The False Division of Tropical & Sidereal Astrology
Full disclosure: The author started with tropical astrology and eventually found it wanting, then shifted to sidereal. Although I have a broad background in both systems, I definitely have an opinion, and this article doesn’t claim neutrality!
The relative merits of the tropical or sidereal zodiac are a point of conflict amongst astrologers, and a source of much misunderstanding and misinformation in modern astrology. In this article, we’ll break down some of the common misunderstandings in the sidereal vs. tropical debate, with the intention of encouraging a bit more open-mindedness in Western astrology circles towards the merits of the sidereal system. Let us embrace the spirit of Aquarius, the sign that rules astrology and astrologers, and be broad-minded, inclusive, and curious about the best way to serve humanity with evolving knowledge systems.
First, a few definitions:
Tropical astrology, which is far more prevalent in the West, is based on a symbolic zodiac that aligns the spring equinox with 0° Aries.
Sidereal (side-eer-ee-al) astrology, on the other hand, is based on the “scientific” zodiac, which observes the spring equinox at its cosmologically current position of about 5° Pisces, and thus connects the signs more closely to the actual constellations.
Now, many people might balk at the idea that astrology needs to be “scientific” at all. Fair enough. And one of the larger takeaways that comes from comparing these two systems is that the symbolic power of the archetypes in astrology is strong enough that astrology might not need to be astronomically accurate in all aspects to be useful.
But considering that astrology makes a lot of meaning out of things such as the Earth’s relationship to the Sun, the Sun’s path along the ecliptic as apparent to us from Earth, and the way the equatorial rotations of the Earth produce the seasons, it does make sense that we include as much astronomy as possible that is relevant. And the precession of the equinoxes is not minor astronomical minutiae. In fact it informs our very notion of which astrological age we are in.
The precession of the equinoxes, created by the earth’s gradual wobble, makes the earth shift such that the Sun’s position in relation to the Earth moves backwards along the ecliptic (the band of constellations traveled by the Sun each year). This wobble moves extremely slowly from an earthly perspective, by one degree every 72 years, and results in a roughly 23.5° difference between the two astrological systems.
And yes, sidereal time puts many of the planets in your natal chart in a different sign than you’re used to, if you’re a Westerner. Hence, why Western astrologers often don’t like it! It scrambles things up quite a bit. But consider this: the mental scramble of taking a glance at your chart in sidereal time is really not so different from how the various house systems in astrology can drastically change a natal chart or a transit; astrology is already a field full of many arguments – and absolutely zero agreements – about which way of doing things is best.
And, if you’d like a handy reference chart for exactly when the Sun truly changes signs in terms of the constellations in the sky, see our Sidereal Sun Signs chart!
The Truce that Solves Nothing
Anyway, back to the topic of tropical or sidereal astrology. The question of which system is “better” often leads to hot debates that go nowhere. In a spirit of goodwill (we are, after all, influenced by that Aquarian brotherhood and humanitarianism), astrologers try to settle on cosmological truces that go something like this:
“Sure, sidereal astrology uses the true constellations and accounts for the precession of the equinoxes, but tropical astrology is based on the seasons. Sidereal astrology is Indian and lunar-based, whereas Western tropical is Western and sun-based. They’re two different approaches from two different cultures.”
Settling on the idea of two differing but equal cultural practices, chalking it up to a matter of astrological apples and oranges, in other words, might be easier than debating the merits of each system. However, this truce is based on some false dichotomies and leaves key aspects of the history of astrology unexplored. And, if the history and context of a practice is left in the dark, the art and science of it weaken. So let’s cast some light and clean things up in here!
The first false Dichotomy: “It’s Just Cultural”
First, the idea that sidereal astrology is only the provenance of Vedic astrologers – and that therefore Westerners should steer clear of it for the sake of cultural consistency – is simply false. There is also a healthy strain of sidereal astrology practice in the West — called, it so happens, Western sidereal astrology (1). Though Western tropical astrology is far more prevalent, the Western sidereal system in fact predates Hellenistic tropical astrology in the West.
It is really hard to get Western astrologers and astrology students to even wrap their minds around the fact that sidereal time is not synonymous with Vedic astrology. People frequently assume one indicates the other, and react as if the question being put before them is one of cultural affiliation and traditional knowledge systems. (And…there might be a smidge of Western Eurocentricism percolating under the collar in some of these conversations…not always, but probably sometimes).
Next, another false cultural comparisons Westerners often make when dismissing sidereal time (which, again, to many Western minds is synonymous with Vedic astrology):
The Next False Dichotomy: “Lunar vs. Solar”
Closely related to the idea that sidereal astrology is solely the provenance of Vedic astrologers is the cultural presumption that because Vedic is more lunar, sidereal astrology is incompatible with Western astrology, which is solar. But whether an astrologer focuses on the Moon or the Sun as a more important factor in personality is unrelated to sidereal time. Vedic astrology’s focus on the Moon (versus Western tropical astrology’s focus on the Sun) is a separate topic from its use of sidereal calculations.
Again, the sidereal zodiac (whether in the Vedic system or the Western) is informed by the precession of the equinoxes and reflects a much closer depiction of where the planets are in terms of the constellations. It says nothing about the Moon or Sun as primary drivers of personality; it simply describes the Sun’s apparent relationship to the ecliptic, and thus which part of the zodiac the Sun or any other planet is in at a given moment.
The Next False Dichotomy: Western Astrology Can’t be Done without the Tropical Zodiac
The Western tropical zodiac, due to the “drift” it has taken over the centuries away from the constellations, is wholly symbolic. This is not to say all of tropical astrology is fluff and imaginary – the planetary aspects in a chart, and the impact of various house systems (which inform the equatorial aspect of astrology, bringing the stars “down to earth”) are all real. All of these astrological events are just put into a symbolic version of the zodiac that is no longer related to the actual sky.
Again, there is nothing inherently wrong with using a symbolic system, but it is worth emphasizing this difference because a lot of people are unaware of it. I know that I personally was absolutely scandalized when I first caught onto the fact that tropical astrologers refer to planets being in “signs” that have nothing to do with the constellation those sign names come from. For example, many folks assume that when Western astrologers say, for example, “Mars is in Pisces,” they are literally referring to the planet Mars traveling along the constellation Pisces in the actual sky – when in fact, Mars is often still back in Aries, due to that 23.5° gap created by precession.
However, using sidereal time does not have to mean throwing away all the Western mythological and zodiacal lore of the Western zodiac, adopting Vedic names for the planets, and changing one’s whole cultural frame of reference. Doing so is unnecessary and could also result in sloppy, piecemeal cultural misappropriation – something the world doesn’t need any more of, eh? (And by the way, we’ve put together a handy guide to the Western zodiac in archetypal terms – its most useful function – as a purely symbolic system. See below.)
What does it all Mean
There is no real good reason, aside from force of habit, that Western astrologers could not simply dial their astrological calculators back to align with the true sky. We could even still conceptualize the “starting point” of the zodiac at Aries, while using the true astronomical sidereal calculations for astrological events. Or, we could decide to dial it all forward and christen Aquarius the start of spring – since we’re heading towards the Age of Aquarius, when the spring equinox will pass through the Water-Bearer, soon.
But if we continue to use a zodiac that dates to millennia ago for a dynamic art and science that is deeply connected to the stars and planets, which are in constant movement, we are missing something profound, are we not?
The main purpose of this post was to illustrate why we need to stop misconstruing the “cosmological time lag” between the tropical and sidereal astrology as a “cultural issue.” It is, in fact, a scientific issue. The only cultural issue is that this problem appears in the astrology of the West, and not the East.
In the next post in this series, come with us to ancient Babylonia as we can dig into the real “cultural issue” at play in the predominance of the tropical zodiac in the West: the incomplete appropriation of a conquered culture’s knowledge system. This problem of consuming another culture’s astrological practice without understanding its original context is precisely how the Western tropical zodiac came to be disassociated from the actual sky. Read on with the next part of this series to get more of the history of sidereal time being used in Western astrology.
Again, though the author is convinced of sidereal astrology’s utility and insights, the purpose of this series of posts is not necessarily to convince people to migrate to sidereal, but to consider it legitimate and viable, and allow it to have a place at the astrological conference table, so to speak, in the West. (Though I guess that conference table would have to be covered in a tie-dyed throw of some kind, wouldn’t it?) Really, the question at the heart of the issue of the tropical or sidereal zodiac is more about force of habit and how stubbornly we hew to what is familiar. But maybe our lens on the skies would benefit from the exploration of what else is possible. Due to increased interest in the topic of sidereal astrology, it is likely that as more astrologers and astrology students explore sidereal time, it will finally become accepted as merely yet another entirely viable Western system – amongst the several systems that astrologers argue about!
References:
- Bowser, Kenneth. Western Sidereal Astrology (website). https://www.westernsiderealastrology.com/
