People Archetypal of Their Sign

Q&A and discussion on the meanings of the Zodiacal Constellations, Sun and Moon sign-meanings, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
By Jove
Constellation Member
Constellation Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:10 pm

People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by By Jove » Tue Oct 10, 2017 9:27 am

What people would you consider to be strong archetypes representing their sign and why?

Pisces
Albert Einstein
Charlie Chaplain
J.S. Bach
Franz Joseph Haydn
John Wilmot

Aries
Karl Marx
Robespierre
Lenin
Sigmund Freud

Taurus
D.A.F. Sade
Oswald Spengler
Walt Whitman
Bob Dylan

Gemini
Nicola Tesla
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Foucalt
Paul Morphy

Cancer
Helena Blavatsky
John Calvin
Carl Jung
Henry S. Olcott

Leo
Alexander the Great
Luis XIV
Goethe

Virgo
Samuel Johnson
Nietzsche
Thatcher
Eisenhower

Libra
Pierre Choderlos de Laclos
Arthur Rimbaud
Bram Stoker
Erasmus
Sylvia Plath

Scorpio
Martin Luther
Jonathan Swift
John Milton
Jim Morrison
Marina Abramovic

Sagittarius
Issac Newton
Stephen Hawking
Beethoven
Joseph Bologne de Saint-Georges

Capricorn
Mozart
Lewis Carroll
Charles Dickens
Janis Joplin

Aquarius
Charles Darwin
Abraham Lincoln
Bobby Fischer
Galileo
Copernicus

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4368
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue Oct 10, 2017 9:39 am

Do you mean "archetypal," or do you mean "typical." The answers would be very different.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
By Jove
Constellation Member
Constellation Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by By Jove » Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:41 am

Archetypal, as in they represent their sign the best by having the most potent qualities of said sign.

James Condor
Luminary Member
Luminary Member
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 10:47 am

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by James Condor » Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:44 am

I like the idea Jove.
Typical or archetypal is an interesting question or way to view things. Typical makes sense to me if the sign is more"pure" or evident. If I make a list, I would research to look for the purist of the sign. I will look for sun signs without any foreground planets or close/ hard aspects opposing or influencing the sign. This makes sense to me. For example, a Sagittarius with Saturn foreground would not be a typical Sagittarius. But all Sagittarius will have a common denominator, which would be the archetype.
Too much of a planets quality would really emphasize or pronounce. So a double Virgo with Mercury rising and Sun-Mercury would not be a typical Virgo. But then as an observer, I would not miss the enormous Mercury quality.
I notice a person's sun sign more when other chart factors make it so the sign is more obvious.
Ah, so the definition of.... I can be like, yeah your the spokesman of,... fill in the blank
I keep thinking of planets though, not so much signs, because the sign will show through no matter what.

DDonovanKinsolving
Constellation Member
Constellation Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 3:04 am

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by DDonovanKinsolving » Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Cyril Fagan's advice on this matter was to select people with foreground unaspected Suns. I've seen this recently, so it was eitherin a "Solunars" in 1959-1960 or in 1966.

-Derek

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4368
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:06 pm

I disagree with that approach tamae since it puts in angular Sun quality into all the interpretations.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

DDonovanKinsolving
Constellation Member
Constellation Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 3:04 am

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by DDonovanKinsolving » Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:26 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:
Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:06 pm
I disagree with that approach tamae since it puts in angular Sun quality into all the interpretations.
That's an excellent point Mr. E. By_Jove seems to want the essence (correct me if I'm wrong Jove, since I don't want to presume your meaning) of the signs, independent of whatever planet is in it; a "pure" or basic meaning. But if a sign is empty (nor angular) it would seem to have no noticeable effect. It looks like we have a problem here, solvable only by astute observations factoring out the planets.

Thoughts & suggestions?

-Derek

User avatar
By Jove
Constellation Member
Constellation Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by By Jove » Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:55 pm

DDonovanKinsolving wrote:
Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:26 pm
Jim Eshelman wrote:
Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:06 pm
I disagree with that approach tamae since it puts in angular Sun quality into all the interpretations.
That's an excellent point Mr. E. By_Jove seems to want the essence (correct me if I'm wrong Jove, since I don't want to presume your meaning) of the signs, independent of whatever planet is in it; a "pure" or basic meaning. But if a sign is empty (nor angular) it would seem to have no noticeable effect. It looks like we have a problem here, solvable only by astute observations factoring out the planets.

Thoughts & suggestions?

-Derek
I was simply thinking of people who best exemplified most qualities associated with a zodiac sign. I'll elaborate tomorrow if not tonight.

User avatar
By Jove
Constellation Member
Constellation Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by By Jove » Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:35 pm

For example:

Pisces
Haydn and Bach both exemplify the sign's musical and fecund nature. John Wilmot was a famous libertine, and most famous libertines were Pisces, Taurus, and Libra - in that order.

Aries
Marx and Lenin are typical of Aries dictatorship qualities. Freud hints at Aries' Pluto influence.

Taurus
Sade and Spengler exemplify Taurus in deep philosophy, and their understanding of the human body and the earth.

Gemini
Tesla was a mercurial extravert with versatile talents, and brilliant mental and scientific capability. Foucalt created a brilliant opus on psychology (a key factor with "air" signs), and de Saint-Exupéry's The Little Prince reveals Gemini's association with childhood and innocence.

Cancer
Blavatsky et al have a strong mystical and occult streak, and John Calvin was especially sectarian.

Leo
Do I really need to explain the grand, magnanimous, far-reaching nature of Alexander and Louis?

Virgo
Johnson and Nietzsche show Virgo's versatility with language and writing and language (similar to Gemini). Eisenhower demonstrates Virgo's aptitude in strategy in war.

Libra
De Laclos was the famous libertine who published Dangerous Liasons. Rimbaud, Plath, and Stoker all have shades of Libra's dark, saturnine side, while Erasmus shows the humaneness and sense of justice often found in Libra.

Scorpio
All the Scorpios are seismic earthquakes who profoundly changed the values of their respective cultures, like Aquarius. But unlike Aquarius, Scorpio's changes are more ambiguous and destructive. Jonathan Swift was especially defensive and secretive while Jim Morrison and Abramovic might as well be serpents in human form, but regardless they were all very aggressive and confrontational.

Sagittarius
Newton and Hawking both had totalizing grand scientific theories that cover all aspects of the universe, a very Sagittarius theme. Beethoven also exemplify Sagittarius nobility, elitism, and lofty ideals. Joseph Bologne had versatile skills in music and sports.

Capricorn
Mozart and Joplin reveal the puckish and musical qualities of Capricorn. Carrol and Dickens also exemplify Capricorn wit, as well as the saturnine restraint associated with the sign.

Aquarius
All the Aquarius people made seismic shifts to their cultures that advanced the human race. Unlike Scorpio, Aquarius has a great humane streak and a strong sense of progressive evolution. Copernicus and Galileo radically altered cosmology while advancing humanism. Darwin and Lincoln made huge progressive leaps for humanity; Darwin formulated the theory of evolution and Lincoln ended slavery in America.

User avatar
By Jove
Constellation Member
Constellation Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by By Jove » Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:37 pm

ADDENDUM:
This is not a zero sum game in that someone who exemplifies one sign cannot also exemplify another. For example with Moon signs; Nietzsche and Beethoven were both intensely Scorpio while Spengler and Abramovic were deeply Aquarius.

mikestar13
Luminary Member
Luminary Member
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 2:13 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by mikestar13 » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:02 am

We will always have something to factor out. An entirely empty sign has no significance in a chart. By way of analogy, the planets are the colored lights and the signs are the the stained glass windows they shine through, adding the sign's color to the planet's own. The angles are where the lights shine brightest and are easiest to see, and therefor discern their color. Aspects are interference patterns among multiple light sources, further complicating the picture. So if we know the Sun is "red" and Sun in Taurus is "orange", we can deduce that Taurus is "yellow". (Assigning colors arbitrarily for illustration, no symbolic association implied.) So If we consider foreground Sun unaspected in the signs, we will have to factor out "foreground Sun" but we won't have to factor out as much else. Trying to grasp the essence of a sign by selecting charts with nothing in that sign is rather like trying to discern the color of a window with no light shining through it.
Time matters

James Condor
Luminary Member
Luminary Member
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 10:47 am

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by James Condor » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:05 am

Yes, maybe a endless approach or idea to follow, in that archetype will always show through to some degree. I get what Jove is getting at; I have been down that road and have lived similar experiences in seeing a sign in someone or in people. I remember thinking, oh man, that's it, I just saw it, I saw what astrology is saying. I saw Saturn in Libra, or I saw Pluto in Aries. It is like a personal discovery making me feel apart of something bigger.
But really, all people will show their archetype, sign, more or less. As a mental exercise or fun learning experience, I think it would be possible to narrow down individuals who are more pure or who embody more than less of the archetype by definition. I still wonder though if doing the study would be worthwhile.
So to take Jove's list, he isn't wrong in that the people were born in that sun sign, but I could research each individual he listed and find other planetary factors that interfere with the purity of their sun sign, therefore making his list less objective and more subjective. Basically there have to be criteria to agree on. An individual with Sun in Taurus, with Mars rising tightly, would not be the best example of purity.
Yes, as mikestar said, we will always have to deduce or factor out, but nothing is perfect. It comes down to actually risking to do the research. And if we think its worth it. I don't understand how a sign can be empty though, there has to be something, even nothing is something. Being born say, today, even with no close aspects or foreground planets, would not make a sign empty. Things are more or less, no absolute.
Last edited by James Condor on Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4368
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by Jim Eshelman » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:17 am

I wasn't suggesting excluding "Sun in" - I was challenging the angular Sun idea.

There is an aphorism that has run around Sidereal circles since at least the '70s, that luminary signs are only important if the luminary is foreground. I think that's entirely wrong. Luminary signs are important always. I'll go so far as to say that they are the bedrock of who we each are. Angular planets show how we act, aspects show the interaction and mutual triggering of different drives or circuits, but the bedrock on which this is built is the pair of constellations holding Sun and Moon.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

James Condor
Luminary Member
Luminary Member
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 10:47 am

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by James Condor » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:27 am

Good analogies Jim. That explains it all very accurate and brief.
I now feel I am wasting energy trying to reach or obtain something with no answer in this post. I have come to my own conclusion that I wouldn't find any purpose in finding the most pure of signs, because, it is beside the point and there would always be a better example. When it comes, it comes, no need to reach for it. I could make a list of planetary energies as opposed to signs. That would be more relevant and meaningful to me. Like, my mother has so many planets in Aries, so she is very Plutonian. I have a friend with sun and moon in Scorpio, so very martian. And so on.

mikestar13
Luminary Member
Luminary Member
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 2:13 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by mikestar13 » Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:54 pm

Perhaps an idea might be to created three piles for each sign: unaspected Sun foreground, middleground, and background, and examine what traits seem consistent with different angularites. I would have been no more strongly Piscean had I been born at sunrise, though it might have been more immediately obvious on cursory examination.
Time matters

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4368
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by Jim Eshelman » Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:05 pm

I have never seen any indication that angularity of a luminary has any connection to how it's sign qualities manifest.

Yes, Sun can be in a sign AND angular. Similarly, Madonna can be a singer AND a mother, but neither has any connection to the other.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

Avshalom Binyamin
Planet Member
Planet Member
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 11:09 am

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by Avshalom Binyamin » Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:01 am

Yeah, it's kind of impossible to find a person who is a pure, unadulterated, quintessential expression of a sign. Humans are complex.

The realistic options are: find a non-human archetype who typifies the sign, or subjectively choose people who exemplify elements of the sign (as Jove did).

User avatar
Jupiter Sets at Dawn
Synetic Member
Synetic Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 7:03 pm

Re: People Archetypal of Their Sign

Post by Jupiter Sets at Dawn » Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:25 am

I think another option is to ask people for descriptions of people they know who were born under that sign, and then let someone, maybe a Virgo, with some experience distilling generalities from specifics, generalize from those subjective descriptions, and see working from observation gets us.
:)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest