ASTROLOGY: YOUR PLACE AMONG THE STARS

By EVANGELINE ADAMS

AUTHOR OF THE BOWL OF HEAVEN, AND ASTROLOGY: YOUR PLACE IN THE SUN

With One Hundred Horoscopes of Famous People

(Ghost written by Aleister Crowley)

Contents

Introduction

The Sun Symbolically Considered

The Sun

The Sun in the Signs

The Sun in Aries

The Sun in Taurus

The Sun in Gemini

The Sun in Cancer

The Sun in Leo

The Sun in Virgo

The Sun in Libra

The Sun in Scorpio

The Sun in Sagittarius

The Sun in Capricorn

The Sun in Aquarius

The Sun in Pisces

Periods When The Sun Will Be Afflicted by Uranus

Periods When The Sun Will Be Beneficently Aspected by Uranus

Periods When The Sun Will Be Afflicted by Saturn

Periods When The Sun Will Be Beneficently Aspected by Jupiter

The Moon Symbolically Considered

The Moon

The Moon in the Signs

The Moon in Aries

The Moon in Taurus

The Moon in Gemini

The Moon in Cancer

The Moon in Leo

The Moon in Virgo

The Moon in Libra

The Moon in Scorpio

The Moon in Sagittarius

The Moon in Capricorn

The Moon in Aquarius

The Moon in Pisces

Mercury Symbolically Considered

Mercury in the Signs

Mercury in Aries

Mercury in Taurus

Mercury in Gemini

Mercury in Cancer

Mercury in Leo

Mercury in Virgo

Mercury in Libra

Mercury in Scorpio

Mercury in Sagittarius

Mercury in Capricorn

Mercury in Aquarius

Mercury in Pisces

Venus Symbolically Considered

Venus in the Signs

Venus in Aries

Venus in Taurus

Venus in Gemini

Venus in Cancer

Venus in Leo

Venus in Virgo

Venus in Libra

Venus in Scorpio
Venus in Sagittarius

Venus in Capricorn

Venus in Aquarius

Venus in Pisces

Mars Symbolically Considered

Mars in the Signs

Mars in Aries

Mars in Taurus

Mars in Gemini

Mars in Cancer

Mars in Leo

Mars in Virgo

Mars in Libra

Mars in Scorpio

Mars in Sagittarius

Mars in Capricorn

Mars in Aquarius

Mars in Pisces

Jupiter Symbolically Considered

Jupiter in the Signs

Jupiter in Aries

Jupiter in Taurus
Jupiter in Gemini

Jupiter in Cancer

Jupiter in Leo

Jupiter in Virgo

Jupiter in Libra

Jupiter in Scorpio

Jupiter in Sagittarius

Jupiter in Capricorn

Jupiter in Aquarius

Jupiter in Pisces

The Effects of Jupiter on Vocation

Saturn Symbolically Considered

Saturn in the Signs

Saturn in Aries

Saturn in Taurus

Saturn in Gemini

Saturn in Cancer

Saturn in Leo

Saturn in Virgo

Saturn in Libra

Saturn in Scorpio

Saturn in Sagittarius

Saturn in Capricorn
Saturn in Aquarius

Saturn in Pisces

Uranus Symbolically Considered

Uranus in the Signs

Uranus in Aries

Uranus in Taurus

Uranus in Gemini

Uranus in Cancer

Uranus in Leo

Uranus in Virgo

Uranus in Libra

Uranus in Scorpio

Uranus in Sagittarius

Uranus in Capricorn

Uranus in Aquarius

Uranus in Pisces

Neptune Symbolically Considered

Neptune in the Signs

Neptune in Aries

Neptune in Taurus

Neptune in Gemini

Neptune in Cancer
Neptune in Leo

Neptune in Virgo

Neptune in Libra

Neptune in Scorpio

Neptune in Sagittarius

Neptune in Capricorn

Neptune in Aquarius

Neptune in Pisces

Diseases of Neptune

The Problem of Death

One Hundred Horoscopes of Famous People

Introduction

MAJOR-KEY TO ASTROLOGY

IT has often been a source of bewilderment to the student that, with such small variations in
the heavens, the variations should be so large on earth. Everybody has just as many signs and
planets as everybody else; yet one man is a nobody and another is more than half divine. No
study of aspects as such can explain the fact. They “work,” more or less, when they are far from
being exact; and, on the theory of probabilities, it would seem as if at least a third of the human
race should be of noble calibre. As a fact, hardly one man in ten thousand leaves even a
transient mark upon his generation. How is this? The problem has always baffled astrologers
and encouraged their critics. In fact, few astrologers have fairly faced it.
II

What is the difference between an amoeba and an elephant? The cells of which an elephant is
composed are one and all not very dissimilar from the amoeba. The difference is that one is
varied and organized, a harmonious republic; the other remains single.

What is the difference, to go higher in the scale of evolution, between a monkey and a man?
The answer is similar. It is not so much the size and weight of the brain that differ; some men
with small brains have been the intellectual superiors of men with large brains. But if we take
the brain of an ape and that of a man from their envelopes, a radical difference becomes
immediately patent. The convolutions in the ape are few and simple; in the man they are many
and complex.

There lies the great secret; the men who mould the destinies of humanity are the most evolved
and therefore the most highly complex types. They are not men who have small interests here,
and small functions there; they have built up every factor in their being {vii} into a single
composite pattern. Often the manifestations of the complex will be widely divergent, on the
surface, but this is only another symptom of the complexity. All this is explained by Astrology.

III

A glance at the horoscopes of the greatest men of whom we have record shows that, generally
speaking, the planets form exact or very close aspects, and also – this is the important point –
that all, or very nearly all, the planets are interwoven. Sometimes we find two or three
complexes in a nativity, perhaps even four; and these have no close relation with one another.
Such horoscopes are those of commonplace people. It is as if they had several strands in their
nature which had not been properly interwoven. As a result, there are times when one is at
work in its own feeble way; then it is forgotten, and another comes into operation. The lack of
continuity is fatal to the performance of any constructive work. If such a person should acquire
fame, it is the result of some action suddenly conceived and executed, or because of an
apparent accident. A few examples of great horoscopes will make these points certain.
Shakespeare, to begin with, has all nine planets in a single complex. Five of them are in aspect
within three degrees, and only one is more than ten degrees from the very farthest.

Dante may be said to have two complexes, one of five planets, all within six degrees; another of
four, all within nine degrees; and one complex is only nine degrees from the other.

Michael Angelo has six planets within six degrees, with a seventh only four degrees, and an
eighth only three degrees away.

Petrarch has six planets within six and a half degrees, and the other three within ten degrees.

Sir Richard Burton has five planets within five degrees and the other four within seven degrees.

Bismarck has seven planets within ten degrees, the other two within four degrees.

Edison has six within eleven degrees; the others within eight degrees.

Shelley has five within eight degrees; three within two and a half {viii} degrees, and the other
only six degrees from a conjunction with one of the larger complex.

Zola has all nine within eleven degrees; Copernicus, eight within the same limit.

Goethe has two distinct complexes, one of six planets, within thirteen degrees, the other of
three within seven degrees.
Napoleon has six within ten degrees, three within three and a half degrees, and the one is but
eight degrees from the other.

Newton has three within one and a half degrees, three within five and a half degrees, and three
within seven degrees.

Balzac has four within nine degrees, five within ten degrees, and the two complexes are related
within seven degrees.

Wagner has five within five degrees, three within six degrees, and the last only five degrees
away.

Baudelaire has two complexes within ten degrees, one of five planets and the other of four.

Pasteur has six planets within six and a half degrees, two within three degrees, and the Moon,
which stands aloof, is by far the least important of the host of heaven.

Swinburne has six planets within five degrees, the rest within one and a quarter degrees.

If we had chosen to include minor aspects, such as forty-five degrees and one hundred and
thirty-five degrees, or the quincunx and sesquiquadrate an even stronger case could have been
made out; but it is undesirable to introduce too much subtlety into an argument of this sort; we
prefer to base it only upon obvious and patent facts.

IV
In the investigation of any nativity, it is quite useless to content oneself, as is too frequently
done, with the consideration of planets in pairs. These will give details of the native, it is true;
but it is the complex which decides on what scale these details are to be interpreted. Zola had
Saturn trine to Mercury, which made him great in construction. But had not this aspect been
merely part of a mighty complex, it would have made him a good merchant, a clever lawyer, or
something comparatively common. {ix}

Shelley's conjunction of Mars and Jupiter is very differently effective from that aspect in the
horoscope of the late J. P. Morgan. Why? Because they form parts of complexes of quite
opposite natures. The mere fact that one is in Leo and the other in Libra would not account for
the difference. And here it is that we must emphasize the necessity of looking not only for the
complex, but for the key to it.

Two men might have identical aspects and yet be utterly different just because in one case the
Lord of the Ascendant was Mars and in the other Venus. It is not always easy to divine the
secret pivot on which a complex swings. The Lord of the Ascendant is usually the cardinal point,
but if there be several planets or even one very strong planet rising, he may be overwhelmed
by them or it and his place in heaven, as it were, usurped. And it is of the utmost importance
that this fundamental planet be detected with accuracy; for it makes all the difference in the
world whether we regard the other planets as modifying Saturn or Jupiter. If the native be a
Saturnian at heart, the trine of Jupiter will flavor his selfish plans; if a Jupiterian, the trine of
Saturn will restrict and balance his enthusiasms. The conjunction of the Sun and Venus which
made Shelley so glorious an incarnation of Light and Beauty would hardly have acted in that
way had Scorpio, not Sagittarius, been his ascendant. It is the Lord, Jupiter, culminating in
conjunction with Mars and Neptune, that determines the disposition, and the superiority of the
Sun in Leo to Venus that made effective the manifestation of that disposition in the heart
through art; had those planets been influenced by Pisces, for example, it would have shown
itself in some soft shadowy way.

Enough has been said for a preliminary account of this matter; in the course of these pages we
shall pile Pelion upon Ossa, and Ossa upon Olympus, in demonstration of this secret of the
Astrological Complex. {x}