Monday, January 29, 2007

An Aquarian Astrologer

I've noticed that Scorpio seems to feature in astrologers' charts more strongly than Aquarius, even though some say that Uranus or Aquarius "rules" astrology. I know only of Evangeline Adams, Russell Grant, and C.E.O. Carter who have/had Sun in Aquarius. Other astrologers may well have Aquarius rising or prominent in their charts, of course.

Of the three astrologers I've mentioned, C.E.O. Carter appeals most to me. He was an Englishman, and from his writing style, a rather charming one. My birthday is a few days before his.

Charles Ernest Owen Carter was born 31 January 1887 at 10.55 pm in Parkstone, Dorset, UK. Data from

Mr Carter was very much an Aquarian. He had Sun, Mercury and Venus all in the sign of the water bearer, with Uranus, Aquarius's modern ruler in house 12, very close to his Libra ascendant. His Aquarian Sun trines Uranus within 34 minutes of arc. Jupiter lies in Scorpio in first house. This astrologer had both Scorpio AND Aquarius well featured.
Quote from the link above
"........he was elected president of the Astrological Lodge of London in 1922. Through this office, which he held for thirty years, and through the quarterly 'Astrology' which he started in 1926 and edited until 1959, he was a guiding light to students not only in London but throughout the world. Upon the foundation of the Faculty of Astrological Studies he became its first Principal and in 1958 he became Patron of the newly formed Astrological Association.
Throughout these years he wrote many books and articles which were especially
characterized by clarity, soundness and unity of thought. Together they provide perhaps the finest body of astrological literature available today. "

The same website carries some good articles by Mr Carter covering the 12 signs, and the planets. Under "Aquarius" is a transcript of Mr Carter's lecture to the Astrological Lodge on 23 May 1955 entitled "Some Eminent Aquarians" (including Sun Aquarians and those with Aquarius prominent in their natal charts.) He lists a string of well known characters from history pinpointing their similarities and concludes:
"Among our Aquarians we have found many who wished mankind well, and some who have deserved to be remembered by every one of us with gratitude and honour. Others, like Charles Dodgson and Grock have amused and delighted us. Of some few it is not easy to speak kindly. And "others there be that have no memorial.
I confess I have found much pleasure in writing about them, for they are interesting subjects of study. Furthermore, I think that there is a sufficient family likeness throughout to constitute, of itself, an argument for the truth of Astrology. "

He was man after my own heart! But I had to smile when I read the following extract on the same website - from Mr Carter's article about Uranus. I have commented cynically myself, more than once, on the point he speaks of. I'm still not convinced, even after reading his view on the matter, but I shall try to keep an open mind !
"It is often said that the absurdity of astrologers is manifest in the way in which they claim that the names of the three "modern" planets - if one may for con- venience call them so - have a real relation to their qualities. For, it is said, these names are arbitrarily chosen by people who have no astrological interests and merely select whatever name seems to them to be convenient. It is contended that except for mere chance, Neptune might as well have been named Pluto, Pluto Uranus, and so on. The astrologer, with deeper knowledge, denies that these choices were made fortuitously, although he will of course admit that the persons who chose them believed that they acted without any guidance, either from within or otherwise. We contend that there is a racial guidance, or over- soul, that acts through our subconscious faculties and causes such selections to be made in accordance with a real fitness in things.
We do not pretend that we understand how this influence works, and, for myself, should say that it is on the instinctual level only; but we do contend, from our experience, that there is such a directive power and that it usually operates with a strange appropriateness. "


Barry Goddard said...

Why should astronomers naming planets ALWAYS act in accordance with the deeper symbolic realities of the universe, when no other class of human being that I've ever encountered can do so? It's wishful thinking.

Alex Trenoweth said...

By the way, I'm the new editor of the Astrology Quarterly--and I really feel the pinch to get it all just right!

Twilight said...

Hi Alex - and congratulations!

I'm sure you will too! :-)