out stargazing (it’s a free download at http://www.stellarium.org/ ), and it calculates the current positions of planets so that you can find them easily in the night sky, and then you can go look for yourself and see where the planets really are. You’ll find that they’re in very different positions than what those books will tell you. Really, have we gotten so far from the natural world that we don’t even look at the sky anymore? What’s more important – hanging onto the dogma put forth in a book, or connecting with and understanding the natural world as it really is?

Written By Jennifer
on January 13th, 2011 @ 5:18 pm

So was the Sun in the house of Aquarius on 2/3/1974 or Capricorn? I feel like I just found out I was adopted. What is the astrological community feeling on this?

Written By Kyle
on January 13th, 2011 @ 7:16 pm

I second Naya’s comment very strongly,
If we are to treat astrology as a science, which it should be, then we need to take into account new data. The ancient did, which is why they based the Zodiac on how they saw the sky. To follow how the sky looked 2,000 years ago would be like saying that we need to follow ancient ideas of physics (such as the disproven, but once believed, idea that heavy objects fall faster than lighter ones). The Earth’s wobble (called precession) completes a cycle every 26,000 years. Astrological signs will therefore shift overtime. This is science! This is nature!

Written By Elysia
on January 13th, 2011 @ 9:19 pm

Hey everyone, don’t worry about it! The horoscope/zodiac sign you’re most likely familiar with is called tropical astrology, and the type of horoscope that actually follows the constellations as they are in the sky is sidereal astrology. Astrologers have known the difference for years, now you can too! What this means is that your zodiac sign is still perfectly valid, for doing tropical astrology (which most every newspaper and book in the US follows) – if you ever want to explore sidereal astrology, then follow those “new” dates and see what happens!
Here is a nice summary of the situation from Rob Brezsny, if you’re on facebook. (Even if you’re not, the link might still work)

Written By Anna
on January 14th, 2011 @ 10:15 am

Thanks for the input! More input from author Susyn Blair-Hunt also points to the fact that our Sun Signs have indeed NOT changed: http://www.llewellyn.com/blog/2011/01/has-my-astrological-sign-changed-no/. Even CNN.com had a rebuttal to the original Star Tribune article: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/13/no-your-zodiac-sign-hasnt-changed/?hpt=C2.


Add a Comment

required, use real name
required, will not be published
optional, your blog address

Verification Code:
Please enter the words that you see, below, into the box provided.

Previous Post: