The Traditional Zodiac and the Age of Aquarius Explained

The traditional zodiac is the natural astronomical calendar of the solar system. The zodiacal ages are a function of the traditional zodiac. It is solely based on astronomical features. It is a continually moving, dynamic calendar; it will run for the life of the solar system with no human intervention. We need only know how to read it. It can be used today just as well as ever. The problem is that the zero point of the zodiac, the key to the beginning of the zodiacal ages (and the zodiacal signs) has been lost for a long time.

Definitions

First of all, to explain the traditional zodiac, we need to explain some features of the solar system. In the figure below, there is a gigantic sphere in space similar to the celestial sphere but with the sun at the center rather than the earth. The sky and all the stars are painted on the inside of it. The celestial north pole is aligned with the terrestrial north pole. The celestial equator is a great circle on the sphere directly above and in the same plane as the earth's equator. The ecliptic is another great circle on the sphere which is the path the sun appears to follow throughout the year. Not coincidentally, the angle between the celestial equator and the ecliptic is exactly the same as the tilt of the earth. The vernal equinox is the point where the celestial equator and the ecliptic cross (to the east); it is also the moment in time when the sun crosses that point. In other words, the vernal equinox is both the beginning of spring and the point on the celestial sphere where the beginning of spring occurs.

The earth is orbiting the sun while spinning on its axis. Twelve equally spaced zodiacal signs are along the ecliptic; the vertical lines represent the boundaries of the signs. The sun appears to be moving counter clockwise around the zodiac through out the year due to the orbit of the earth. The celestial equator and the earth are tilted at about 23.5° with respect to the zodiac. There is another great circle on the celestial sphere representing what Cicero (102-49 B.C.E. (Before Common Era)) called orbis lacteus, the significance of which will be discussed later.

THE ZODIAC

Next, we need to clarify some concepts of the zodiac that are often confused; zodiacal signs and zodiacal constellations are referred to herein with respect to the traditional zodiac. The astrological zodiac and the modern definition of the zodiac were derived from the traditional zodiac, but have taken on many new meanings so that they have little in common except for using the same names. There are at least three very different concepts of the zodiac around using the same words with different meanings causing great confusion to the unwary.

Use of the term "sign" is common and old; Cicero called the zodiac orbis signifer (sign-bearing circle). The term sign is used and defined many ways; one needs to be cautious of context and usage for the meaning of the term. I will use the term zodiacal sign to mean one of twelve equal 30° segments of the traditional zodiac. Each sign is associated with a constellation of the same name. A zodiacal sign is not a constellation.

A zodiacal constellation is one of twelve groups of stars associated with a zodiacal sign to which it lends its name. Typically, the zodiacal constellations are partially within the boundaries of the zodiacal sign of the same name. To be perfectly clear: constellation-group of stars, sign-30° segment.

The traditional zodiac is a band of the celestial sphere divided into twelve equal 30° segments along the ecliptic. Each segment is one of the zodiacal signs. Being twelve equal segments, a single defining point is mandatory; define one point, and you define all the signs. To define any additional points would either be redundant or conflict with the first definition. The calendar function of the traditional zodiac marks beginnings and ends of great years, ages, years, and seasons (which will be discussed later). The concepts of the traditional zodiac are unchanged by any new definitions of the zodiac or its elements.

As used by astronomers, the modern definition and use of the term "zodiac" is so different, that the term "traditional zodiac" must now be used to differentiate the two. In the modern definition, the zodiac is mainly the band along the ecliptic within which the sun, moon, and planets except Pluto move. Zodiacal constellations have been redefined in accordance with modern boundaries. With the new definition, signs are gone, the equal divisions are gone; there is no calendar, no clock, no ages, no beginning nor end. Under this definition new "zodiacal" constellations might be added. I emphasize, nothing related to this concept of the zodiac has any impact on the traditional zodiac.

As for the age of the traditional zodiac, no one knows, but the evidence keeps going further back in time. The oldest written history we have indicates that the zodiac was already ancient at the time of the Sumerians. Zecharia Sitchin (see ref. 1) translates Sumerian clay tablets as recording a flood of biblical proportions as occurring in the age of Leo (around 11,000-9,000 B.C.E.). He also says the Sumerians recorded in their astronomical lists the precessional shifts to Gemini, Cancer, and Leo. And he suggests that he believes he has read of events recorded in terms of zodiacal ages from before the age of Leo (see ref. 2). The zodiac was almost certainly developed before the age of Leo. By our historical standards, it is prehistoric.

THE ANNUAL ZODIAC

The traditional zodiac is a useful convention which provides at least five calendar functions as well as convenient astronomical reference points, and pretty accurate timekeeping at night for the person who knows the zodiacal signs. The first calendar function is monthly. Every month (approximately), the zodiacal signs shift a position to the west, and a new zodiacal sign shifts into position from the east while one disappears in the west. The second function is seasonal. Every shift of three zodiacal signs is exactly a season of the year. The third calendar function is yearly. Once throughout the year, the sun sequentially moves eastward through all twelve signs of the zodiac and begins the new year at the vernal equinox and starts to move through them all again.

THE ZODIACAL AGES AND GREAT YEARS

The fourth calendar function is the zodiacal ages. (refer again to the figure on page 1) The zodiacal ages are a result of what is called precession of the equinoxes. This is a function of a very slow wobble of the earth. The earth wobbles like a spinning top; the 23.5° incline of the earth is the incline of the wobble. The wobble makes one complete rotation in about 26,000 years, a great year (also called a Platonic year). Think of the axis of the earth at the north pole drawing one huge circle above the earth in 26,000 years. Of course as the earth rotates, the celestial equator and celestial north pole, hence the vernal equinox rotate in sync with it. So as the north pole makes a complete circle, the celestial equator/vernal equinox makes a complete circle through the zodiac. Every 30° of that circle, the vernal equinox enters the next zodiacal sign; very near that time a new zodiacal age begins. The vernal equinox spends about 2100-2200 years in each zodiacal sign. Numerous factors affect the length of an age, so it is not constant.

A new age begins the first time the sun is in the next sign of the zodiac at the time of the vernal equinox. The difference between the position of the sun and the vernal equinox is that, although the ecliptic is the path of the sun, the ecliptic is a perfect circle; the sun doesn't quite follow a perfect circle. The sun drifts slightly back and forth around the ecliptic. So the point of the vernal equinox and the actual sun don't necessarily enter the next sign in the same year, but it is not more than a year apart. Of course, no one can see the zodiacal boundary through the sun. If you stare at the sun at sunrise on the day of the vernal equinox trying to discern what house it is in, all you will do is go blind. This is all computed from night-time observations. The U.S. Naval Observatory (see ref. 3) has already published the times of the equinoxes and solstices to the exact minute up to 2005 C.E. (Common Era).

The fifth calendar function is the great year. Every 360° circuit by the vernal equinox around the zodiac back to the zero point logs another great year.

THE SEARCH

We have evidence from ancient Sumerian tablets that the zero point of the traditional zodiac may be between Gemini and Taurus (see ref 4). Therefore, with respect to the zodiacal ages, the sign of Taurus would start at the zero point, each of the other signs would be 30° from the previous. To analyze the sky at that time and place, using the planetarium simulator, RedShift 3, the first thing to do on the computer is to astronomically go back approximately to the zero point and see what was significant. We have numerous estimates of the beginning of the age of Pisces from about 200 to 1 B.C.E. (with a preponderance of the evidence pointing to the second century B.C.E.) Based on 100 B.C.E. as a mid-range estimate of the age of Pisces, the age of Taurus computes to around 4450 B.C.E. I set the Planetarium simulator on the computer for the time of the vernal equinox of 4450 B.C.E. to see what astronomical features are there. See the following figure (adjusted a fraction of a degree from 4450 B.C.E.).

In the illustration above, it is the minute that the sun is crossing the equator at the vernal equinox of 4492 B.C.E. The zero point of the zodiac, marking the boundary between the signs of Taurus and Gemini, is behind the sun. The horizontal line through the sun is the ecliptic; the slanted line is the celestial equator; the vertical line through the sun is the Gemini-Taurus boundary. The sun is about 17 seconds of arc to the right of the vertical line, crossing the celestial equator in the sign of Taurus for the first time in around 24,000 years. A great year of around 26,000 years is ending and another beginning at this minute in time and at this point in space. It is the beginning of the most recent age of Taurus. What is significant about this point (behind the sun) that makes it the perfect zero point for the zodiac? A hint, it's the biggest thing in the sky.

There's nothing there but millions of stars, absolutely nothing but millions of stars. How could they pick a point like this; there's nothing but millions of stars. After a month of this, I started playing around with the planetarium simulator on the computer; I clicked a button to see what it would do. The computer drew a line through the middle of the Milky way, right through the sun at the vernal equinox!

The very first thing that I noticed when I started experimenting with the planetarium simulator was that everything moves. The first thing I did was to pick a star in a constellation to get a comparison of how long it took the constellation to move 30°. When I went back in time until the star moved 30°, I noticed that another star that was ahead of it before was now behind it. I tried numerous stars to try to get a consistent number; every star in the constellation took a different amount of time to move 30°. (I now understand that all stars exhibit these characteristics and they are called "proper motions". These are well known.) It kept bothering me. Just to get a perspective of how things were moving, I kept looking for a stable point. I had assumed that the defining point would be a star. I wanted to be able to determine how much that star was moving. I knew I couldn't really measure 30° with a moving point; not when I measured the thirty degrees two thousand years later. When the computer drew that line through the sun, it only took a few seconds to realize what it was. Of course, that's it. It's the stable point that I had needed, and they needed it too. After all, whatever civilization had the astronomical expertise and data to design an ingenious system like the zodiac would not pick a defining point which would drift all over the galaxy and from which they couldn't even measure 30°. That would be like a calendar that starts on a different day every year.

What Cicero called orbis lacteus (milky circle) ( see the first figure), the Milky Way, goes right through that point; more specifically, the great circle through the middle of the Milky Way goes right through that point.

I believe that this is the long lost zero point, because it is at the time and place where history says it should be; it is the only significant feature which is there; it is a perfect and sophisticated defining point, for after all, Zecharia Sitchin, one of the world's foremost translators of ancient languages, says that their (Sumerian) astronomy was advanced and heliocentric. They had astronomical lists going back at least to the age of Leo. Somebody was into astronomy for a long time, and before we know about. The point being, we can't say that the civilization that developed the zodiac wasn't advanced enough to develop it because first of all, we haven't even identified them, and second, they did develop it, and it clearly took thousands of years of recorded observations giving plenty of time to find the only logical starting point. Actually it is the only possible starting point; I say "only possible" because any other point on the ecliptic will move with respect to the galaxy. It is impossible to measure a 360° rotation of the vernal equinox from a moving point back to the same moving point 26,000 years later; it wouldn't be 360°. It is likewise impossible to measure 30° from a moving point to where the moving point was 2160 years earlier (an approximate zodiacal age). The point where orbis lacteus crosses the zodiac (two opposite points actually) is the perfect starting point. I have no problem with the perfection.

To give an actual example of proper motion, I have read that the star Regulus is believed by some astronomers to be the defining point of the zodiac. This star would make the boundaries of the zodiac very close to what they would be with orbis lacteus (and the boundaries would actually coincide at some time during the age of Pisces). Due to the proper motion of Regulus, at the beginning of the age of Taurus it was 0° 44' east of the boundary of Leo. At the beginning of the age of Aquarius, it will be 0° 10' west of the boundary. What this means is that if Regulus is used as the zero point of the zodiac, the vernal equinox would have to travel about 90° 54' from the beginning of the age of Taurus to the beginning of the age of Aquarius. If a great year were computed starting at Regulus, the vernal equinox would have to travel about 363° 36' to get back to Regulus. As a logical necessity, if a sign is defined as 30° and the zodiac is defined as 12 equal 30° signs totalling 360°, there are a very limited in the number of definable points on the ecliptic that can be used. And if you look at Regulus, again as an example, 363° 36' is only about a 1% error, but in astronomical measurements, that is humongous; and if I get any impressions about ancient astronomical measurement techniques from the ancient stone astronomical monuments around the world, it is that they were as precise as their technology would allow.

When you think about it, it is perfectly logical to make the intersection of the great circle of orbis lacteus the defining point. There are three natural great circles on the celestial sphere; the celestial equator and the ecliptic are already used to define the vernal equinox. The third great circle bisecting the Milky Way is the same type of reference as the other two. The intersection of this great circle with the ecliptic makes the only, perfect, natural zero point on the ecliptic to measure from.

This also explains why in the past only the astronomers could tell when the ages began, only they could compute the line down the middle of the Milky Way. With any other point in the sky and anybody could determine beginning of the ages; it is known the computation of the ages was a complex task for astronomers. It also explains how the point could get lost; ancient astronomers were known to be secretive about their science. If the defining point of the zodiac could be and were based on a star, again anyone could compute the defining point based on any date. Computing backwards to the defining point with this system leaves things kind of milky, right in the middle of via lactea (milky way) you might say. Which would lead, as it has, to everyone knowing about where the defining point is but with no one being able pinpoint it. Exactly the situation which we have had for a long time.

When we read what the Sumerians said about a flood that virtually destroyed the world in the age of Leo, it implies that whoever survived that flood was already using the zodiac. The point is, the history of our oldest history already has the zodiac. We don't know who they were or what knowledge they had. Our history says that their civilization was destroyed.

THE CONCLUSIONS

Today, our astronomers also compute the line down the middle of the Milky Way. It is called the galactic equator or sometimes the galactic circle. While the concept would have been essentially the same as the galactic circle, the computation of a great circle through the middle of the Milky Way (orbis lacteus) is likely to have been somewhat arbitrary and varied due to methodology. But then, so were the computations of the ecliptic and the celestial equator, both of which the ancients used also. However, the galactic equator comes already programmed into the computer astronomy program. If the point where the galactic equator crosses the ecliptic between Gemini and Taurus marks the zero point of the traditional zodiac, it is then simple to compute the beginning of any zodiacal age. The age of Taurus would therefore have begun about 4492 B.C.E. and lasted about 2179 years. The age of Aries would have begun about 2313 B.C.E. and lasted about 2165 years. The age of Pisces would have begun about 148 B.C.E. and lasted about 2147 years.

At the beginning of spring 1999, the vernal equinox is about 13 seconds of arc inside the sign of Aquarius. However, the Sun (which doesn't actually follow a perfect circle) is still about 10 seconds of arc inside the sign of Pisces, almost, but not quite a new age (the traditional definition is based on the sun). At the beginning of spring 2000 C.E., the vernal equinox is about 63 seconds of arc inside the sign of Aquarius. The Sun crosses the equator beginning spring at 0735 GMT (Greenwich Mean Time) 20 March 2000 C.E., about 36 seconds of arc within the sign of Aquarius; the Age of Aquarius begins at that minute, the beginning of spring 2000 C.E. The age of Aquarius will last for about 2126 years.

Based on the historical data, it is entirely likely that the historical dates of the ages varied from the astronomical dates due to the numerous cultures using the zodiac, local observations, human error, historical quibbling, definitions, and the difficulty of picking the middle of orbis lacteus. It seems likely that different dates were recognized even at the same time in history in different parts of the world, or even in the same part of the world. With thousands of years between ages and astronomical information actually being lost, it even seems possible that different computation methods were used at different times, or even at the same time. Based on historical date, it also appears that some cultures used variant zodiacal systems.

Using the galactic equator as the zero point for the zodiac, the figures on the following pages show the boundaries of the twelve signs of the zodiac at the beginning of the age of Aquarius. The boundaries of the zodiacal signs are locked in sync with the galaxy (galactic plane/equator/circle, orbis lacteus) and therefore never change; all the stars and constellations within them very gradually shift and move.

During the age of Aquarius, the formerly lost starting point of the zodiac will lend popularity to the cliché, "Can't see the galaxy for the stars."

1 Zecharia Sitchin, The 12th Planet (1976), p. 409.

2 Zecharia Sitchin, The Stairway to Heaven (1980), p. 91.

3 ttp://aa.usno.navy.mil/AA/data/

4 Zecharia Sitchin, The 12th Planet (1976), p. 197, quoting Alfred Jeremias, The Old Testament in the Light of the Ancient East: "The science of the zodiac can be traced in the records back to the age of Taurus, i.e. the period when at the spring equinox the sun stood in the sign of Taurus. Mythological motifs connecting the beginning of a new era with Gemini (Dioscuros myths) indicate that the zodiac was devised in the age of the Twins. A planisphere from the library of Assurbanipal, based upon ancient calculations, and accepted by Sayce as such, shows a graduation of the sun's course, and marks for the zero point a point between the Bull and the Twins ("Scorpions' Star, 70 degrees" - from Hommel, Aufssatze und Abhandlungen, p. 354 seq.) The twelve tablets of the epic of Gilgamesh seem to correspond to the cycle of the zodiacal signs. Also Babylonian boundary stones show pictures of the sun, moon, and five planets, which to a certain extent seem to refer to the zodiac (see figs. 2-5). An order of zodiacal signs corresponding to the age of the Ram from pre-Greek times has been determined by Epping.

Zecharia Sitchin, The 12th Planet (1976), Chapter 6.

Top