New names for Triplicities

[Jim Eshelman]

I've been experimenting with new names for the Triplicities.

Some considerations:

Though the triplicities appear in very early astrological writings, especially of Greek and Greco-Roman derivation - for example, both Manilius and Ptolemy - they had no names. (Ptolemy did give them planetary rulers.)

The assignment of the four elements to the triplicities came much later - I think Medieval. They were crafted entirely for the Tropical zodiac as far as i can tell and never had root or meaning for the Sidereal zodiac. In fact, elemental assignments of the signs was quite different in earlier times - look at Manilius, look at the ancient Egyptians. These elemental assignments are really quite popular among Tropicalists, both professional astrologers and especially the general public who so easily identify with being a Fire Sign, a Water Sign, or whatever. They're flexible and grab the imagination. Hard to compete with that.

There are no sets of four things descending from antiquity that fit them. The closest fit I've found to an existing model to describe them is in Jung's four typologies, especially as early Myers-Briggs research mapped them to different relationships to the perception of time. These aren't perfect, and people get emotional about the Jung typologies, but they've been the best so far.

One of the things that makes it difficult to talk about them is that - despite the popularity of "the Elements" in Tropical astrology - the triplicities are a relatively weak descriptor of the signs. The quadruplicities are far more important, even fundamental to the natures of the signs - you can grab everything you want, I think, from the planetary dignities and the quadruplicity. It seems that sign commonalities follow the same rules as aspects: Squares are significantly stronger and more vivid than trines; and square signs have significantly stronger and more vivid commonalities than trine signs. Nonetheless, there has always seemed to be something going on.

One of the complicating factors (or is it simplifying?) is that the commonalities of signs of the same triplicity are not vast. It's very easy to find traits that two of the three signs have in common that are at odds with the third sign. Ultimately, this might be simplifying in the sense that it let me narrow my focus to picking the sign least like the other two, then reading through its traits and reflecting on what of its salient traits are evident in the two that already resemble each other (e.g., what Scorpio really has in common with the obviously similar Pisces and Cancer).

I wanted labels that were meaningful; that were accurate; that might possibly capture people's imaginations; and that took all of the above into consideration. I was willing to be led in directions I hadn't previously considered.

[Jim Eshelman]

I settled on a single descriptive word for each triplicity or, rather, for themes that all three signs in a triplicity have in common. Understand, please, that they don't all express it in the same way. But I think they all express it. I wish a couple of the words were simpler, but there are limits to language. Here is my current list:

Taurus, Virgo, Capricorn - Fertile Prolific signs
Gemini, Libra, Aquarius - Egalitarian signs
Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces - Enigma signs
Leo, Sagittarius, Aries - Imperial signs

The Imperial signs were the easiest. I probably don't need to explain this name at all. I do think that this triplicity has the highest level of Jung's sensation function operating, and is most oriented to here-and-now, the present. When their normal resources fail, Imperials slingshot into primitive (infantile) intuition, but normally they are sensation types. Most basically, though, keeping with Ptolemy's Sun-Jupiter attribution, these signs of the King, the Nobleman, and the Emperor are imperial.

Taurus, Virgo, and Capricorn are all Prolific Fertile signs. I was surprised when so earthy, sensual a word fertile emerged for this group (consistent with Ptolemy's Moon-Venus rulership). They aren't each fertile in the same way, but all three creatively stream into their worlds. - I do think that this triplicity has the highest level of Jung's thinking function (reverting to reactive, even infantile feeling when their best resources fail them), relate to time in continuity from past through present to a projected future, have a deep interest in origins, etc. But the one thing that the constellations of the Spewing Phallus, the Receptive Furrow, and the Horn of the Goat have in common is their high level of fertility, especially of ideas.

All of these titles are adjectives except for the Enigma signs, for which I accept the noun because the adjective doesn't work: They aren't enigmatic. Cancer and Pisces can be enigmatic but, more widely, dance in and out of shadow and veil. Scorpio Moons can seem enigmatic, but Scorpio Suns especially pierce through enigma, cut through obscurity. All of them, though, are closely defined by a powerful relationship to enigma. - They are also all marked by enjoying life. I think Jung's feeling function is most pronounced in them (sling-shotting to infantile thinking when their normal resources fail). Especially as they age, their primary relationship is to the past. I think there is little difficulty associating the constellations of the Scarab, the Serpent, and the Twin Fishes to the realm of enigma.

Finally, the label that was hardest to discern (but, in hindsight seems should have been much easier): The Gemini, Libra, Aquarius triad has many paradoxes in it. For example, they all have symbols of relationship and connection, and yet, as a group, no sign group can more easily feel alienated or solitary (matching Ptolemy's Saturn-Mercury rulership). Two of the signs are distinctly scientific, yet I'm sure this group has the strongest expression of Jung's intuition function with its primary relationship to the future, the only timeframe that people have not currently lived, which sometimes brings distinctive problems of relating to normal frameworks of life (back to the alienation). Therefore, they commonly rebound into their secondary function, which is sensation, dealing with what's in front of them and available to the senses. - In any case, egality is one of my three Gemini keywords, showing a distinctive flavor of democracy in its philosophy. (All three signs are anti-imperial, un-solar or un-jovial.) Egality is also obviously an Aquarius theme, and it's practically the literal name of Libra. There is a social awareness about a majority of natives of these signs (but not all of them). I think, though cumbersome, the most suitable name for these constellations is the Egalitarian signs as an expression of what the Twin Stars, the New Dawn, and the Enriching Floods of the water-bringer most share.

[Parto]

That's probably pretty close to the best attempt at this that can be. The Egalitarian-Imperial axis is the best part, being symmetric, descriptive, and symbolically satisfying. I'd prefer an established or symmetric set of four things (like the elements) if I were to try and come up with something. (I thought about the four seasons, but it's a lousy fit, mostly meaningless and kinda random.)

I'm comfortable with the triplicities lacking names, as if indicating their relative unimportance. Nowadays, I almost never think about them despite their prominence in things like popular astrology and Qabalah. I take it as a sign (heh) that I've learned well.

[Jim Eshelman]

I'd prefer an established or symmetric set of four things (like the elements) if I were to try and come up with something.

Me, too. However, over 40 years of looking hasn't turned up any. *(The classic Humors don't fit at all!)

(I thought about the four seasons, but it's a lousy fit, mostly meaningless and kinda random.)

Plus, it's intrinsically Tropical.

I'm comfortable with the triplicities lacking names, as if indicating their relative unimportance.

I'd like to be able to easily reference them in the fewest words possible. While calling "Air" signs Geliaq was neutral and possibly even cute, I just never felt right calling my Libra-Gemini friend a "double Geliaq." Besides, it doesn't catch popular imagination. (Perhaps these won't either, but they'll have a much better chance than Geliaq.)

I'm trying to knock down all the barriers between Sidereal astrology and the mass of public consumers. The Tropical use of the elements is enormously popular and (as I was reminded recently), if it weren't hard enough to convince someone that their "Taurus" friend is really an Aries, it's downright impossible when they can legitimately and meaningfully counter with, "But they are such an Earth sign!" (Because Sidereal Arlesa signs do have a great deal in common the conventional understanding of "Earth," especially since the ability to deal with hands-on here-and-now practical reality is the foundation of actual rulership and dominion in the real world.)

They'll rarely relate that to Fire. Ah, but you can say they are Imperial, and people catch on at once! "Oh, yeah, she is kinda bossy."

I'd like all four to be that good.

[Parto]

Plus, it's intrinsically Tropical.

Oh, not like that. (Though it'd surely remind people of that.) Imperial = Summer (hot!), Egalitarian = Winter (cold...), Fertile = Spring (!), Enigma = Autumn (some associations come to mind).

I'd like to be able to easily reference them in the fewest words possible.

Yeah, I can see that point.

I also thought about keeping the four elements and just switching the attributions around, but you've probably tried that and had just as much success as I. Not to mention, it would never catch on.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I think you're both missing something here. One of the things people like about astrology is it's esoteric. I'm a fire sign is shorthand, and it's also mysterious to people who don't know what it means. If you learn the words you can be mysterious too. You have esoteric knowledge your friends don't. And people love that. Everybody wants to be on the inside.

[Jim Eshelman]

I think you're both missing something here. One of the things people like about astrology is it's esoteric. I'm a fire sign is shorthand, and it's also mysterious to people who don't know what it means. If you learn the words you can be mysterious too. You have esoteric knowledge your friends don't. And people love that. Everybody wants to be on the inside.

Oh, I very much get that. It's just that the elements don't work. They give wrong impressions. You have to do great violence to the whole idea of the elements to make them fit the Sidereal framework.

I don't want us burdened with something crafted for Tropical astrology in the first place that doesn't fit (especially with esoteric folks who already have their own idea of what the elements mean).

We can, of course, restore the original elemental attributions (which have nothing to do with triplicities). Aries really is a classic Earth sign, as representing the first month the Nile started to recede. Pisces and Aquarius are both Water. Scorpio is Air. Capricorn is part Earth, part Water. Taurus and Virgo remain Earth (and hopefully not too "dry"). - But that, of course, isn't the point here (and they didn't all have elemental attributions).

[Jim Eshelman]

Wouldn't Leos love to be called the Imperial Hub? <vbg>

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Some might. Most might find it a bit cartoonish.

[By Jove]

Maybe name the triplicities after their planetary rulers?

"fire" signs = Solar signs
"earth" signs = Venus signs
"air" signs = Saturn signs
"water" signs = Mars signs

I notice how the "masculine" signs are named after social constructs in civilization (imperialism and egalitarianism). The "feminine" signs are decidedly named after attributes of nature (fertility and mystery).

[Jim Eshelman]

I notice how the "masculine" signs are named after social constructs in civilization (imperialism and egalitarianism). The "feminine" signs are decidedly named after attributes of nature (fertility and mystery).

Interesting, I hadn't noticed that - it wasn't intentional. I was just picking things that fit the character.

Maybe name the triplicities after their planetary rulers?

"fire" signs = Solar signs
"earth" signs = Venus signs
"air" signs = Saturn signs
"water" signs = Mars signs

I think it would be confusing, and upset fundamental principles, to call Virgo a "Venus sign," Cancer a "Mars sign," or even, for that matter, Aquarius a "Saturn sign."

[By Jove]

Maybe name the triplicities after their planetary rulers?

"fire" signs = Solar signs
"earth" signs = Venus signs
"air" signs = Saturn signs
"water" signs = Mars signs

I think it would be confusing, and upset fundamental principles, to call Virgo a "Venus sign," Cancer a "Mars sign," or even, for that matter, Aquarius a "Saturn sign."

We could use some iconic symbol representing the concepts you describe.

Imperial signs = crown?
Egalitarian signs = ???
Fertile signs = ???
Enigma signs = ???

Besides, elements fit planets far better than signs. The Vedic system assigns the elements this way:

Fire = Sun, Mars
Water = Moon, Venus
Earth = Mercury
Air = Saturn
Æther = Jupiter

East Asian countries assign the elements this way:

Fire = Mars
Water = Mercury
Earth = Saturn
Metal = Venus
Wood = Jupiter
(Sun & Moon were not included.)

(Chinese astrology is a whole system in its own. It goes way further than just your birth year. Even the birth month and birth hour (if not more) have a zodiac sign, planet, element, etc.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I don't like this new schema any better than the old one and I don't see the point.

I like the analogy of a wheel - rim, spokes, hub. It makes sense and is coherent and most people in the world know what a wheel is and get the analogy with the parts.

I think it would be more useful to find an overall symbol (like the wheel) that can be broken down into parts to describe the various groups. It would need to be a symbol that is universal, and I think that can best be found by looking for a symbol that would have been comprehensible to an ancient Egyptian or Persian or Hindi.

[Jim Eshelman]

I'd love to do that. But in 40 years I haven't found anything usable.

I think the root of the problem is that - compared to other things like planetary dignities and quadruplicities - triplicities are relatively minor distinctions. But minor doesn't mean unimportant or non-existent. The distinction may not have been strong enough to show as a social or symbolic standard (or only emerged strong enough in character after the Tropical zodiac was the popular paradigm: Ptolemy's distinction were slight), so there isn't exactly a ready-made symbol set.

My recollection, for example, is that despite the importance of trine relationships of signs-houses in Hindu astrology, there are no trinal sign groupings. (I have to get a couple of book out of storage one of these days and double-check that.)

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I'd love to do that. But in 40 years I haven't found anything usable.

I was hoping for a blinding flash of insight, but it didn't come and I have to go play lumberjack before it gets too hot.

I'm moving the bundling branches over to Club Aldebaran.

[By Jove]

I'd love to do that. But in 40 years I haven't found anything usable.

I think the root of the problem is that - compared to other things like planetary dignities and quadruplicities - triplicities are relatively minor distinctions. But minor doesn't mean unimportant or non-existent. The distinction may not have been strong enough to show as a social or symbolic standard (or only emerged strong enough in character after the Tropical zodiac was the popular paradigm: Ptolemy's distinction were slight), so there isn't exactly a ready-made symbol set.

My recollection, for example, is that despite the importance of trine relationships of signs-houses in Hindu astrology, there are no trinal sign groupings. (I have to get a couple of book out of storage one of these days and double-check that.)

Maybe the cardinal points of a compass may help, or even the four points of a sun wheel! Why not use one metaphor for triplicities and quadruplicities!

North (top) = Regulus/Leo, so the "fire" signs.
South (bottom) = Fomalhaut/Aquarius, so the "air" signs.
East (right) = Aldebaran/Taurus, so the "earth" signs.
West (left) = Antares/Scorpio, so the "water" signs.

(Imagine each triplicity as a triangle, with the hub signs as the triangle's top point. If you orient each triangle this way, the spoke signs are the left point, and the rim signs are the right point).

There are also ancient Persian names for the four royal stars if that means anything. Venant = Regulus, Hastorang = Fomalhaut, Tascheter = Aldebaran, Satevis = Antares.

With the archangles, we have: Raviel = Regulus, Gabriel = Fomalhaut, Michael = Aldebaran, Uriel = Antares. The assignments don't make sense to me, at least not in the ways the angels are associated with the elements. (Why Gabriel, the "air" archangel, over Regulus/Leo? Or Michael, the "fire" archangel, over Aldebaran/Taurus?)

I don't know if there are any "official" names for four points on a wheel, but I do know the four points of a swastika have various meanings. (Yes, we westerners associate swastikas with fascism, but we're just gonna have to get over it and stop horrible people from taking away nice things.) The eight-spoke Dharma wheel also has excellent symbolism (and it even fits the ancient 8 house system).

The four points have the following symbolic meanings. They seem to strikingly fit their respective triplicities.

Top = Regulus/Leo/"fire" signs
Yajur Veda (formulas for worship rituals)
Treta Yuga (the "silver age")
Arthra (wealth, property)
Garhastya (2nd life phase, adulthood, raising a family, earning a living to maintain a home)

Bottom = Fomalhaut/Aquarius/"air" signs
Atharva Veda (demotic scriptures for daily rituals and common life milestones)
Kali Yuga (the "iron age")
Moksha (enlightenment, liberation)
Sanyasa (4th life phase, old age, renunciation of material desires and prejudices)

Right = Aldebaran/Taurus/"earth" signs
Sama Veda (melodies and chants)
Dyapora Yuga (the "bronze age")
Kama (desire, longing)
Vanaprastha (3rd life phase, middle age, retirement, switching from an active to advisory role, gradual withdrawl)

Left = Antares/Scorpio/"water" signs
Rig Veda (the oldest Indo-European texts including the Samhita, Brahmanas, Aranyakas and Upanishads),
Satya Yuga (the "golden age")
Dharma (virtue, truth)
Brahmacarya (1st life phase, childhood to young adulthood, education under the guru, self-mastery)

As for the Dharma wheel:

Top (right view)
Top-left (right meditation)
Left (right mindfulness)
Bottom-left (right effort)
Bottom (right livlihood)
Bottom-right (right action)
Right (right speech)
Top-right (right intention)

[Jim Eshelman]

Too cumbersome. Not interested. Has to be brief, barely taking syllables, and capable of engaging pop culture imagination. The biggest purpose (if I wasn't clear) is to sell Sidereal astrology to the masses, so the least thinking required, the better.

[By Jove]

Too cumbersome. Not interested. Has to be brief, barely taking syllables, and capable of engaging pop culture imagination. The biggest purpose (if I wasn't clear) is to sell Sidereal astrology to the masses, so the least thinking required, the better.

This was to help inspire "pop culture" ideas. But to do that, I need to explain where the inspiration comes from and its significance.

[Veronica]

Too cumbersome. Not interested. Has to be brief, barely taking syllables, and capable of engaging pop culture imagination. The biggest purpose (if I wasn't clear) is to sell Sidereal astrology to the masses, so the least thinking required, the better.

This was to help inspire "pop culture" ideas. But to do that, I need to explain where the inspiration comes from and its significance.

I think with pop culture you actually do not have to do that (explaining) and in fact it seems that the nature of pop culture is Not to splain' nothing, just POP it to em.

It's almost as if in order to get the idea out it has to be presented as the NEWEST OF ALL NEWnesses, so that it has the very least amount of cultural ingrained biases and preconceptions.

linking it to old traditions and ideas and cultures and words seems a sure way to have it tossed in the ol that and discarded without a pause.

[Veronica]

before I learned Tarot I read Raymond Bucklands books on Gypsy fortune telling, and I learned that the four suits in a normal deck of cards are the same as Tarot.

Most every person on the planet knows what Diamond, Spade, Heart and Clubs are but they have no clue they have much deep significance.

[By Jove]

Too cumbersome. Not interested. Has to be brief, barely taking syllables, and capable of engaging pop culture imagination. The biggest purpose (if I wasn't clear) is to sell Sidereal astrology to the masses, so the least thinking required, the better.

This was to help inspire "pop culture" ideas. But to do that, I need to explain where the inspiration comes from and its significance.

I think with pop culture you actually do not have to do that (explaining) and in fact it seems that the nature of pop culture is Not to splain' nothing, just POP it to em.

It's almost as if in order to get the idea out it has to be presented as the NEWEST OF ALL NEWnesses, so that it has the very least amount of cultural ingrained biases and preconceptions.

linking it to old traditions and ideas and cultures and words seems a sure way to have it tossed in the ol that and discarded without a pause.

I know, but Jim linked the quadruplicities to a wheel. That is very ancient and universal symbolism. The compass, sun wheel, and swastika also fit that model.

When the New Age movement began and Linda Goodman published her works, astrological terms like "fire sign" and "Neptunian" sounded new and trendy even though they were traditional. But that was simply because America (for example) was extremely WASPish, so anything sounding remotely Eastern or occult was seen as very exotic.

But now, Eastern culture and occult ideas are better understood, so maybe being trendy and catchy isn't what we should be aiming for? Trendiness made astrology mainstream but severely decreased its quality.

[By Jove]

Too cumbersome. Not interested. Has to be brief, barely taking syllables, and capable of engaging pop culture imagination. The biggest purpose (if I wasn't clear) is to sell Sidereal astrology to the masses, so the least thinking required, the better.

TL;DR version: I found the basic symbols and ideas for the triplicities. But coming up with catchy names is the challenge.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I still don't understand why we would need new names for the Triplicities. For the amount we use them, the names most people already know are fine. I think changing them is just an unnecessary complication. Sure it would be nice to have something like the wheel analogy, but we don't. Till we do, if we ever do, let's leave it alone. It's not that broke. There's no need to fix it.

And if it's "fixed" badly it will make Sidereal Astrology less accessible, and contribute to people deciding it's too complicated to use and impossible to learn quickly.

I agree, we do have this problem. People are already annoyed by having to learn they aren't the sign they thought they were. I think adding one more thing that's "wrong" with other astrology schools and that they have to relearn just makes people less interested. Its too much to ask.

What do Aries, Leo and Sagittarius have in common? They think everybody should do what they're told and are willing to tell them what that is, and try to enforce it if necessary. The generals holding the throne.
Libra, Aquarius and Gemini think their thought processes are better than other people's and try to influence the influencers. Power behind the throne.
Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces think what they want is more important than what other people want and are willing to work to get it. Pisces is willing to lie and obfuscate. Scorpio is willing to punch you in the nose to get past you. Cancer is willing to undermine. Enforcers. Throne topplers.
Capricorn, Virgo and Taurus think they are better than everybody else, especially their families, and also that everything revolves around sex and controlling other people's reproduction. The Aristocracy.

Edited to add: This is just to start people thinking about what these signs have in common. It's not a proposal. But we don't need to come up with snappy names and try to bend the signs to fit them. That's backwards. Start with the facts, and then look for an overarching symbol to fit them.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I know, but Jim linked the quadruplicities to a wheel. That is very ancient and universal symbolism. The compass, sun wheel, and swastika also fit that model.

I believe that was Fagan.

[Jim Eshelman]

I also don't want to go Vedic because it would lead too many to confuse us with Vedic astrologers. We already have trouble getting some segments to realize that.

[By Jove]

I still don't understand why we would need new names for the Triplicities. For the amount we use them, the names most people already know are fine. I think changing them is just an unnecessary complication. Sure it would be nice to have something like the wheel analogy, but we don't. Till we do, if we ever do, let's leave it alone. It's not that broke. There's no need to fix it.

And if it's "fixed" badly it will make Sidereal Astrology less accessible, and contribute to people deciding it's too complicated to use and impossible to learn quickly.

I agree, we do have this problem. People are already annoyed by having to learn they aren't the sign they thought they were. I think adding one more thing that's "wrong" with other astrology schools and that they have to relearn just makes people less interested. Its too much to ask.

What do Aries, Leo and Sagittarius have in common? They think everybody should do what they're told and are willing to tell them what that is, and try to enforce it if necessary. The generals holding the throne.
Libra, Aquarius and Gemini think their thought processes are better than other people's and try to influence the influencers. Power behind the throne.
Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces think what they want is more important than what other people want and are willing to work to get it. Pisces is willing to lie and obfuscate. Scorpio is willing to punch you in the nose to get past you. Cancer is willing to undermine. Enforcers. Throne topplers.
Capricorn, Virgo and Taurus think they are better than everybody else, especially their families, and also that everything revolves around sex and controlling other people's reproduction. The Aristocracy.

Edited to add: This is just to start people thinking about what these signs have in common. It's not a proposal. But we don't need to come up with snappy names and try to bend the signs to fit them. That's backwards. Start with the facts, and then look for an overarching symbol to fit them.

So are the old "fire", "air", "earth", "water" names fine, or do we need to look for overarching symbols to find better names?

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

The old names are fine. We don't need new ones.

If you simply must have new names, then do not look for new names!!! Start with the similarities between the constellations in each division. What's the same between Capricorn, Taurus and Virgo?
Let new names happen naturally as you find similarities.

[Jim Eshelman]

That was the basis of the proposed names.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I didn't read through your post where you said what you meant. I posted some of the same ideas. But Egalitarian? Maybe we don't come up with names for all the pieces at once. And I still think there needs to be some obvious overarching theme that all the pieces fit with naturally. If it has to be forced, I think that's a pretty good indication it's wrong.

But I still don't think we need new names, or any names. I always thought the triplicities were forced even before I started learning about Sidereal. They're all Apples, Bananas, and Synchronized Swimming. Not really three of a kind.

[mikestar13]

I don't know if we strictly need new names, but the ones Jim suggests are a reasonable start to understanding what the elements mean in western sidereal astrology. Analogously, with regard to the quadruplicities, I still call them cardinal, fixed and mutable, but the rim, hub, spokes analogy, is helpful in understanding the meaning. I will always think of my Aries moon (for example) as "cardinal fire", but the label "imperial rim" also gives me meaningful interpretive understanding. I like the new labels to supplement and clarify the old ones, not displace them. But everyone's mileage may vary.

[Jim Eshelman]

In response to Mike and Jupe's last posts - something I've been thinking about the last few weeks but not saying - might be a temporary point of view, but, in any case...

After coming up with these four words, I'm less bothered by the element names PROVIDED the elements names are understood to mean (something like) these four words. My real objection to using the element names is that they have deeply rooted natures (prevailing across multiple occult disciplines, and especially alchemy and qabbalah). Using them in astrology without significant prior explanation is (at the least) going to result in misunderstandings. More likely, it will result in passionate Tropical advocates weaponizing them against Sidereal astrology, e.g., "You just called your so-called 'Fire Signs' pratical, which is SO earthy, you just disproved your zodiac" sort of thing.

But when I line up these words (derived from observation of the signs and cross-comparison of traits to find simple commonalities), I find they are a reasonable expression of each of the elements - provided we entirely throw out any earlier ideas about the elements. (That's the hard part.)

In order of the zodiac:

Earth signs = Fertile signs
Air signs = Egalitarian signs
Water signs = Enigma signs
Fire signs = Imperial signs

FWIW. Call it my opinion of the month on the topic. I don't think they're bad, and they almost make me ready to go back to the elements. However, I'd still need something else to modify it, e.g., saying "the Fire or Imperial signs."

[Parto]

Hot, cold, dry, wet?

[Jim Eshelman]

Hot, cold, dry, wet?

Interesting.

The four elements are classically combinations of these: four results from combining binary hot vs. cold with binary dry vs. wet.

First impression (only): Making the assignments is awkward and not really fitting. For example, only Water/Enigma fits "wet," but these people aren't "wet" in any way that comes immediately to mind - on a cultural basis. "Hot" is probably taken as temperamental, which is the way it is thought to fit best Tropical Fire signs (and, in fact, the only group it fits is Sidereal Water signs, but it's way too one-sided for them); similarly, "cold" only fits the Fire signs in the sense of the icy pragmatism that becomes extreme cruelty in the most dictatorial sense but, again, is one-sided. I'm not sure that any of the describes Earth signs. It's at least a novel componentialization.

[By Jove]

In response to Mike and Jupe's last posts - something I've been thinking about the last few weeks but not saying - might be a temporary point of view, but, in any case...

After coming up with these four words, I'm less bothered by the element names PROVIDED the elements names are understood to mean (something like) these four words. My real objection to using the element names is that they have deeply rooted natures (prevailing across multiple occult disciplines, and especially alchemy and qabbalah). Using them in astrology without significant prior explanation is (at the least) going to result in misunderstandings. More likely, it will result in passionate Tropical advocates weaponizing them against Sidereal astrology, e.g., "You just called your so-called 'Fire Signs' pratical, which is SO earthy, you just disproved your zodiac" sort of thing.

But when I line up these words (derived from observation of the signs and cross-comparison of traits to find simple commonalities), I find they are a reasonable expression of each of the elements - provided we entirely throw out any earlier ideas about the elements. (That's the hard part.)

In order of the zodiac:

Earth signs = Fertile signs
Air signs = Egalitarian signs
Water signs = Enigma signs
Fire signs = Imperial signs

FWIW. Call it my opinion of the month on the topic. I don't think they're bad, and they almost make me ready to go back to the elements. However, I'd still need something else to modify it, e.g., saying "the Fire or Imperial signs."

Maybe some catchy symbol to represent these concepts?

Imperial = Crown (self-explanatory; "sword" could also work)
Air = Sickel (represents both the serf and death/saturn, the traditional diurnal ruler)
Earth = Horn (fertility symbols of the bull and goat, and even the plow/furrow)
Water = Veil (the Veil of Isis, enigmas of nature; I also thought "shadow", but maybe it's too abstract)

A little aside; you can even see a masculine/feminine dynamic between them.

Imperial/Crown = masculine symbol, the patriarch (top of hierarchy/social construct)
Egalitarian/Sickel = feminine symbol, the farmer (base of hierarchy/social construct)
Fertility/Horn = masculine symbol of nature; pretty self-explanatory
Enigma/Veil = feminine symbol of nature; again, pretty self-explanatory

[Parto]

I thought cold fit "Air" so well, with their alienation and solitude. Two of them are anti-solar, as if away from warmth.

Dry for "Earth," because dryness makes me think cerebrotonia (it might be a personal bias), characteristic of Virgo and Capricorn. Not Taurus, but Taurus has always felt to me like the oddest fit in any of the triplicities.

I'll admit my reason for attributing hot to "Fire" didn't go much deeper than, "Hey, fire's hot."

[Veronica]

Hydrogen, Helium, Oxygen and Carbon? The four most common elements in the Universe and scientifically accurate.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Hydrogen, Helium, Oxygen and Carbon?

How would you attribute them?

[By Jove]

I thought cold fit "Air" so well, with their alienation and solitude. Two of them are anti-solar, as if away from warmth.

Dry for "Earth," because dryness makes me think cerebrotonia (it might be a personal bias), characteristic of Virgo and Capricorn. Not Taurus, but Taurus has always felt to me like the oddest fit in any of the triplicities.

I'll admit my reason for attributing hot to "Fire" didn't go much deeper than, "Hey, fire's hot."

Not gonna lie. Saying, "I'm a hot spoke." or, "I'm a wet hub." is pretty funny.

[Jim Eshelman]

Dry for "Earth," because dryness makes me think cerebrotonia (it might be a personal bias), characteristic of Virgo and Capricorn. Not Taurus, but Taurus has always felt to me like the oddest fit in any of the triplicities.

That's the challenge: To find the parts that do fit all of them. For example, it was easy to find Cancer and Pisces overlaps, in some way's they're duplicates or close siblings; but getting a word that matched Scorpio narrowed the field. One couldn't pick just a Cancer-Pisces word.

[Veronica]

Hydrogen, Helium, Oxygen and Carbon?

How would you attribute them?

Carbon is Earth
Oxygen is Air
Helium is Fire
Hydrogen is Water


Hydrogen and Helium are the most abundant by a far ratio to each other and even farther from Oxygen and carbon.

the sun itself is almost 75% hydrogen and 25% Helium (which is the cornerstone of my conviction that the sun shouldn't be cast as Masculine exclusively).

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Interesting. I agree about Hydrogen and Carbon, but would switch up Oxygen and Helium because Helium won't burn. In fact can be used as a fire suppressant, while Fire won't burn without Oxygen at least most of the time.

[Veronica]

Interesting. I agree about Hydrogen and Carbon, but would switch up Oxygen and Helium because Helium won't burn. In fact can be used as a fire suppressant, while Fire won't burn without Oxygen at least most of the time.

I thought about that, switched placement at first but I think our perception of fire falls short of its truth. melted molten rock in Earths core is not like fire because it burns oxygen but because of the speed at which the atoms are moving and chemical reactions (ie losing or gaining electrons) happening. if most all suns are hydrogen and helium then one might think He has some role or need to meet in the action of burning itself.

Oxygen is an Interesting element and while yes fire burns it, we also breathe it. it is also a byproduct of other chemical reactions in a way similiar to that air on earth is byproduct of photosynthesis.

[Veronica]

Jupiter....

As a Leo you would be a Fire or Helium sign,
I as an Aquarius would be Air or Oxygen

In my mind and heart you seem the type that is vital and essential to the whole who can rise above and even quell fires before they get out of hand.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

(kicks at the grass) Aw, shucks. Thanks.

[By Jove]

Dry for "Earth," because dryness makes me think cerebrotonia (it might be a personal bias), characteristic of Virgo and Capricorn. Not Taurus, but Taurus has always felt to me like the oddest fit in any of the triplicities.

That's the challenge: To find the parts that do fit all of them. For example, it was easy to find Cancer and Pisces overlaps, in some way's they're duplicates or close siblings; but getting a word that matched Scorpio narrowed the field. One couldn't pick just a Cancer-Pisces word.

That's what makes the triplicities complicated. They each have an odd duck.

Aries for the "fire" signs (Sun/Leo and Jupiter/Sagittarius are the day/night rulers of the triplicity).
Taurus for the "earth" signs (the only sign with Venus/Moon, the day/night ruler of the triplicity).
Gemini for the "air" signs (the only sign not ruled or exalted by Saturn, the day ruler of the triplicity).
Scorpio for the "water" signs (the only sign with Mars, the triplicity ruler and a malefic.)

[Veronica]

The Triplicicity in the Universe is the Electron and the Up Quark and the Down Quark.

[Jim Eshelman]

I don't see all the odd ducks as you do. For example, Libra seems the real odd duck of the Egalitarian signs (Gemini and Aquarius being overtly scientific-intellectual); though, of course, Libra and Aquarius share social activism (though it looks very different in both locations).

But they can't truly be odd ducks if there are indeed Triplicities. By definition, any traits that identify less than all three of them are not really traits of the triplicity, but merely of two signs that happen to be in it. In defining triplicity traits, one has to keep throwing things out until one comes to something that they all share in common.

Basing this on dignified planets will mislead you endlessly. I think it a very bad mistake to say, "The 'Earth' triplicity has to have traits that come from planets dignified in Taurus, Virgo, and Capricorn." Even Ptolemy's triplicity "rulers" are suspect - they don't really fit, at least not in a straightforward way. For the normal dignities, Taurus is anti-Mars, Capricorn is martial; Taurus is Venussy, Virgo is anti-Venus; Taurus is lunar, Capricorn is anti-lunar. You can't rely on these.

[By Jove]

I don't see all the odd ducks as you do. For example, Libra seems the real odd duck of the Egalitarian signs (Gemini and Aquarius being overtly scientific-intellectual); though, of course, Libra and Aquarius share social activism (though it looks very different in both locations).

But they can't truly be odd ducks if there are indeed Triplicities. By definition, any traits that identify less than all three of them are not really traits of the triplicity, but merely of two signs that happen to be in it. In defining triplicity traits, one has to keep throwing things out until one comes to something that they all share in common.

Well, I do have crown/scythe/horn/veil symbols to reflect your ideas.

[Veronica]

(kicks at the grass) Aw, shucks. Thanks.

No, thank you for being authentically you.
nothing to thank me for, I was speaking the truth.

[Henrik Jansen]

Just curious, so does an Aries share more in common with signs that share the same triplicity (Leo, Sagittarius), or signs that share the same quadruplicity (Cancer, Libra, Capricorn)?