Waiting for Ages

Some years ago I watched a swords and sandal epic movie (produced in Italy with English sub-titles) about an old Grecian legend involving titans, monsters heroes etc.  The titans had just been released from some kind of very long captivity from a previous age.  One titan (in human form) was chatting with a barmaid and said “I have been waiting for ages to meet someone as beautiful as you”.  This innocuous story led me to consider how the astrological ages correspond with developments with the astrological ages.  Allegorically this could be likened to the astrological ages navel gazing.

The ‘modern’ approach to the astrological ages was kicked off by the Greek astronomer-astrologer Hipparchus in the late 2nd century BC when he irrefutably discovered the slow eastward shift of the stars due to the precession of the equinoxes.  This newly perceived perspective from around 127 BC (for the Greeks at least) allowed Hipparchus to conceptualize the astrological ages.  This occurred in the previous Scorpio sub-age (189 – 8 BC) – specifically extremely close to the first sub-age decan cusp around 129 BC, the Cancer sub-age decan cusp.

Jump forward to modern times, and the equivalent to 127 BC is 1853 AD (equivalent in the sense that both 1853 AD and 127 BC exist two years past their respective Cancer sub-age decan cusp).  There is also another way of relating specific periods between different ages.  Each age is approximately 2150 years.  Add 2150 years (an age) to 127 BCE and we arrive at 2024 AD.  At a minimum, we know that the period 1853 to 2012 (leading to 2024) has experienced a revolution in the acceptance, understanding or recognition of the astrological ages in modern times along with a massive resurgence of interest in astrology. 

In the 19th century Blavatsky, who co-founded the Theosophical Society in 1875, popularized the concept of a new age commencing in 1888 and some of her followers specifically addressed the Age of Aquarius.  This marks a new age for the astrological ages rising to a crescendo in the late 1960s when the musical Hair proudly proclaimed in its first song ‘this is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius’.  References to the Age of Aquarius are now so ubiquitous, that on any day, about half a dozen references can be found in the media (especially in the USA), and particularly promoting the urban myth that the Age of Aquarius arrived in the 1960s and 70s.  In following the press and online articles, many commentators suggest that the Age of Aquarius lasted 10 or 20 years as the world seems to have moved away from the Age of Aquarius in recent decades.

Therefore in the two periods associated with highpoints for the astrological ages, both are associated with a Scorpio sub-age and both periods are about one age apart.  The next area of interest is another age before Hipparchus discovered precession.  Using both methods as applied above, 2150 years before 127 BC takes us back to 2277 BC based on an age with an average of 2150 years.  Two years past the Cancer sub-age decan cusp of the ancient Scorpio sub-age (2188 – 2006 BC) places us around the year 2125 BC.  Therefore the period 2277 to 2125 is the target period for an ancient highpoint related to the astrological ages.  For many people this is ridiculous because in academia, precession of the equinoxes was only discovered by Hipparchus around 127 BC.  How could anyone before this time know about astrological ages or precession of the equinoxes?

Though academia rejects ancient knowledge of precession of the equinoxes and the astrological ages before Hipparchus – mountains of circumstantial evidence suggests the contrary.  Most astrologers know that astrology is too subtle and sophisticated for academics to comprehend (they need an apple to fall on their head), so we will put aside their collective limitation and move back to very ancient times and see if ancient astronomers may have made advances in their understanding or knowledge of the astrological ages.  Surprisingly, the period 2277 to 2125 BC hits the nail right on the head.  A major restructuring of the zodiacal constellations occurred in the late third millennium BCE because over the thousands of years since the Mesopotamians had been observing the heavens, the constellations had shifted position due to precession of the equinoxes.[1]  It is believed this restructure of the constellations occurred in what is known as the Akkadian period (2390–2210 BC).  If the astronomers from this ancient time could perceive that the stars had shifted, did it occur to them that the stars would keep shifting into the future?  Did they relate astrological ages to these shifting stars? 

Though we cannot be certain of the knowledge-base of ancient astronomers, we can historically perceive the developments in ancient astronomy.  For thousands of years a cosmic religion had existed where the heavenly bodies were deified.  Sometime, not long before 2000 BCE in Mesopotamia, the astronomers commenced applying astrological concepts to the heavenly bodies.[2]  This very major development in astrology appears around our target period of 2277 to 2125 BC.  Another key development is that the stars and constellation, as defined in those ancient times, became ‘frozen’ until Hipparchus appeared around one age later.  As early as 1915 researchers noticed that the ancient Greeks inherited the Babylonian constellations, but the constellations they used were defined around 2084 BC (in the final florescence of the old Sumerian civilization in Mesopotamia).[3]  Other researchers agree with this approach. 

Basically what we have is three highpoints associated with astrology (and astronomy) in general, including the astrological ages to a certain extent – all associated with a Scorpio sub-age.  Between these highpoints are large periods of time of erratic or reduced activity or understanding but with some highpoints, particularly when any period is associated with Aquarius.  For most of the 1st and 2nd millenniums BC, a lot of important astronomical/astrological knowledge or understanding appears to have been lost in the turbulence of those times, and people much information could only be hand down and possibly only partially understood.

There is a delusionary expectation that as the years unfold, everything improves.  This is not the case.  Shakespeare is still called the greatest poet the world has seen.  Michelangelo’s artwork is revered today.  Any original Impressionist painting is worth a fortune.  Picasso is undoubtedly the greatest surrealist or abstract painter the world has known.  Most of the best classical composers lived a number of centuries ago.  People will be listening to the music of the 1960s and 70s in awe for centuries.  The best novelists the world will appear around 2029 (minus 15 years or plus 60 years), and not to be overtaken for around another 700 years.

The reason for these spikes in accomplishment is that they all relate to peaks in ages and sub-ages.  For example, the power of Pisces at the time of Shakespeare will not be replicated for almost another 26,000 years.  The music of Jimi Hendrix, Bob Dylan, the Beatles and so on is associated with the Pisces-Aquarius age (1433- 3574) with a highpoint for Scorpio in 1970.  As Richard Tarnas points out in his music and astrology workshops, the music of the 1960s and 70s was the combination of the Uranian (Aquarian) electric medium combined with the sexual rock-and-roll beat of Pluto (Scorpio).

Therefore it can be expected that the current highpoint for astrology in general and specifically the astrological ages will not be constant in the coming millennia. It is therefore appropriate that such a major discovery of the true nature of the astrological ages is made during the current period when the astrology of our time resonates with major advances in astrology.  Even ten years ago, near the beginning of my major research into the astrological ages, I was aware of the need to produce a book at a time that was a suitable highpoint for astrology.  The whole Scorpio subage and overflow (1791-1970-2148) is a highpoint for astrology, but there are specific Scorpio hotspots within this multi-century period.  One such hotspot is the current Scorpio micro-age decan and overflow (2005-10-15) with the bell curve highpoint located 2007-12 (basically aligned to the GFC).  Ten years ago I thought this hotspot was located around 2020 and so I thought I had plenty of time to write my book.  This illusion was shattered in 2006 when I eventually fine-tune my rectification of the start of the Aquarian age to 1433 – about 10 years earlier than my previous estimate.  This advanced the current Scorpio hotspot from around 2020 to 2010.  I immediately felt the pressure to produce the book of the astrological ages and I commenced writing it in 2007, with it being published in 2011.

For those readers interested in the astrological ages we live in a magic period.  In hindsight it is easy to see why Hipparchus in the 2nd century BC got his calibration technique for measuring the astrological ages wrong.  This is why for over the last 2,000 years the astrological ages have been a mere toy and plaything for some astrologers, as it gave the hint of correlation but was basically useless as a predictive tool.  One of the big questions I have is: did the astronomer-astrologers of around 2100 BC perceive and understand the astrological ages?  Circumstantial evidence cannot provide a definitive answer but there is a good possibility the answer is yes.  Every time you look at a zodiacal constellation in the sky, you are looking at the forensic evidence left by the ancient astronomer-astrologers over 4,000 years ago.  These zodiacal constellations, in their heliacal rising mode of calibration, are exactly aligned to the astrological ages as defined with the Age of Aquarius arriving in 1433 AD.  Is this an accident or were the zodiacal constellations purposely defined to measure the astrological ages? Now this is a real mystery!  Will we have to wait another age to find out?

For details about my book THE DAWNING see www.macro-astrology.com/purchase.html

[1] Babylonian Star-Lore, p. 256–9

[2] The Great Year, p. 21

[3] Mythology of the Babylonian People, p. 322

7 thoughts on “Waiting for Ages

    • Gert, yes, I would expect that the solar storms and flares the sun is unleashing this year correlates to the Leo nano-age. However, ultimately it would be necessary to examine many Leo nano-ages and see if the correlations form a distinct pattern. Even without a pattern, random Leo archetype events can occur in any Leo period.

  1. Hi,

    What can you find wrong with a more sidereal timeline? The Age of Pisces beginning around 159 (with Ptolemy’s Almagest?), the birth of Christ marking the start of the Piscean ‘era’ of Aries. 159 year ‘eras’ would have, quite closely, the Crusades and Black Death in Scorpio, the Age of Discovery and Reformation in Sagittarius, Industrial Revolution and general British apotheosis in Capricorn and the invention of flight, electricity and modern art marking the era of Aquarius before 1913. That timeframe would also account for a sidereal ‘Age of Cetus’ stretching from the falls of the Roman and Parthian Empires and the birth of Mohammed to the 19th/20th century wars and the birth of Hitler and much of the character of the intervening ‘Dark Ages’ as well…

    As for the popular perception of the Aquarian Age, wouldn’t that be explained by the 60s being an Aquarian decade like the Golden Twenties were Libra, the Depression Scorpio, the – World – War Sagittarius and conservative 50s Cap? Speaking of culture when have movie stars been shorter than Al Pacino and Dustin Hoffman in the Piscean 70s or more martial than Schwarzenegger or Stallone in the 80s? Comfortable, prosperous 90s (George Clooney and Bill Clinton’s stars rose) and then the postmodern, technological 00s…

    I’d be interested if you can find fault with that much simpler progression. A fractal approach has some merit but surely the ebbs and flows are more ‘local color’ compared to the above?

  2. Uranus has been making a series of aspects to Pluto since the 70s that coincide with economic crises and ensuing unrest. Don’t you think what you’ve dialled into are outer planet harmonics rather than Ages?

  3. adllda, No i don’t think I have dialed into outer planet harmonics rather than Ages? You would need to show the historical correlations to at least three previous sets of Uranus and Pluto aspects to prove or at least substantiate the observable effects that should be expected whenever Uranus/Pluto aspects appear. I have seen timelines like the one you produced in your first post here. Anyone can produce a timeline but you have to prove it or at least substantiate it. I am confident with my timeline which is why I went to the trouble to publish a book on this research. Where do you get 159 years eras?

  4. Sorry, that was a typo that I tried to rationalise. It was late. That should be 179 year eras, 2148 divided by 12 signs. That would have Jesus around ‘Aries of Pisces’ rather than ‘Pisces of Aries’, otherwise the timeline amounts to the same.

    Pluto/Uranus aspects have a somewhat complex relation to crises going back to the 19th century, that being as far I’ve studied. (Due to which I had already concluded that 2015 would mark a change in the zeitgeist, before coming across your work.) What I was doing bringing it up was trying to reconcile the effects of outer planet cycles (undoubtedly true), your system (which obviously has some basis in truth) and the timeline I posted above (as far as I can see, unimpeachable).

    I could exhaustively substantiate “mine”, at least in reference to culture, art and fashion. I mean I did, when I was exploring it. But I think I’ve suggested enough above for anyone open to the truth to recognise its validity.

    How do you reconcile the ~600 year (28%) gap between your Age of Aquarius and the constellations? Especially compared to a scheme that does correspond to them, as well as accounting for the characters of decades and centuries without fail?

    • Here is an extract from my book “The Dawning” about why the calibration system used by astrologers in reference to the astrological ages has been incorrect since Hipparchus invented it about 127 BC:

      “The stars and zodiacal constellations shift backwards one degree in 72 years and take approximately 2150 years to move thirty degrees (i.e. one zodiacal sign). The usual calibration technique takes as a reference point the vernal equinox which occurs around 21st March each year. The vernal equinox not only marked the beginning of the New Year in Mesopotamia (and many other regions until a few centuries ago) but is also the astronomical basis for Easter in modern times. The coincident Jewish Passover was the most important annual ritual for the Jews and was indicated by the first full Moon following the vernal equinox. At the vernal equinox, the Sun lies directly above the equator on its path from the southern hemisphere to the northern hemisphere when night and day are of equal length. It is an exact replicable point each year. The Sun’s physical position in the sky at the vernal equinox is called the Vernal Point (VP). Currently at the vernal equinox the VP is located in the constellation of Pisces. Many astrologers believe that while the VP is located in the constellation of Pisces the world will remain in the Age of Pisces.

      The Vernal Point in relation to the astrological ages is a red herring. The Vernal Point is not used as the calibration technique for the astrological ages in this book. In its place is the heliacal rising constellation. The heliacal rising constellation is the last constellation visible rising up from the eastern horizon just before the eastern horizon turns blue from the approaching Sun. Currently in the world, the constellation of Aquarius is the heliacal rising constellation at the Vernal Equinox (around 21st March each year), indicating that based on the ancient method of viewing the stars and constellations, the world is currently in the Age of Aquarius. ”

      Your accounting for the characters of decades and centuries did not make sense. I have seen many such systems whereby a jumble of historical developments are assigned to an age or sub-period of an age without any proof that these historical events have any association to the zodiacal signs involved. You must demonstrate how an event or series of events have a zodiacal archetypal association to the sign in question. Archetypal relationships are my specialty. Here is what the ISAR book reviewer said about my book:

      “The Dawning
      Shedding New Light On The Astrological Ages
      by Terry MacKinnell
      ISBN: 978-1-4568-8253-2

      Written by the astrologer Terry MacKinnell, who is well known in his native Australia for his extensive astrological research, this in-depth book challenges more traditional concepts of “astrological ages” and their timing. Basing his findings on qualitative rather than quantitative research, Terry challenges the approach to astronomy which is based on a tradition that originates with Hipparchus in 127 BC, claiming that
      “Hipparchus made a mistake which has been erroneously used by astrologers ever since.”

      In this very interesting book, the author suggests that “because of
      the overflow effect” of one age into the next “a monosign is inappropriate as a descriptive label for an astrological age.” Using zodiacal archetypes rather than planets to describe the key focus of each age, Terry explores historical periods based on ages, quasi-ages, age decans and quasi-age decans. With 16 chapters in all, Part 1 focuses on the “Ages of the Holocene Epoch” from Leo-Cancer to Pisces-Aquarius as well as a chapter on quasi ages. Part 2 covers the “Age Decanates” including the collapse of the empires, Europe and Greco-roman heritage, and climate change. The final chapter offers “an outline of the future” with the author clearly reminding us that “if the astrological ages cannot provide a theoretical basis for the arrival of civilization, this suggests that they cannot predict the other end – the ultimate dissolution of civilization.” The back of the book contains a useful appendix on the
      astrological archetypes which will be of particular assistance to non-astrologers, as well as an appendix on the rectification of the Aquarian age, and a section on
      historians’ perspective on history.

      Comfortable weaving his way through the astrological and historical ages, one cannot help being fascinated by the manner in which the author deftly brings archetypal astrological themes to life throughout the book. This wealth of information is likely to be enjoyed by astrologers and non-astrologers alike, who are interested in a new approach to exploring our historical evolution through the ages.

      By Margaret Gray MSW D. Psych. Astrology
      “ISAR International Astrologer” August, 2012 Volume 41, Number 2″

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s