Sidereel

[ndnchick26]

I have used sidereel for my birth chart and it is a total miss. Then I worked with Solar Returns, spot on. Does anyone have thoughts? Mine is that it works well in the dynamic sense. To me birth charts are a blue print to our life. Meaning struggles, gifts, and events that urge growth. Solar Returns are a small slices of time. Not a total picture of whole. Just a small moment in it all. 

[Ava]

@ndnchick26

I haven't worked with sidereal, except when I briefly studied Vedic.

Thanks for suggesting this idea. I think I'll tinker around at astro.com and report back my findings.

[Deleted]

I have tried sidereal out before and have had no success. I am definitely not a Libra Rising; that's for sure. I've met other Libra Risings and how we are in public differs quite a bit. Plus I don't feel connected to having a Capricorn stellium.

[glaucus]

Babylonian Astrologers were using a Sidereal Zodiac.
I use the Sidereal Zodiac, but I don't agree with the use of elements,gender and planetary rulers.
Babylonian Astrologers didn't use them.
Those concepts came from the Greek astrologers based on Tropical Zodiacal concepts.

Unlike other Siderealists, I don't want to intepret zodiac signs based on their mode,elements,and ruling planets which were concepts that were derived from the Greeks' Northern Hemisphere seasonal, weather,and atmospheric observations.

I want to use actual Babylonian star-lore as the basis for my zodiac sign interpretations.
Of course, I want to use the names that the Babylonians used and not the ones that were created by the Greeks.
Therefore, Sidereal Zodiac intepretation would be much different from Tropical Zodiac interpretation.


After reading about Mesopotamian Star-lore, I think of Gu-la (Aquarius) as Ea/Enki who was the God of the Waters,Wisdom,and Magic. Like Neptune/Poseidon, he lived underwater.
He resided in the Apsu which was the ocean underneath the earth.

I think of Sahur-Mas-ku (Capricorn) as Ea/Enki's symbol, and so I view it as having an aquatic nature and nothing to do with being earthy and Saturnian.

I think of Zi-bi-an-na (Libra) as the scales which were held sacred by the sungod Shumash who was God of Truth and Justice. Instead of a placement of debilitation, I definitely see it as a placement of strength and favorability. I don't see it as having anything to do with being Airy and Venusian.

I think of Mas-tab-ba-gal-gal (Gemini) as a pair of warriors that guarded the entrances to the Underworld. They were associated with Nergal, the War God of the Underworld, Disease, and Pestilence. Nergal was linked to the planet, Mars. I view Gemini as Martian instead of Mercurial and Airy.



I don't believe that any zodiac is more or less accurate than others.
There is so much diversity in Astrology that arguing which astrological system is more accurate is futile.
I have a "to each,his/her own" approach to Astrology as well as everything else in life.
I just believe that Modern Babylonian Astrology is my path.


My Babylonian Zodiac placements

Sun in Zi-ba-an-ana (The Scales) - Libra
Moon in Gu-la (The Great One) - Aquarius
Mercury in Zi-ba-an-ana (The Scales) - Libra
Venus in Zi-ba-an-ana (The Scales) - Libra
Mars in Gu-la (The Great One) - Aquarius
Jupiter in Gir-tab (The Scorpion) - Scorpio
Saturn in Gu-An-Ana (The Bull of Heaven) - Taurus
Uranus in Ab-sin (The Furrow) - Virgo
Neptune in Gir-tab (The Scorpion) - Scorpio
Pluto in Ab-sin (The Furrow) - Virgo
Ascendant in Ur-Gu-la (The Lion) - Leo
Descendant in Gu-la (The Great One) - Aquarius
Midheaven in Gu-An-Ana (The Bull of Heaven) - Taurus
Imum Coeli in Gir-tab (The Scorpion) - Scorpio
North Lunar Node in Mul Suhur-Mas-Ku (The Goat-fish) - Capricorn
South Lunar Node in Mul Al-ul (The Crab) - Cancer

[glaucus]

Norming of the Zodiac
from pages 131 to 132 of The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, And Astronomy In Mesopotamian Culture by Francesca Rochberg

Since Ptolemy's Almagest, the beginning of the zodiac at 0 degrees Aries was fixed in relation to the vernal equinox, which however, moves westward at a constant rate of (1/72 degrees per year). The Babylonian zodiac was not counted from the vernal point, but was generally normed by the end points of zodiacal constellations, each one counted from 0 degrees to 30 degrees. This implies an ecliptic of 360 degrees, but Babylonian astronomy employed degrees within signs rather than a strictly numerical count of longitudes from 0 to 360. Also the longitudes assigned to the fixed stars were done so arbitrarily with the result that the zero point of the ecliptic did not coincide with the vernal equinox. That the Babylonian zodiac was sidereally fixed implies that regardless of date the fixed stars do not change their positions (degree of longitude) with respect to the norming point of the ecliptic.

The zodiac and the year itself were defined sidereally, so that one year was the time in which they returned to the same position with respect to a fixed star. The year that was counted from vernal equinox to vernal equinox, known as the tropical year, was not distinguished by the Babylonians from the sidereal year. To have done so would have been to recognize the fact that the equinoxes move - the precession of the equinoxes - and this has been ruled out for Babylonian astronomy.

In mathematical astronomical texts, the equinoxes and solstices were also normed sidereally at 10 degrees Aries in system A and 8 degrees Aries in System B. That the cardinal points of the year do not correspond to the zero points of the appropriate signs in the Babylonian zodiac is a result of the sidereal (rather than the tropical) construction of the zodiac. The two systems of Babylonian mathematical astronomy maintained the two norming points throughout the period of their use. As Neugerbauer pointed out, neither the chronological relation between Systems A and B Norms nor the reason for their difference is understood. That both vernal-point longitudes remained sidereally fixed, however, proves precession was not recognized.

The counting of the zodiac signs from Aries is a consequence of the origins of the zodiacal signs in the association between zodiacal constellations and the twelve schematic months of the year. Although the original list of stars in the "path of the moon" began at the end of Aries, specifically, with the Pleiades (choosing an exemplary star with longitude), the zodiac, when it is numerated in texts, begin with Aries. More precisely, however, we still cannot establish the star that originally served as norming point for the ecliptic. Even were we assume the vernal point was determined correctly when it was assigned 10 degrees then 8 degrees Aries, the corresponding dates for these zodiacal norming points cannot be pinpointed, as we do not sufficiently understand the ancient methods used to obtain those values. Comparison against modern values for the longitudes of equinoxes is therefore uninformative for this purpose.

[glaucus]

From page 106 to 108
History of the Zodiac by Robert Powell

With respect to the question as to why the zodiacal belt of Normal Stars was divided into twelve signs, each 30 degrees long, van der Waerden in his early article 'History of the Zodiac' writes
'There are twelve signs, because there are twelve months in the schematic year of MUL.APIN...The signs were made of equal length in order to get months of equal duration; they were divided in 30 degrees each because of the schematical months were supposed to contain 30 days each.'

In other words, in the early fifth century BC when the division of the zodiacal belt of Normal Stars into twelve signs was originally formulated, there already existed a schematic calendar devised earlier by Babylonian astronomers, known from the text MUL.APIN. The text of MUL.APIN consists of two tablets dated around 687 BC in which are listed, among many other things, the rising of stars and constellations in terms of schematic year of twelve months each 30 days long. This is a 'schematic year', because the actual civil calendar in Babylon operated with lunar months, which fluctuate in length, being either 29 or 30 days long, and in an inter-calculation year (roughly every third year) there were thirteen instead of twelve lunar months. The Mul.APIN calendar scheme thus represented an idealized year: the ideal of a solar calendar rather than the actual year of twelve (or thirteen) variable length lunar months. With this scheme already in existence, the originator of the system of zodiacal signs was influenced by it in such a way as to specify a twelve-fold division of the zodiacal belt into signs, each sign consisting of 30 degrees, each month consisting of 30 days. Once the idea of this division of the zodiacal belt, analogous to the schematic division of the year, had been formulated, it was simply a matter of defining where the signs should lie in relation to the Normal Stars comprising the zodiacal belt.

Evidently the Babylonian sidereal zodiac originated in the fifth century BC. It was devised as an alternative system to that of the Normal Stars belonging to the zodiacal belt. The division of the zodiacal belt into twelve signs each 30 degrees long was analogous to the schematic division of the year into twelve months, each 30 days long, formulated in the text MUL.APIN around 687 BC. The relationship between the Normal Stars belonging to the zodiacal belt and the division into zodiacal signs was specified by the adoption of the Aldebaran-Antares axis as the fiducial axis for the Babylonian zodiac, with Aldebaran at the middle of the sign Taurus and Antares at the middle of the sign of Scorpio.

Once adopted as the primary reference for the new system of the twelve signs of the zodiac, the longitudes of the remaining Normal stars were defined in terms of sign and degree in the Babylonian zodiac by determining their distances from the Aldebaran-Antares axis. The relationship between Normal Stars and the Babylonian zodiac was recorded in a star catalogue, thus constituting the definition of the Babylonian zodiac. In this way the transition from the system of Normal Stars to the system of zodiacal signs was accomplished, and herein lies the origin of the Babylonian zodiac.

This intrinsic definition of the sidereal zodiac enables it to be reconstructed exactly (Appendix I). The resulting reconstruction of the sidereal zodiac is in exact agreement with the result determined by Huber for the Babylonian definition of the zodiac, confirming the validity of this intrinsic definition of the sidereal zodiac. It is also in conformity with the statement of Cleomedes quoted above who evidently inherited the Babylonian definition. The reconstructed Babylonian star catalogue in Appendix I gives latitudes and longitudes of the 32 Normal Stars together with the latitudes and longitudes of all identifiable stars in Ptolemy's catalogue. The longitudes listed in this reconstruction, defined such that Aldebaran is located at 15 degrees Taurus and Antares at 15 degrees Scorpio, are sidereal, i.e. independent of the location of the vernal point. From this modern reconstruction of the Babylonian sidereal zodiac the relationship between Normal Stars and the zodiac is apparent, e.g. Spica at 29 degrees Virgo marks the closing degree of the sign of Virgo, etc. 





There is some debate what star(s) were used to set up the Sidereal Zodiac
It could be Spica ...who knows

[glaucus]

Western Sidereal Astrologer Kenneth Bowser has some good info about the Sidereal Zodiac.
I have his book, Introduction To Western Sidereal Astrology
www.westernsiderealastrology.com/western-sidereal-book


I use some of his other methods:
use of parallels,contraparallels in Declination
use of parans which he refers to as mundane aspects
I prefer a multi-dimensional Astrology.

This excerpt was first published in 2007 by The Mountain Astrologer Magazine

This is the first in a three part series on western sidereal astrology, its antecedents in the ancient Near East, and its renewal by Cyril Fagan, one of the greatest astrologers of the 20th century. This series, which originally ran in the student section of The Mountain Astrologer, will also cover the introduction of tropical zodiac reckoning, the phenomenon of precession, the astrological ages, and a quick review of the works of Hipparchos of Rhodes and Claudius Ptolemy.

People new to astrology are often confounded by the two main schools of thought within it: tropical and sidereal. Tropical astrology reckons positions of bodies from the Northern Hemisphere vernal equinox. In this system, the zodiac is defined by the seasons and is disconnected from the stars as a frame of reference. It gained currency late in the first millennium B.C. in the Greek world and is practiced today primarily in the West.

Sidereal astrology reckons positions of bodies from the fixed stars. In this system the zodiac is defined by the stars themselves and is disconnected from the seasons as a frame of reference. The earliest form of sidereal astrology gained currency in the Near and Middle East in the second millennium B.C. Sidereal astrology is practiced today primarily in India and among some Westerners, mostly British and American.

There are two schools of sidereal astrology: eastern, also known as Indian, Vedic or Hindu astrology, and Babylonian, also known as western sidereal astrology. Babylonian astrology is a familiar quantity in academia because it is very well documented. Western sidereal astrology is built around the re-discovery in the nineteenth century of the sidereal zodiac employed in Assyria and Babylonia (modern Iraq) that spread throughout the Near and Middle East and the Mediterranean world.

Eastern and western methodologies are similar in some respects, but the differences are great enough that the two schools can only be considered cousins, rather than brothers, joined mainly by their use of the sidereal zodiac. Western sidereal methodology is closer to tropical astrology with the sidereal zodiac substituted for the tropical.

In the ancient world, astrology and astronomy were, in effect, twin disciplines. Every astronomical fact had an astrological corollary, a tenet astrologers still embrace. Early astrology was crude compared to its modern rendering, but it bloomed into a form roughly familiar to modern astrologers in the first millennium B.C.

The earliest Babylonian astronomical document to which a date can be affixed is from 1702 B.C and the last datable Babylonian astronomical document found to date is from A.D. 75. Babylonian materials are plentiful and well-edited from approximately1600 B.C. through to the height of the Roman Imperial Era in the first century of the Christian Era. The earliest astronomical computations in the Middle East were concerned with the varying length of day and night, the rising and setting of the Moon and the appearance and disappearance of Venus. The equinox was noted because of its integral role in the determination of the longest and shortest days.

The most important texts for ancient astrology come from the city-states of Nineveh, Babylon and Uruk in ancient Mesopotamia, and the most important of those texts is the seventy tablet series known by its incipit: the Enuma Anu Enlil (“When [the gods] Anu and Enlil…”). It is the richest source of second millennium B.C. astrological and astronomical information in the world. The Enuma Anu Enlil series deals with solar, lunar, planetary, stellar, zodiacal and meteorological lore and some omens. Its astrology is called judicial because it deals with events and conditions that affect king and country; primary among those are issues that relate to war and peace, quality of the harvest and weather. This was all derived from the positions of the Sun, Moon, planets and stars and sometimes the rising point of the ecliptic. Modern astrologers do the same things, now mostly for individuals, but judicial or political astrology is still very much in vogue.

A two tablet series titled Mul Apin (which means “plowstar”), that is part of the Enuma Anu Enlil series, deals extensively with astronomical lore including the simultaneous risings and settings of constellations, the time interval between the rising of paired constellations and the calendar dates that correspond to the risings and culminations of important stars in the Babylonian pantheon. Mul Apin is a compilation that took centuries to complete. Its completion date is firmly fixed at 687 B.C., and while some scholars place its genesis in the third millennium B.C., the latest work on this series strongly suggests that it dates from 1000 B.C. (1)

The zodiac took many centuries to sort out. The twelve equal division scheme of thirty degrees each is not attested with certainty until 500 B.C., although there is compelling circumstantial evidence, that it is several centuries older than that. Before they produced the modern twelve-fold division of the zodiac the Babylonians used an eighteen unequal division scheme that included the twelve constellations used today but with Pisces in two pieces (the eastern fish and the western fish) plus another constellation within Pisces called “the swallow” and with the addition of the Pleiades, Auriga, Orion and Perseus.

The high water mark for Babylonian mathematical astronomy that transferred directly into an astrological context, covers the second half of the first millennium B.C. The discoveries in the second millennium B.C. that most planetary and astronomical movements are periodic was an enormous stimulus to regular observation, record-keeping and mathematical treatment of those observations.

After the final determination of the reality of the zodiac, the main tool that allowed the Babylonians to graduate from omens to a broader, more extensive astrology, was a technique called period relations. Period relations are a combination of sidereal periods and synodic periods. A synodic period is the time elapsed between successive conjunctions of a planet with the Sun as seen from the Earth. The synodic period for Jupiter, for example, is 398.88 days. A planet’s sidereal period is the time it requires to orbit the Sun as seen from the Earth. The sidereal period for Jupiter is 11.86223 years, but Jupiter’s period relation, discovered by the Babylonians, is thirty-six revolutions of that planet which is 427 years or 391 synodic periods. That means Jupiter returns to the same positions in the zodiac very closely every 427 years with respect to its synodic phenomena, both in terms of order of occurrence and interval in time. A planet’s synodic phenomena are its first appearance (visibility), first stationary point, opposition (to the Sun), second stationary point and last appearance (visibility). For example, in the current year Jupiter has had two stations; in terms of sidereal reckoning, it turned stationary retrograde on April 6, 2007 (N.S., i.e. New Style or Gregorian calendar reckoning) at 24° 56' and stationary direct on August 7, 2007 (N.S.) at 15° 05'. Four hundred twenty-seven years ago Jupiter turned stationary retrograde on March 22, 1580 (O.S., i.e. Old Style or Julian calendar reckoning) at 25° 42' and stationary direct at 15° 51' on July 23, 1580 (O.S.). (2) The agreement between 1580 and 2007 is close enough to allow someone with long term observations of the previous 427 years to predict Jupiter’s behavior quite accurately during its period relation that began in 2007 by comparing it to 1580. The period relation of Venus is 1151 years; Mars is 284 years; Saturn is 265 years; Mercury is 46 years. The understanding of period relations was immensely valuable information much used by later astronomer/astrologers including the Greeks, the Indians and the Arabs.

Period relations are the main component of the first ephemerides, one of the greatest achievements of the Babylonians. There is a difference, however, of more than five degrees between tropical and sidereal reckoning during Jupiter’s period relation that is at the root of how precession was discovered. Actually, it is precisely this divide between tropical and sidereal reckoning that is only obvious over a period of centuries that gave rise to tropical reckoning itself. Babylonian material is sidereal, but the Babylonians had no knowledge of precession—the element that separates tropical from sidereal reckoning. Their use of the equinox was mainly to keep their calendar from drifting out of relationship with the solar year. Their priority with respect to the zodiac is their supreme achievement; ephemerides rank next in importance.

Tropical and sidereal reckoning diverge with the career of the Greek astronomer Hipparchos of Rhodes. His dates are unknown but his career spanned the period 146-127 B.C. Hipparchos made observations of stars that he compared against the first star catalogue compiled by a Greek, the astronomer Timocharis, one and a half centuries before Hipparchos’s time.

Hipparchos found that (the modern equivalent of) declinations (3) of some stars had increased in 150 years, some had decreased, some had stayed the same but that distances and positions of the stars with respect to each other had not changed, nor had their celestial latitudes. (4) Hipparchos’s observations were correct and the conclusions he drew from them completely logical based upon his underlying assumptions that the Earth was motionless and the center of the solar system. He concluded that Spica (the brightest star in Virgo) had been eight degrees to the west of the autumnal equinox in Timocharis’s time, and from his own observations that Spica was six degrees to the west of the autumnal point in his own time. (5) It is from this conclusion in combination with the declination comparisons to Timocharis’s star catalogue that Hipparchos deduced that there was definitely a slow motion between the stars and the equinoxes, heretofore unknown. Hipparchos’s lasting fame rests more on this discovery called now “the precession of the equinoxes” than for any other part of his work.

The consequence of his discovery produced the modern tropical zodiac almost beyond question. If one believes that the Earth doesn’t move and one observes motion between the equinoxes and the stars, then one is forced to conclude that the stars must be moving with respect to the Earth. What is actually happening, now as then, is that the Earth moves with respect to an essentially fixed sky, but the Earth’s motion was not obvious by any experiment devised in Hipparchos’s time. The stars do have motion with respect to the Earth but their motions are so infinitesimally small that in most cases it takes tens of thousands of years for an observer to see any change in their distances from each other. Except for some relatively fast nearby stars (yet even these are still exceedingly slow except compared to a stellar average), it takes hundreds of thousands of years for stars to move as much as one degree with respect to the Earth. So while the so-called fixed stars are not absolutely fixed, as a practical matter they are very much fixed to the naked eye. The night sky looks now to the naked eye just as it did at the dawn of recorded history in Egypt circa 3000 B.C.

The premise behind Hipparchos’s logic is that the initial starting point of the zodiac has to be tied to something that won’t change. Otherwise one has no absolute standard against which to measure bodies. Yet if it is assumed that the Earth is fixed and the sky is moving, the signs reckoned from the vernal equinox—which moves one degree westward against the stars in 72 years—quickly get out of synchronization with the sidereal signs reckoned from the stars. Sidereal reckoning is not subject to precession because its frame of reference is fixed to a star and an epoch that obviates the exceedingly slow motion of the stars themselves. The zero degree of Aries, as defined by western sidereal reckoning, is the point forty-five degrees west of Aldebaran, the brightest star in the middle of the constellation Taurus at the epoch A.D. 1950.0. Thus, sidereal reckoning is “fixed” and tropical reckoning is called, "the moving zodiac."

Western Sidereal Astrology Part One
www.westernsiderealastrology.com/part-one-of-three-part-series

Western Sidereal Astrology Part Two
www.westernsiderealastrology.com/part-two-of-three-part-series

Western Sidereal Astology Part Three
www.westernsiderealastrology.com/part-three-of-the-three-part-series


here is a webinar that he did

[glaucus]

At age 36, 
there is a 1/2 degree difference between Tropical Transits and Sidereal Transits
there is a 1/2 day difference between Tropical Solar Return and Sidereal Solar Return

At age 72
there is a 1 degree difference between Tropical Transits and Sidereal Transits
there is a 1 day difference between Tropical Solar Return and Sidereal Solar Return


There are tropical astrologers that use precession correction with Solar and Lunar Return charts. 
There are tropical astrologers that use precession correction with transits, and Robert Hand is one of them.



Precession Correction
page 29 of Planets in Transit: Life Cycles for Living by Robert Hand

Another issue that should be considered in trying to predict when transit patterns will reach their maximum influence is the matter of precession. Most astrologers are aware that the vernal equinox, otherwise known as the first point of Aries, does not remain stationary with respect to the fixed stars but moves backward through them at the rate of approximately 50.25 seconds per year. This is because of the effects of the gravitational pull of the Moon and planets upon the rotational cycle of the Earth on its axis. This movement has caused the signs of the zodiac and constellations of the same name to slip out of alignment with each other by about 25'00, depending upon how one measures the constellations. Because of this problem, one group of astrologers has abandoned the signs based on the vernal equinox, called the “tropical' zodiac, and adopted a zodiac that is fixed with respect to the stars, called the “sidereal zodiac.”

The problem for us is not which zodiac to use, but that the timing of transits taken in the two zodiacs begins to differ significantly as a person gets older. This effect begins to be noticeable by your late twenties, and when you are seventy-two years old, there will be a difference of one degree between the two positions which significantly affects the timing of outer-planet transits. Even more important, this problem almost immediately begins to affect return charts, that is, charts cast for the moment of the Sun's or Moon's return to its exact natal position. By the age of thirty-six, one's tropical solar return differs from one's sidereal solar return by twelve hours which completely alters the positions of the planets in the houses.

I personally feel that the signs of the tropical give interpretive results that are more useful than those of the sidereal, but I recognize that it is possible to treat the tropical zodiac as if it were moving. In other words, one should treat the natal positions of the planets as if they were fixed stars. Since the vernal equinox moves backward, the positions of the fixed stars move forward in the tropical zodiac. Opinion differs on this point, but many astrologers agree that at the very least, determining the positions of the natal chart corrected for precession helps significantly in timing events. Examples of this are given in the case study of Nixon and Watergate.

My own experience has been that in timing an event the corrected positions are more accurate than the uncorrected ones, especially if you follow the rules given earlier in this chapter for transit timing. Sometimes, it may appear that uncorrected transits give close results, but that is only because you are not applying the principles explained in this chapter. If an event is signified by several transits, one of them is very likely to be close using uncorrected positions, but the average orb is usually greater. Occasionally, no amount of explanation will make the precession-corrected transits time an event more closely than the uncorrected positions, but this is not usually the case. And frequently no amount of juggling can make the uncorrected positions time an event closely.

Alexander Marr of Germany believes that both positions are valid but for different purposes, and that certainly is a possibility. For the present I would suggest keeping track of both positions, until you have a feeling for what works best for you. In astrology there is the perennial problem that on many matters different astrologers have different experiences. To settle this particular dispute, more elaborate tests will have to be devised.

[Deleted]

glaucus, thanks you for this. This is a fantastic resource.

[Ava]

It's been difficult for me to visualize precession so I looked around for a graphic that made sense to me:

[glaucus]

A STUDY OF BABYLONIAN OBSERVATIONS INVOLVING THE ZODIAC

J. M. STEELE and J. M. K. GRAY, University of Durham


A study by Huber in 1958 showed that for some of the zodiacal signs the dates predicted in Babylonian Almanacs for when a planet will cross from one sign to another coincide with the dates predicted for when the planet is in conjunction with one of the so-called ‘Normal Stars’ (a group of reference stars used by the Babylonians) in the Normal Star Almanacs. More recently, Jones has found the same coincidences in the observational texts known as the Astronomical Diaries. These studies imply that the Babylonian zodiac was fixed sidereally (i.e., with respect to the stars), rather than tropically (i.e., with respect to the equinoxes) as in Greek astronomy. The discovery of two Babylonian catalogues of Normal Stars listing the positions of the stars in degrees within zodiacal signs supports this conclusion

The zodiac appears in five principal contexts within Babylonian astronomy:

1. The zodiacal sign in which a visible planet is located during a month is reported in the summary at the end of an Astronomical Diary. In later Diaries, beginning in the last quarter of the third century B.C., this information is supplemented with the date on which the planet crossed from one zodiacal sign to the next.

2. The zodiacal sign in which a visible planet is predicted to be located at the beginning of a month and the date on which the planet is expected to cross from one zodiacal sign to the next is recorded in the Almanacs.

3. The zodiacal sign in which a planet is located on the day of its first and last visibilities and at its stations is recorded in the Astronomical Diaries, the Normal Star Almanacs, the Almanacs, the Goal Year Texts and in several planetary compilations. In some cases the zodiacal sign is qualified with the adjective ‘beginning’ or ‘end’.

4. The zodiacal sign in which the moon is located during a lunar eclipse is occasionally recorded in the Astronomical Diaries, the Normal Star Almanacs, the Almanacs, the Goal Year Texts and in some eclipse texts. In some cases the zodiacal sign is qualified with the adjective ‘beginning’ or ‘end’.

5. In the texts of mathematical astronomy the positions of the sun, moon and planets are given in degrees and fractions within zodiacal signs.

www.academia.edu/2360664/A_Study_of_Babylonian_Observations_Involving_the_Zodiac

[Ava]

I have problems understanding how the sidereal zodiac can maintain any philosophical consistency when the constellations are of different sizes and overlapping. Ultimately they are using the 30° divisions, same as tropical astrologers. Are they relying on stars precisely 30° apart, to mark the beginning and end? That exists -- visible stars at regular intervals?

[glaucus]

When the Babylonians came up with 12 Sign Zodiac, they didn't care about any of that.
They created the 12 sign Sidereal zodiac to go with their 12 month schematic calendar.


Robert Powell writes about that in his book, The History of the Zodiac.

There are twelve signs, because there are twelve months in the schematic year of mul-APIN. The signs were made of equal length in order to get months of equal duration; they were divided in 30 degrees each because the schematical months were supposed to contain 30 days each.

In other words, in the sixth (or early fifth) century B.C., when the division of the zodiacal belt of Normal Stars into twelve signs was originally formulated, there already existed a schematic calendar devised earlier by Babylonian astronomers, which we know of from the text mul-APIN. Mul-APIN consists of two tablets, dated around 700 B.C., in which are listed the rising of 18 bright stars and constellations in the zodiacal belt, in terms of a schematic year of twelve months each 30 days long. This is aschematic year, because the actual civil calendar in Babylon operated with lunar months, which fluctuate in length, being either 29 or 30 days long, and in an intercalation year (roughly every third year) there were thirteen instead of twelve lunar months. The mul-APIN calendar scheme thus represented an idealized year: the ideal of the actual year of twelve (or thirteen) variable-length lunar months. With this scheme already in existence, the originator of the system of zodiacal signs was influenced by it in such a way as to specify a twelvefold division of the zodiacal belt into signs, each sign consisting of 30 degrees, analogous to the twelvefold division of the year into schematic months, with each month consisting of 30 days. Once the idea of this division of the zodiacal belt, analogous to the schematic division of the year, had been formulated, it was simply a matter of defining where the signs should lie in relation to the Normal Stars comprising the zodiacal belt.

In conclusion, then, the Babylonian zodiac originated in the sixth (or early fifth) century B.C. It was devised as an alternative system to that of the Normal Stars belonging to the zodiacal belt. The division of the zodiacal belt into twelve signs each 30 degrees long was analogous to the schematic division of the year into twelve months, each 30 days long, formulated in the text mul-APIN around 700 B.C.
www.astrogeographia.org/articles/BabylonianZodiac.html


any ways...I have decided to not focus on any zodiac nor constellations and just focus on just the stars


The constellations are arbitrary any way.
How they are formed is very relative.
The IAU Zodiac isn't completely aligned with the constellations that were observed by the ancient Hellenistic Astrologers and Arabic Astrologers and I showed this in great detail in my post,  The IAU 13 Sign Zodiac Is Not So Cut And Dry.
Of course, there were other cultures like the Chinese that had their own way of sorting out the constellations in the sky.

Stars and Constellations have their different mythologies from various cultures, and this what Bernadette Brady considered when she came up with her list of stars to use in her Visual Astrology star paran system. She included stars that she thought were "mythologically bright." In other words, they were stars rich in mythology. She uses only 64 stars in her system.



It's interesting that many point out that we are living in the Age of Pisces, and the Vernal Equinox is in Sidereal Pisces.

Of course when Ptolemy wrote the Tetrabiblos and Almagest, he was living in the Age of Aries when the Vernal Equinox was in Aries.

Many tropical astrologers actually have discussed about the Astrological Ages as well as the symbolism and events in connection to them. 


back to Ptolemy,  he wrote about the stars and their positions in Almagest, and that was his book on Astronomy. 
He listed 1,020 stars.

Only 12 stars of the listed have names, and they are: 
Arcturus, Regulus, Aselli, Sirius, Procyon, Vindemiatrix, Spica, Lyra (Vega), Capella, Aquila, Canopus, and Antares

[glaucus]

The Normal Stars

a series of 32 individual stars located close to the ecliptic that the Babylonians used to indicate the positions of the moon and planets in the Astronomical Diaries. The list derived from Astronomical Diaries and related texts from Babylonia by Hunger and Sachs, 1988, pages 17-19




The bright star of the Ribbon of the Fishes

The front star in the head of the Hired Man

The rear star in the head of the Hired Man

The Star Cluster

The Bull's Jaw

The northern (rein) of the Chariot

The southern (rein) of the Chariot

The front star of the Twin's feet

The rear star of the Twin's feet

The star of the Twin's close to the Shepherd

The star of the front Twin

The star of the rear Twin

The northern star at the front of the Crab

The southern star at the front of the Crab

The northern star at the rear of the Crab

The head of the Lion

The King Star

The small star 4 cubits behind the King Star

The hindquarters of the Lion

The rear foot of the Lion

The single star in front of the Furrow

The bright star in front of the Furrow

The bright star of the Furrow

The southern part of the Scales

The northern part of the Scales

The central star in the head of the Scorpion

The upper star in the head of the Scorpion

The Lisi Star

The bright star on the tip of Pabilsag's arrow

The horn of the Goatfish

The front star of the Goatfish

The rear of the Goatfish

[Deleted]

glaucus, do any of these stars match the fixed stars given in the short list at astro.com, e.g., Regulus, Alderbaran etc?

[glaucus]

Some of them do
The Star Cluster is definitely the Pleiades 
King Star is definitely Regulus
Bright Star of the Furrow (Virgo) is definitely Spica
Northern Scales is Zuben Elgenubi which is alpha Libra
Southern Scales is Zuben Elschamali which is beta Libra

I will look them up again

I want to create a separate thread on the Mul.Apin and give information about the star,constellation listings of the Babylonians



back to Ptolemy, he wrote about the stars and their positions in Almagest, and that was his book on Astronomy.
He listed 1,020 stars.
Vast majority of the stars in his Almagest were recorded by Hipparchus who discovered precession.

Only 12 stars of the listed have names, and they are:
Arcturus, Regulus, Aselli, Sirius, Procyon, Vindemiatrix, Spica, Lyra (Vega), Capella, Aquila, Canopus, and Antares 


The Greeks taking the constellations and zodiac from the Babylonians is widely recognized and acknowledged among the academic
it's not just the zodiac
also the exaltation sign placements, triplicities, and other things


There really is no exact identifications between Babylonian and later Greek constellations. The boundaries of the Babylonian constellations are not known. The Greek constellations and their boundaries only mostly became canonical with Eudoxus (there were later changes), but we do not know what the boundaries were unt
il after the period of Aratus (circa 3rd-century BCE).

My Sun is located at the end of Virgo constellation which is the largest zodiac constellation. 
There is a strong possibility that my Sun may be in the Babylonian constellation Zi-ba-an-na 'The Scales' and not the Babylonian constellation Ab-sin 'The Furrow' 
lambda Virgo Khambalia, the star that my Sun occults is a 4th magnitude star. 
Therefore it's relatively dim and the Babylonians would have dismissed it.
Ptolemy did record this star as Mercury-Mars.


Khambalia is located at the left foot of The Virgin.

[glaucus]

The site that I gave a link to has information about the Normal Stars and how the relationship was found between them and the zodiac


Ancient astronomy was concerned with observing the movements of the heavenly bodies, for which purposes the zodiacal belt ? although not necessarily defined as above ? was used as the natural frame of reference. Indeed, the zodiacal belt was the frame of reference originally used by Babylonian astronomers, who were the first to make systematic astronomical observations of the movements of the planets against the background of the fixed stars. According to the Greek astronomer Claudius Ptolemy (second century A.D.), systematic observations by Babylonian astronomers began in the first year of the reign of King Nabonassar of Babylon (747 B.C.).1 Ptolemy?s statement has been confirmed by the excavation of cuneiform texts from Babylon and Uruk, some of which contain recorded astronomical observations of eclipses going back to the eighth century B.C., or the early years of the era Nabonassar. ?Diaries? of astronomical observations by Babylonian astronomers, dating back to the seventh century B.C., give the positions of the Moon and planets within a zodiacal belt extending between 10 degrees north and 7½ degrees south of the ecliptic.2 In these early astronomical texts, the positions of the Moon and planets are given with respect to a set of 31 reference stars, called Normal Stars,3 the more prominent stars belonging to the zodiacal belt. All 31 Normal Stars used by Babylonian astronomers have been securely identified, and have been found in a zone between 10 degrees north and 7½ degrees south latitude.4 In the texts the position of the Moon or of a planet is given by stating that it is ?in front of? a Normal Star (which means to the west of the star), or that it is above or below the star, often in terms of the Babylonian units ?cubit? and ?finger?.

The primitive system of Normal Stars, although used throughout the period of Babylonian astronomy, until roughly the beginning of the Christian era, became superseded for most practical purposes by a new system in which the positions of the Sun, Moon, and planets came to be given in terms of zodiacal signs. The first recorded use in Babylonian astronomy of the new system, a list of solar eclipses given in signs of the zodiac, belongs to the first half of the fifth century B.C., the eclipses extending from 475 to 457 B.C.5 In this system the zodiacal belt is divided into twelve equal sectors or signs, each 30 degrees long, where the signs are defined with respect to fixed stars in the zodiacal belt. The relationship between the Normal Star system and the system of zodiacal signs can be determined from a fragment of a catalog of Normal Stars, belonging probably to the fourth century B.C., and also in conjunction with readings from cuneiform texts giving planetary or lunar positions in both systems simultaneously. For example, the catalog gives the Normal Star α Librae in terms of the system of zodiacal signs as 20˚ Libra, i.e. the star α Librae is located at 20 degrees in the Babylonian (sidereal) sign of Libra. Similarly, the longitude of β Librae is 25˚ Libra, or 25 degrees in the Babylonian (sidereal) sign of Libra.6 Peter Huber, using all available data at his disposal, determined the zero point (0˚ Aries) of the Babylonian zodiac,7 and the Babylonian sidereal zodiac has been reconstructed in its entirety by cataloging Ptolemy?s 1022 stars, listed in his star catalog from the Almagest, in terms of the Babylonian signs of the zodiac.8

This is not the place to enter into the complex early history of the zodiac in Mesopotamia, which is discussed by B.L. van der Waerden in his paper ?History of the Zodiac.?9 However, it is necessary to add a few brief remarks concerning the relationship of Normal Stars to the Babylonian signs of the zodiac, since this is crucial to our consideration of the origin of the Babylonian zodiac. How did the Normal Stars come to be assigned given degree positions in the various Babylonian zodiacal signs? Was it a purely arbitrary process, or is it possible to find some underlying structure in the relationship between Normal Stars and zodiacal signs?



Among the list of 31 Normal Stars there are five stars of 1st magnitude: Aldebaran, Pollux, Regulus, Spica, and Antares. It is reasonable to assume that for Babylonian astronomers, making their observations of the Moon and planets in relation to Normal Stars, the brightest of these stars would assume greater significance ? just as is the case in modern popular astronomy. A conjunction of the Moon with Spica is more noteworthy than a conjunction with its relatively faint neighbor, Porrima. Hence, the first magnitude Normal Stars ? Aldebaran, Pollux, Regulus, Spica, and Antares ? are of primary importance in considering the inherent structure of the Babylonian signs of the zodiac. From Peter Huber?s analysis of the location of the zero point (0˚ Aries) of the Babylonian zodiac, the longitudes of these first magnitude stars may be reconstructed. To the nearest degree, their positions in the Babylonian zodiac are: Aldebaran (α Tauri) = 15˚ Taurus, Pollux (β Geminorum) = 29˚ Gemini, Regulus (α Leonis) = 5˚ Leo, Spica (α Virginis) = 29˚ Virgo, Antares (α Scorpii) = 15˚ Scorpio.10 This reconstruction reveals the remarkable fact that the two 1st magnitude stars, Aldebaran and Antares, lie diametrically opposite one another in the zodiac, each in the center of their respective signs.



These two 1st magnitude Normal Stars thereby stand out from the other three 1st magnitude Normal Stars, and indeed from all the Normal Stars, since the rising of one coincides with the setting of the other. Thereby they divide the zodiacal belt exactly in two. This striking property, relating to two of the brightest stars in the zodiacal belt, evidently led to these two stars being chosen as the ?fiducial axis? for the Babylonian zodiac, i.e., an axis dividing the zodiac in half ? in relation to which the stellar longitudes of the other Normal Stars could be measured. With the increasing astronomical and mathematical prowess of the Babylonians, and the need for better, more accurate ephemerides for the prediction of eclipses and other planetary phenomena, the adoption of such a reference axis for measurement and computation was necessitated, and undoubtedly it evolved naturally from the more primitive system of Normal Stars. The two stars ? Aldebaran and Antares ? specifying this reference axis of the Babylonian zodiac were defined to be in the center of the zodiacal signs of Taurus and Scorpio rather than elsewhere (for example, at the beginning of their respective signs), as they both lie centrally in groups of stars which had long been recognized as distinct stellar configurations marking the constellations of Taurus and Scorpio. Confirmation of this line of reasoning is to be found in excerpts relating to two Greek astrological texts:

Cleomedes states (De motu I, 11, p. 106,25 to 108,5 Ziegler) that there exist two bright stars such that the rising of one coincides with the setting of the other: Aldebaran (α Tauri) and Antares (α Scorpii), both being located at the 15th degree of their respective sign.11



?the diametrically opposite positions of Aldebaran and Antares in Taurus 15 degrees and Scorpio 15 degrees, respectively?is also given in a Greek treatise which goes under the name of the ?Anonymous of the Year 379?.12





The Greek astrologer Hephaestion of Thebes (fourth century A.D.) also lists the longitude of Aldebaran as 15˚ Taurus.13



Why, however, should these statements drawn from Greek astrology have any bearing on the Babylonian zodiac? Greek astrology is relevant here, since it is know that Greek astrologers were the direct recipients of Babylonian star lore, as is evident in the case of the astrological school founded by Berossos on the Greek island of Cos early in the third century B.C.14 From sources such as Berossos, Babylonian star lore was transmitted to Greece and became incorporated into the corpus of Greek astrology. The statements of Greek astrologers may thus offer direct insight into the nature of Babylonian astronomy, and in this instance the singling out of Aldebaran and Antares from all other stars, by virtue of their special relationship to one another, could reflect the reasoning underlying the original definition of the signs of the Babylonian zodiac as the system to replace the system of Normal Stars. Hence, we may suppose that at some time in the sixth (or early fifth) century B.C. some Babylonian astronomer (or group of astronomers), while making observations of the Moon and planets in relation to Normal Stars, realized that two of the most prominent Normal Stars, Aldebaran and Antares, divide the zodiac in half, and that the axis between them could therefore serve as a reference axis for all the stars of the zodiacal belt. In this way, therefore, the Normal Stars came to be related to a new system, namely the system of zodiacal signs in which the zodiacal belt was divided into twelve 30-degree sectors or signs, with the two signs Taurus and Scorpio defined so that Aldebaran and Antares were located at the center of these signs, respectively ? Aldebaran at 15˚ Taurus and Antares at 15˚ Scorpio. With this as the basic, initial definition of the structure of the Babylonian zodiac, it was then simply a matter of measuring the distance in degrees of other Normal Stars from the Aldebaran-Antares axis in order to deduce the longitudes of Normal Stars in the various signs, with Regulus at 5˚ Leo, Spica at 29˚ Virgo, etc.15




This is all in his book,  The History of the Zodiac which I got 7 years ago.

There is a lot of good info 
he does write a bit about the Babylonian

any ways there was a history that Aldebaran and Antares of being noted as being 15 degrees of Taurus and
Scorpio
that one star rose, the other set and vice versa
That's definitely a astronomical fact
it's probably why Robert Powell,Cyril Fagan, and some other Sidereal Astrologers believe that Aldebaran and Antares were the fiducial stars to base the 12 Sign Sidereal Zodiac on.
There are no texts telling what the fiducial stars are, and so there is no proof. 


from the stuff that I read, the Tropical Zodiac has its roots in Hipparchus and Ptolemy, but it wasn't really popularized until the Arabs who were ignorant of the Sidereal Zodiac due to it being lost
The Dark Ages 

Many of the stars have Arabic names like Aldebaran for alpha Taurus
derived from the Arabic for "the Follower" (الدبران),[16][17] because it seems to follow the Pleiades.
Ptolemy had only 12 stars named in his Almagest

[glaucus]

This is a note that I made on facebook back in 2012
That's when I first started seriously looking into the Sidereal Zodiac. 
I had briefly converted from Tropicalist to Siderealist
www.facebook.com/notes/371771446185481/


INSIGHT ABOUT THE SIDEREAL ZODIAC AND TROPICAL ZODIAC


I was so interested in finding the truth about the zodiac. I ended up getting Cyril Fagan's Sidereal Astrology books.

I have been reading PRIMER OF SIDEREAL ASTROLOGY.


I read the following:


Page 19 of PRIMER OF SIDEREAL ASTROLOGY

"Notwithstanding the reforms of Julius Caesar in 45 B.C. and Pope Gregory XII in the year 1582 A.D., our calendar remains a clumsy and anachronistic contraption, having no place in this modern world. It is, if fact, another variation of the tropical zodiac--the zodiacal signs being months of unequal length. In its ideal prototype this tropical calendar commenced at "Spring Day," with the vernal equinox fixed on March 1, the first day of the year, with leap-year day, when it occured, being placed at the end of February, the last day of the year. But today we find the calendar so much out of gear with its prototype that the year commences on January 1. Leap-year day is stuck at the end of the second month and the vernal equinox point is fixed on March 21. All this, in the light of astronomy, is absurd, and it occasions many unnecessary complications in computations. If error is to be avoided, it is advisable for the modern astrologer to abandon the Gregorian calendar and commence the year again with March 1 and then reckon all dates, not in terms of months, but as days of the year commencing with March 1. The following table will enable the reader to effect the change at sight."

The Astronomical Year

March 0 = 0
April 0 = 31
May 0 = 61
June 0 = 92
July 0 = 122
August 0 = 153
September 0 = 184
October 0 = 214
November 0 = 245
December 0 = 245
January 0 = 306
February 0 = 337


From page 10 of PRIMER OF SIDEREAL ASTROLOGY

"Towards the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, a great collection of Babylonian cuneiform tablets was excavated from the magnificent astrological library of Ashur-bani-pal (668-626 B.C.) at Nineveh, while many more were found elsewhere in Mesopotamia. These included observation tablets, prediction tablets, lunar tablets, Jupiter tablets, fixed star tablets, Babylonian almanacs, Babylonian ephemerides, and the like, many of them going back to the third millenia B.C These were critically examined by such internationally known scholars and scientists as Epping, Kugler, Weidner, Schaumberger, Rehm, Schoch, Neugebauer, Sachs, Van der Waerden and many others. Indeed, the literature on this subject is considerable and can only be lightly touched upon here. They discovered that the longitudes as given in these tablets were not reckoned from the equinoxes and solstices. In other words, they were not tropical, but were reckoned from the fixed stars.

Therefore, the zodiac of the ancient Babylonians, and also that of the Egyptians--for the Demotic Stabart Tables and the Berlin Papyrus P8279 fall into the same category--were essentially sidereal, or "starry" which means that the zodiac was reckoned from the fixed stars and not from the ever-shifting equinoctial points. When all longitudes were reduced to the epoch 101 B.C (-100 B.C), it was found that mean ayamansa or difference in longitude between the modern tropical and sidereal zodiacs was, for the epoch, 4.3, the standard error of a single observation being 0.6. But with the subsequent discovery of more material, this error has been much reduced. This proves that the Egyptians and Babylonians measured their longitudes from the Pleiades in 5 Taurus, Aldebaran in 15 Taurus, Regulus in 5 Leo, Spica in 29 Virgo, and Antates in 15 Scorpio, such marking stars being known as "fiducials."

"Astronomers are high in their praise of the astonishing accuracy of the Babylonian tablets and computations."
""I can say of the Babylonians, who were persistent observers of the crescent during 3,000 years, that not only their observations, but also their computations for ephemerides are admirable." (Carl Schoch, Venus Tablets of Ammizaduga)""


From page 4 of PRIMER OF SIDEREAL ASTROLOGY

"About January 14 (the date advances one full day in 72 years), the Sun is in ecliptic conjunction with its own apex, and simultaneously it enters the constellation Capricorn. Known as the Capsolar, this is the master and most important ingress in the year. This when Earth is heliocentrically in 0 Cancer. But as the apex does not lie in the plane of the ecliptic (it is 58'04' north of it), the sun, Earth and apex can never be in alignment. In other words, the sun can never "eclipse" the apex. The date on which the sun is ecliptically in conjunction with the antapex is July 16. At this juncture the point is diametrically in opposition to the apex, and heliocentrically the Earth is in ecliptic conjunction with the apex. Simultaneously the Sun enters the constellation Cancer--this is known as the Cansolar ingress. The inference there is that the ecliptic longitudes of the solar apex determined 0 Capricorn (of the original Egypto-Babylonian zodiac), and the rest of the zodiacal constellations, each rigorously 30 degrees in extent, were reckoned from this point, thus placing to all intents and purposes permanently the Pleiades in 5 Taurus, Aldebaran in 15 Taurus, Regulus in 5 Leo, Spica in 29 Virgo and Antares in 15 Scorpio."


"Incidentally it should be borne in mind that the ancient Egyptian and Babylonian zodiacal constellations were always exactly 30 degrees in length. This is proved from monumental records, Babylonian almanacs, lunar and star tables, and Egyptian and Babylonian ephemerides. When Cleostratus of Tenedos imported the zodiac into Greece in the middle of the 6th century B.C., he evidently tried to make the zodiacal symbols conform to the patterns in the sky by the groupings of the fixed stars, thereby causing some of the zodiacal constellations to have fewwer than 30 degrees and others more than 30 degrees, i.e., Cancer and Leo, but the Egyptians never made this mistake. To them the zodiacal symbols were only heiroglyphic ideograms, and homonyms or rebuses were often substituted for them."

"Thus the symbol of the "lion" was only a rebus for a "sickle," both having phonetically the same sound, the sickle being apparently the original symbol for the constellation Leo. During different dynastic periods, varying zodiacal symbols appear. Thus the "two turtles" and "scarabaeus" symbolised Cancer; the "serpent," Scorpio; the "sun on the eastern horizon," Libra; "fleece," Aries; and a "phallus," Taurus. Leo was also often symbolised by a "knife," as was the planet Mars."


Page 15 of PRIMER OF SIDEREAL ASTROLOGY

"The vast majority of horoscopes calculated in the Western world are in terms of the modern version of the tropical zodiac. Hipparchus, when compiling his star catologue, plotted the positions of the fixed stars from the equinoctial and solstitial points for the year 139 B.C. approximately, and Posidonius apparently improved on this idea by making the zodiac as a whole commence with the vernal point fixed in 0 Aries. This, then, was the birth of the modern version of the tropical zodiac. Before Hipparchus' time it had no existence, and it was entirely a Greek innovation."

"As already pointed out, at the time Tetrabiblos was written the vernal point had retrograde to the beginning of the ancient Egypto-Babylonian fixed zodiac, so Claudius Ptolemy, very naturally and quite correctly for the time in which he lived, i.e. the 2nd century A.D., stated that the zodiac commenced with the equinoctial point. Unfortunately, his followers and translators, not understanding the real situation, took Ptolemy's statement on its face value and they thus caused Posidonius' tropical zodiac to become the more popular."


I am getting the impression that the Babylonians and Egyptians used a Sidereal Zodiac. It was passed down to the Greeks, and a Greek started fudging with it which led to coming up with Ophiuchus constellation even though Babylonians always used 12 zodiac constellations. Hipparchus plotted the equinoctial and solstitial points, and Posidonius made the zodiac as a whole commence with the vernal equinox fixed in 0 Aries. Ptolemy written his book, Tetrabiblos when the Vernal equinox retrograded into beginning of Aries. He was correct at the time, but his followers and translators adopted Posidonius zodiac. Instead of the Sidereal Zodiac that the Babylonians and Egyptians used, we ended up getting the Tropical Zodiac invented by the Greeks.

The Tropical Zodiac is thought actually be a season calendar, but the Romans and Roman Catholic Pope made adjustments to the Gregory calendar.

Maybe we can resolve the conflict between the Sidereal Zodiac and Tropical Zodiac by giving one zodiac different names. Because the Greeks were responsible for the Tropical Zodiac, then let the Tropical Zodiac names stay the same. They are all Grecian-Roman names any way. Just give Babylonian or Egyptians names to the Sidereal Zodiac signs.

[glaucus]

This is facebook note that I made February 2016
it was a few months after I converted from Tropicalist to Siderealist
It took reading Gavin White's Babylonian Star-lore to drop the Tropical Zodiac as the result of being drawn to the Mesopotamian myths including especially the water god, Ea/Enki which was the original representation of Aquarius which is where my Tropical Pisces Moon and Tropical Mars in Aquarius are actually in
www.facebook.com/notes/raymond-scott/tropical-zodiac-vernal-point-was-not-always-in-0-aries/1222442157785068/


Vernal Point was not always in 0 degrees Aries.


from Page 48 of ZODIACS OLD AND NEW by Cyril Fagan and Donald A. Bradley

THE HELLENISTIC ZODIAC

According to Fotheringham, It was Cleostratus of Tenedos who introducted the Babylonian zodiac into Greece, about the 6th century B.C. In that zodiac, the vernal-point was started to be in Aries 12 degrees.

In the 3rd Century B.C., Aratus of Soli wrote his famous astronomical poem, "Phaenomena," on the celestial sphere of Eudoxus of Cnidus (circa 366 B.C.) which put the vernal-point in Aries 15 degrees. Boeker has, however, demonstrated that this sphere was set for the geographical latititude of 32.5 degrees which was exactly that of Babylon (Berechnung zur vorgriechischen Astronomie, VI Die Sphaere Arats). In the second tablet of the mul-APIN ("Plough-star") catalogue, from the library of Assurbanipal, the vernal-point is also placed in the sidereal Nisan 15, giving its date as about B.C. 900. (A study of the dates of the heliacal risings of the fixed stars given in the 1st tablet dates it for around B.C. 1050.)

About B.C. 331, Calisthenes, a general in the army of Alexander the Great, at the behest of his uncle Aristotle, sent from the fallen Babylon, a large collection of Babylonian tablets, including those of Naburiannu, who placed the vernal point in Aries 10 degrees, and Kidinnu who placed it in Aries 8 degrees. In their eagerness to make Babylonian astronomy their own, the Greeks, being unaware that the position of the vernal-point was receding in the zodiac at the approximate rate of one degree in 72 years, concluded that the Spring equinox was fixed absolutely in the 8th degree of the constellation Aries (A minority, however, favored Naburiannu's value of Aries 10 degrees.) They amended their zodiac accordingly. This, then, was the HELLENISTIC ZODIAC of classical times, adopted by both Greece and Rome. It was the zodiac of Manilius, Firmicus, Vettius Valens, and Manetho. The positions of the planets in the Egypto-Roman zodiac in the Temple of Hathor in Denderah are for the Neomenia, April 17th, A.D. 17, and are in terms of this Hellenistic zodiac. Although the Greeks believed that it was identical with the fixed zodiac of Kiddinu (Cidenas), it was in fact the tropical zodiac, with the vernal equinox styled "Aries 8 degrees," and not, as in modern times, "Aries 0 degrees."


page 49 and 50 of ZODIACS OLD AND NEW by Cyril Fagan and Donald A. Bradley

HIPPARCHUS MOVING ZODIAC REJECTED

With the exception of Posidonis and his pupil Geminus, Hipparchus' suggestion that "Aries 8 degrees of the Hellenistic zodiac be read as "Aries 0 degrees was not accepted by astronomers of his day. Nor was it any more popular 300 years later when Claudius Ptolemy's "Tetrabiblos" appeared.

Manilius, the Roman poet-astrologer who flourished during the reign of Augustus and Tiberius says "So one degree in the tropical signs is to be marked out which moves the world and alters the seasons...some place this power in the 8 degrees, others prefer the 10 degrees and there has been a writer* who has allotted to the first degree the alterations of the seasons." (Astronomicon Bk. III.)

Columella (60 A.D.) says, "Winter, which begins about viii kal. of January in the eighth degree of Capricorn....and I am not deceived by Hipparchus' argument which teaches that the solstices and equinoxes happen not in the eighth but in the first degrees of the signs. In this rustic science, I follow the Fastus of Eudoxus and Meton and the ancient astronomers, which fits the public festivals" (Columella IX 14, 12)

Achilles Tatius (3rd century A.D. ) states: "Some place the tropics in the beginning, others about the eighth degree, others about the twelfth and others about the fifteenth." (Isag 23.)

Censorinus (A.D. 238 informs us, "The Sun creates the winter solstice when passing through the 8th degree of Capricorn and in the 8th degree of Aries is in the vernal equiinox." (De Die Natali XXV.)

Even the pseudo-Manetho, born according to the details of his own horoscope at 11.30 p.m., May 28th, A.D. 80, and who dedicated his astrological poem, "Apotelesmatica" to his friend and countryman Claudius Ptolemy, whom he styles "King Ptolemy," shows, by the following statement, that he, too rejected the modern zodiac, invented by Hipparchus and which puts the summer solstice permanently in Cancer 0.0 degrees: "The circle which turns the season of fiery summer is described in the sky by the all-seeing Sun in its course upon the 8th degree of Cancer." (Apotelematica II 72-87.)

*Obviously referring to Hipparchus.

[glaucus]

The 12 Sign Sidereal Zodiac was the zodiac constellations to the Babylonians. It was their coordinate system that became a frame of reference in their astronomy. It's just that they rearranged the numbers and boundaries of constellations in a way that they were 12 and equal in size to go with their 12 month schematic calendar.

Tropical Astrologers, 13 Sign Astrologers and Astrology skeptics argue that the 12 Sign Sidereal Zodiac is invalid because it doesn't align with the constellations are comparing Babylonian zodiac to the modern astronomical zodiac boundaries that are the result of Ptolemy's list of the fixed stars in Almagest. It's saying that Babylonian Zodiac is invalid due to the modern changes of the grouping of the constellations based on a Greek astronomer's influence.
That also goes for the Tropical Zodiac which was introduced by Ptolemy. There is a pretty much arguing that Babylonian Zodiac is invalid due to the later changes that Ptolemy made to the zodiac that it became a zodiac based on vernal point forever fixed in 0 Aries.

I don't believe that Ptolemy invalidates the Astronomy and Astrology of the Babylonians. Numerous cultures had their own way of grouping stars into constellations, and that didn't invalidate those that did it differently. Astronomy and Astrology are not Eurocentric. As a multiracial Astrologer, I have developed a strong preference for Mesopotamian mythology in connection to the stars, constellations.  I owe that to Gavin White's book Babylonian Star-lore for that.


The History of the Zodiac by Robert Powell
The Sidereal Zodiac in Mesopotamia
page 110

During the fifth BC, a new coordinate system was introduced: the zodiac with twelve 30 degree signs, which effectively superseded the system of Normal Stars. The zodiac became the basic frame of reference in the later phase of Babylonian astronomy, although the earlier system of Normal Stars continued to be used until the end. Whereas Normal Stars were used solely for observational purposes, the introduction of the zodiac permitted the observations to be treated mathematically.

The advantage of the zodiacal coordinate system was that it provided a continuous scale of observations, which an isolated set of points, or Normal Stars, did not permit. Moreover, for observational purposes the zodiac is just as effective--if not more so--than the system of Normal Stars. The basic zodiacal unit, the degree is a natural one since the apparent diameters of the moon and of the sun are approximately half a degree. Hence, if a planet is observed to be four "moon's breadths in front of" a Normal Star, the planet is roughly 2 degrees west of the star.

In order for the zodiac to be implemented as a coordinate system the zodiacal longitudes of Normal Stars had to be defined. The remains of a fragment of a Babylonian star catalogue show that this definition took place during the Achaemenid period. From this fragment, together with a comparison of planetary positions recorded simultaneously in relation to Normal Stars and in the zodiac, the longitudes of Normal Stars can be reconstructed. How and by whom the Normal Stars were defined in relation to the zodiac is not know. It was, however, the crucial step in the transition from observational to mathematical astronomy. Because of this step, it became possible to translate observational material recorded in the Normal Star system into zodiacal longitudes. Thereby the observational material collected by the Babylonians over many centuries was rendered amenable to analysis. Finally, by means no longer known, the Babylonian astronomers analyzed planetary motions within the coordinate system of the zodiac and arrived at linear arithmetical schemes for predicting the movements of the planets. A complete system of such schemes is evident during last three centuries BC, coinciding by and large with the Seleucid era in Babylon.

The existence of the mathematical astronomy of the Babylonians remained hidden until the end of the nineteenth century when, through decipherment of astronomical cuneiform texts, it was rediscovered. Increasingly, research into Babylonian mathematical astronomy has revealed that it played an extremely influential role in the history of astronomy. The transmission of the Babylonian sidereal zodiac provides a remarkable example of how Babylonian influence spread.