Astrological Maundering 2: The Age of Aquarius

The musical Hair on in Sunderland in 2019! (sunderlandecho.com)

‘This is the dawning of the age of Aquarius’; so went the song from the 1960s musical Hair. The 60s were the optimistic decade of equal opportunities, new freedoms, and the exponential growth of pop culture, so it did feel like a new age, at least it did in Western Europe, North America, and Australasia. Even the Roman Catholic Church underwent reform! But where did such an idea come from? Is there such a thing as the ‘Age of Aquarius’ and are we still in it, or did it just peter out with global warming, Putin, and the renaissance of the far right?

The fact is that people have always seen their own time as a ‘new age’. People have expected the last judgement, the second coming, and the end of time at regular intervals. Jehovah’s Witnesses play this hand when they come to your door: look at all the wars and natural disasters in the world. One can only reply that there have always been wars and natural disasters. The only reason to fear the end times now rather than at any other time is the development of mega-destructive weapons, and the way in which technology is forcing climate change. But neither of those things reflect the optimism of the concept of the ‘Age of Aquarius’.

The song goes on to tell us that the Age of Aquarius comes ‘when the Moon is in the seventh house and Jupiter aligns with Mars’. On an astronomical level, this is bunkum: the Moon is in the seventh house on a daily basis, and Jupiter is conjunct with Mars every couple of years or so. Hardly the line-up to signal a completely new beginning. But the song is more symbolic than literal: the Moon in the seventh house might signify a time when people care more about others than themselves, and Jupiter aligning with Mars might mean that human energy is put above all to beneficial use. That would be epoch-making,

The concept of the Age of Aquarius has a nineteenth-century origin, like so much in our culture. The belief in a new age of humanity arose with the French revolution, but it was given an astrological format in the form of the Age of Aquarius with the Theosophical movement of the late nineteenth century. The Theosophists were forward-looking in their thinking: they believed in the equality of religions (although they were not the first, as Bah’ai preceded them), the equality of the genders and all races, and the ‘brotherhood of man’ (using the original terminology). And all these things they saw as part of a coming spiritual revolution, the Age of Aquarius, because they were interested in astrology amongst many spiritual practices. The idea of the Age of Aquarius was compelling and became popular even outside Theosophy. Not everyone saw the new age as a positive; whilst most commentators followed the Theosophists and described it as a time of renewed spirituality, some others regarded it more negatively as an age that would lack the spiritual element.

The Age of Aquarius has its origin in what was formally regarded as something of a problem for astrology: the precession of the equinoxes. This shifting of the equinoxes (and solstices) backwards in relation to the stars affects western, European, astrology, but not its Indian equivalent. This is because the Indian version stays with the constellations, and it is not fixed to the equinoxes and solstices. Western astrology is therefore the one out of alignment. The signs matched the constellations during the centuries before Christ, but they don't any longer. The precession of the equinoxes causes the equinox and solstice points to rotate backwards in relation to the stars over a period of around 25,770 years known as a ‘Great Year’ (the Internet gives a range of different measurements, but this seems to be about average). If the Great Year is divided into twelve equal portions, relating to the twelve signs of the zodiac, then the equinoxes take 2,147.5 years to pass through each one. This can then be divided by the thirty degrees of each sign to calculate 71.6 years for the shift of a single degree of the sky. Therefore, the precession is very slow, just one degree of the circle of the Sun’s path over a lifetime. You won’t notice it!

It can be illustrated by a look at the night sky in winter in the northern hemisphere and north of the Tropic of Cancer. The zodiacal constellation highest overhead in ancient Greece would have been Cancer. This has slipped back through Gemini, the Twins, which are easy to spot, with the two bright stars Castor and Pollux close to one another. Gradually, in time these too are being replaced by Taurus as the highest sign. Taurus is a prominent constellation with the bright star Aldebaran and two clusters, the Pleiades and Hyades. For the southern hemisphere (south of the Tropic of Capricorn), the highest constellation in the Sun’s and planets' path would have been Capricorn in ancient times, then Sagittarius and now it is moving back into Ophiuchus and Scorpio.

Perversely, this apparent weakness in the western system of astrology that precession represents is the very thing that gave rise to the idea of ‘the Age of Aquarius’. A nice coincidence reinforces the idea of the astrological ages. The spring equinox, the moment of the year when the Sun leaves the sign Pisces and enters Aries in western astrology, has been moving backwards through the constellation Pisces since sometime around the birth of Christ, and the fish is such an important symbol for Christianity. Christ called fishermen to be his disciples, and the Greek word for fish, ichthus, was used as an acrostic for ‘Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour’, using the Greek for these titles. Christians still use the fish as a Christian symbol today; you can see the fish outline on car stickers. So it was concluded that the approximate 2000 year period since the birth of Christ was the ‘Age of Pisces’, or the age of Christianity.

The idea of the astrological ages originally implied a negative view of the period of Christian dominance. The belief that Christianity belongs to the Age of Pisces leads naturally to the conclusion that Christianity will die out when the next age, the Age of Aquarius, comes into being, to be replaced by new spiritualities. Some astrologically minded Christians have resisted this idea by arguing that Christianity will not disappear but will evolve with the new age. Hence books like The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ were published. But this is a small minority opinion within Christianity; most Christians simply conclude that the idea of the astrological ages is simply nonsense or even inspired by the Devil.

Belief in the existence of an Age of Pisces, the period of about 2000 years since the birth of Christ, was given more impetus by the observation that Christianity grew out of Judaism, which is focussed on the Passover and the sacrifice of the lambs. The sign that precedes Pisces in the precession of the equinoxes is Aries, the Ram. And the Bible shows Moses at the very beginning of the nation Israel condemning the cult of the ‘Golden Calf’. Bull worship in the ancient Mediterranean which was prevalent indicates the period even older than the Age of Aries, that of the Age of Taurus the Bull. The concept fits the historical facts, then?

Such a system of ages is attractive but has several flaws. First, Christianity did not replace Judaism but grew from it, and Judaism still exists as robustly as it ever did. To suggest that Judaism is 2000 years out of date is extremely problematic. And then the fitting in of both pre-Christian Judaism and ancient bull worship to periods of around 2000 years stretches historical vagueness to its limit. And, clearly, this would be a phenomenon relating to Judaeo-Christian history, and not to any other cultural tradition across the globe.

Be that as it may, people believing in the Age of Aquarius think that this new age of enlightened spirituality, not mired down in the traditions of either Christianity or Judaism, is imminent. The 1960s, with its sense of the new, and people rebelling against cultural traditions and religious obligations, did seem to be a good fit for the coming Age. A good number of young people with European heritage joined a variety of new religious movements, many of which had their origins in eastern religions, whilst prohibitions against homosexuality and living together outside marriage, and the patriarchal view of the role of women began to crumble.

Yet the hype was based on a very vague notion of history. If the Age of Aquarius began in 1962, say (there was an interesting line-up of planets in Aquarius in February 1962), when did the Age of Pisces begin? The obvious answer is: at the birth of Christianity, the year zero. But 1962 is well short of the 2147.5 years that constitutes one twelfth of the Great Year. For 1962 to be the cusp of the new age, the previous one had to start in about 185 BCE – why then?

So, overall, the idea of the ‘Age of Aquarius’ is quite fragile, although the idea that Christianity was prominent during the ‘Age of Pisces’, given that the fish is the symbol of Christianity, is quite attractive. The idea has received quite a bit of interest and respect, and so one could say that it has gained some cultural heritage.

Jungian Functions and the Age of Aquarius

The Jungian personality types or functions (from https://communicationstyles.org/personality-theory/)

In my twenties, I was introduced to the work of Carl Jung by astrologers and became inspired by it. The famous psychoanalyst was quite conversant with astrology, as well as other ways of myth-making in the world. Astrological horoscopes identify traits in people, and many modern astrologers draw on the work of Jung. He defined the distinction between extraversion and introversion. He also suggested four functions through which a human being relates to her or his environment. These are sensing, thinking, intuiting, and feeling. Individuals tend to emphasise some of these functions in their lives rather than others. In Jung’s understanding, sensing was opposite to intuiting, and thinking was opposite to feeling. This leads to the Myers-Briggs type indicator in which we are characterised by a series of questions as to whether we are either extravert or introvert, sensing or intuiting, thinking or feeling, and a fourth dichotomy introduced after Jung’s time, judging or perceiving.

Sensing and intuiting, thinking and feeling match very easily to the astrological elements of earth and water, air and fire. In the zodiacal cycle, earth signs are opposite water, and air opposite fire. I once attended a lecture by Marie-Louise von Franz, who was a co-worker with Jung and continued working on his ideas after his death. She spoke about a modern scientific environment in which thinking predominated over feeling. The problem is that an exalted element presupposes a repressed one, in this case, feeling. The Jungian task is to integrate the opposites, and to own them all, understanding how they function within oneself, rather than demonising the repressed elements.

Jung and von Franz after him were concerned about how the thinking function can detach itself from feeling. They identified, for example, scientific experiments which caused harm and pain to both humans and animals, and medical procedures which treated the body but did not respect the human person. Thankfully, some of these issues have been addressed in many societies since Jung and von Franz’s time. But their legacy is still important as an important word of caution. I remember talking to a postgraduate student of economics at Leeds University and asking him about ethics. He stated that economic theories do not include an ethical component; either they work or they don’t. It seems to me that economics without ethics is a very bad idea. And then there are hedge funds and venture capitalism, the use of money as an abstract concept, distanced from the people who are working on the ground.

As a final example of thinking which takes no account of feeling, there is the bureaucratic mentality which takes no account of the excessive workloads that are being thrust on people, when the administration increases year on year. While the motives behind each piece of bureaucracy might be well-intentioned, there can sometimes be a lack of appreciation as to what the effects are, and how the process can prevent people from doing the job they are employed to do. In the U.K., Ofsted have had to modify their feedback system after a headteacher committed suicide after receiving an ‘unsatisfactory’ rating. Her case was indicative of a system that had lost touch with feeling for the staff who were being assessed. I remember, during the build-up to a University inspection, threatening to put up a notice on my door that read, ‘I cannot see students at the present time because I am writing the student support documentation’. I am sure that people in many industries will relate to this. This is perhaps the negative side of Aquarius, an air sign, thinking detached from feeling. Jung was conversant with the idea of the Age of Aquarius, and accepted the possibility of human aeons of time.

What is missing in all these examples is a lack of empathy for other human beings (and for animals). Nevertheless, there is also a positive side to Aquarius which does not lack empathy. This is concern for justice, and a willingness to battle for it if necessary. The Enlightenment push towards the rational rule of law independent of power bases, human rights, and equal opportunities, one could say, is characteristically Aquarian. It is the classic example of thinking that is in touch with and informed by feeling, as the quest for human rights draws upon empathy. We want people to have rights because we identify with them, and because we understand and relate to suffering and oppression. Human and animal rights are the answer to the detached thinking that Jung and von Franz identified, and thinking and feeling are the opposites that are reconciled in the theory and practice of these rights.

In the Piscean Age that came before the Aquarian in the theory of astrological ages, the equivalent would be the opposition between intuition and sensing. One cannot doubt that the sensing function has been repressed through Christian history, through the demotion of sexuality to sinfulness, and the concept of the ‘mortification of the flesh’. The intuition function is expressed through belief in heaven as a higher state, the great contrast between heaven and earth in a dualistic view of reality being symbolised by the two fish of Pisces. The sensing function which is repressed is mediated through the body and its experiences, including pleasure, and this was often associated with the female. In symbol form, the reconciliation of these opposites consists in the fact that Christ is the Piscean heavenly man, but he is also human, incarnate in flesh. The opposite sign of Virgo represents his mother, the Virgin Mary, who gave him his flesh. Admittedly, the fact that she is the Virgin Mary and subordinate to Christ weakens the balance between the functions somewhat. In the Aquarian equivalent, which is characteristically expressed in concepts rather than symbols, the reconciled opposites are knowledge and empathy.

My Interpretation

From what I suggested in the introductory blog, ‘Faith in Astrology’, patterns of meaning that are laid down in tradition, however tenuous, do seem to take on their own reality. And so perhaps we should work with the idea of the Age of Aquarius and see what it yields. Given that astrology is a human construction, there is nothing wrong whatsoever in making one’s contribution to it, suggesting solutions and theories. Ultimately, they cannot be proved or disproved; it is just a question of whether they have the consistency and attractiveness to enable them to convince people and take hold. There has been quite a debate about the Age of Pisces: when did it start and when will it, or did it, finish? In what follows, I have come up with my own personal answer as to when we could imagine that the Age of Aquarius might have begun.

We can calculate where the point of the spring equinox relates to the constellations, so there are some guidelines. If we take the actual constellation rather than the equal division into twelve, then the Age of Aquarius will not begin for some centuries, as Pisces is the second largest constellation after Virgo and the spring equinox will drift back through it over a long period of time. But the neat division into twelve equal portions is what is used in traditional astrology and its horoscopes, so it seems logical to apply it to the ages as well.

It also makes sense to assume that the astrological ages should be calibrated from a point when the spring equinox stood between the constellations Aries and Pisces. We do know when the spring equinox moved beyond the last, or most western, star in Aries. It happened in around 375 BCE. We also know when the spring equinox lined up with the first, or most eastern, star in Pisces. This was around 103 BCE. So 375 to 103 BCE was an era when the spring equinox was between those constellations. If we move forward a time period of 2147.5 years, then we come up with a possible range for the beginning of Age of Aquarius. It is between 1772 and 2044. Based on the position of the constellations, then, we can assume that the Age of Aquarius has either arrived already or will arrive very soon!

Let’s start with that range of years for the beginning of the Age of Pisces, from 375 to 103 BCE. The borderline between Pisces and Aries is the most important one in the zodiac, which traditionally starts with Aries and ends with Pisces. The astrological year begins with the spring equinox. So if we could establish a date for the point when the astrological age moved from Aries to Pisces, then that would calibrate the whole Great Year.

The beginning of our range, the mid-fourth century BCE, was a momentous period for the development of European culture (we cannot answer for how astrological ages might work in non-European traditions). Both Plato and Aristotle were alive at that time and formulating what proved to be the decisive philosophical tradition for the coming centuries, dominating Christian theology and remaining determinative in philosophy right up until the present day. Alexander (the Great) was born in 356, educated by Aristotle, and his army captured Jerusalem in 332, establishing a period of Greek rule. This proved to be decisive for the development of Christianity as a religion with a strong basis in Europe, with its first major language being Greek. Early Christianity grew in the Roman Empire, which succeeded the Greek after a period of Jewish independence, although this did not abolish the Greek influence. All the New Testament, its epistles and gospels, were written in Greek (there may have been Aramaic sources in some cases, but these are lost to us). So, if the Age of Pisces is, as has been assumed, associated with the dominance of Christianity in European culture, then the mid-fourth century BCE is particularly important in its foundation, despite the fact that Jesus Christ was not born for a further 350 years or so.

During this period in the fourth century BCE, the years 367 and 366 are of particular interest. This was when Aristotle came as a young man to study with Plato at the latter’s academy in Athens. It is one of the great meetings of two people in European history. Moving forward 2147.5 years takes us to 1781, another year which makes sense to me as having special impact, as it was the year when the planet Uranus was discovered, of great interest to astrologers, of course, and regarded as the ruler of Aquarius. It was the first planet not visible to the naked eye to become known to humanity. The period around this was one of intense and long-lasting change: the American and French revolutions taking place in 1776 and 1789, respectively, and the industrial revolution well under way, with some of its major changes, such as the development of railways and the discovery of electricity, at their earliest beginnings. Accepting that the beginning of an age should probably be envisaged to be a period of several years, rather than a single one, the period around 1781 is a good choice for the beginning of the Age of Aquarius.

That might disappoint people who identified the 1960s as the ‘dawning of the Age of Aquarius’! But of course, if there is such a thing as an ‘age’ lasting over 2000 years, it will not start at a single moment or in a single year. The Enlightenment is a revolution in European thought that is dated to the whole of the eighteenth century. While everything has its predecessors (for the Enlightenment, the Renaissance, the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, and the beginnings of the Age of Science), the Enlightenment does seem to have the qualities of the initiating cultural movement for an age of individual responsibility, human rights, and democracy. Much that has happened since, including the 1960s, can be dated back to the influence of the Enlightenment.

The association of Christianity with the age of the fish, of Pisces, results from the movement of the spring equinox, as we have seen. The spring equinox is determinative because traditionally the western astrological year starts with it. But there are one other equinox and two solstices. The other equinox (in the northern hemisphere, the autumnal) will have drifted back from Libra through Virgo and is now entering Leo. Meanwhile, the solstices have moved back through Gemini and Sagittarius to Taurus and Scorpio. But there might be a limit on how many symbols and associations are useful with regard to constructing a theory of astrological ages!

In actual fact, the year 366 BCE works well for the solstices. Just as the equinox is in the gap between the stars of Aries and Pisces, so the solstice points fall between the relevant constellations, Cancer and Gemini, and Capricorn and Sagittarius, respectively. But you cannot include the autumnal equinox in the calibration, as the constellation Virgo is too large and spoils the symmetry of the Zodiac constellations. Nevertheless, three out of four isn’t bad!

So, to sum up, astrology is a cultural construction which nevertheless seems to work. The idea of the astrological ages is relatively recent (nineteenth century), and it has not yet been agreed upon by astrologers in terms of its dating. The suggestion here is that it makes sense to calibrate it for when the spring equinox moved between the constellations Aries and Pisces, and it so happens that this works for the solstices too, but not for the autumn equinox. While the cusp of the ages is probably best understood as a period of time rather than a single point, the years 367-66 (for the beginning of the Age of Pisces) and 1781 (for the Age of Aquarius) work well, as they fall in periods that were very determinative for the developments that came after them, accepting that all important moments have their precedents (a radical break and reorientation in the flow of civilisation and technology probably does not exist). Ancient Greece in the fourth century BCE and the Enlightenment in the eighteenth CE are as close as we are going to get in European cultural history to crucial and long-term influential moments of major change.