Outer Planetary Transits - a different theory

In his book Astrology for the Millions American astrologer Grant Lewi put forward a thought-provoking theory. He considered that, with regard to transits of the outer planets, it is the length of time they spend in a particular position that is paramount in their influence upon matters on Earth, rather than any inherent differences in the astrological characteristics of the planets themselves. Transits of the inner planets, to near-exact degrees of a sign, can last from hours to weeks, whereas the outer planets' transits last from many months to several years. Lewi believed that the nature of the experience under transits of Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto is substantially the same.

"It is in reconciling the similarity of the experience with the lengthening out of the time process that you achieve an understanding of yourself, and of how to handle the influences"...

.....of Uranus, Neptune, etc. as they travel through the signs and houses and over the planets in the natal chart. He feels that, for instance, a Uranus transit to the Sun is essentially the same as a Saturn transit or even a Mars transit. The difference resides in the time the planet remains in one place (conjunct, or in aspect to, a natal planet or point).

Our bodies and minds are naturally conditioned to the fast transits of the inner planets and the Moon, even to relatively fast transits of Jupiter and Mars. By adulthood we have experienced several of these and instinctively, or subconsciously respond naturally to them. When we experience a conjunction or hard aspect involving one of the outer planets, lasting for much longer, it has to seem somehow different, though not in the ways we might first suppose: Saturn's influence is said to be restrictive or severe, Uranus brings the quirky and unexpected, Pluto is the transformer....etc. Mr Lewi theorised that these transits feel different because they last so much longer, and in truth, the influence itself is much the same in each case.

From chapter 12 (page 376) The Grand Strategy of Living - part 1: The Nature and Meaning of the Planets

"It used to be stated, or implied, in the older astrological texts, that each of the Planets had a different quality, character, or tone, because of something inherent in its nature, Thus Saturn might have been said to have the quality of iron, hardness, weight; the character of sobriety or gloom; the tone of G-sharp Minor below middle C, or of the rumble of distant thunder. Mars might have been said to have the quality of hot steel, the character of courage or recklessness, and the tone of an awakening bugle. Whether these attributes emanated from the physio-chemical structure of the planets, which caused them to emit rays of a certain quality, or from other causes, was not clarified.

The premise seems to have been that each Planet had a quality inherent in itself, differentiating it and its influence from that of other Planets because of this self-contained quality.

Over a long period of study, in contact with numerous charts viewed experimentally and clinically, I have come to the conclusion that, so far as their astrological influence is concerned, the Planets do not differ in inherent quality. We know from the astronomers, physicists, spectrum-analysts, and chemists that the physical structure of the Planets is different, quantitatively, with respect to the percentages in which the elements are found in them and their atmospheres; and qualitatively, with respect to their stages of hotness, coolness, age, youth, formedness or non-formedness. It is possible that these differences do bear on their astrological influence.

However, consistent observation of planetary effects in a very large number of charts leads me to the conclusion that, whether or not Planets differ in their inherent character, their chief observable difference as they act in the chart is traceable directly to the difference in the rate of motion with which they pass through the Vitasphere......" (Grant Lewi called the natal chart the Vitasphere.)"Once we disabuse our minds of the idea that Planets differ in quality, and base our view of the chart on their differences in rate of motion, we come to grips with the basic realities of the Vitasphere, with the meaning of planetary influences in the forming of character and the timing of opportunity."

That outer planets' transits might have more to do with the length of their stay than with the traditional definition of the nature of that planet is a new idea to me, but not an outlandish one. Pluto, Uranus and Saturn bring changes, their motion is so slow as to make a visit from them to natal planets something unusual in itself. Neptune is not as easy to see as a bringer of general change though - change of attitude perhaps, rather than changes in outside circumstances.

It's quite difficult to turn off the specific astrological definitions for individual outer planets as stored in memory. I still tend to fall back on traditional interpretations. Even so, Grant Lewi's idea is one to keep in mind; i.e. that Saturn transits need not be severe or restrictive, just different; Uranus need not bring eccentricities or the unexpected just a feeling of things not as usual; Pluto need not be the dark, initially painful bringer of transformation, but will, for sure, herald change of some kind depending on personal background and circumstance.

Transits of the Outer Planets

Transits, or more accurately planetary transits, are terms used to describe real time movements of the Sun, Moon and planets. Astrologers relate the planets' transits, or positions during a particular time span, to the position of the planets in a birth chart or mundane chart. This exercise enables them to predict a variety of likely life cycle "atmospheres" and changes.

In his book Astrology for the Millions American astrologer Grant Lewi put forward a theory which I hadn't come across before, but which makes a lot of sense to me. He considered that, with regard to transits of the outer planets, it is the length of time they spend in a particular position that is paramount in their influence upon matters on Earth, rather than any inherent differences in the astrological characteristics of the planets themselves. Transits of the inner planets, to near-exact degrees of a sign, can last from hours to weeks, whereas the outer planets' transits last from many months to several years. Lewi believed that the nature of the experience under transits of Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto is substantially the same.

"It is in reconciling the similarity of the experience with the lengthening out of the time process that you achieve an understanding of yourself, and of how to handle the influences"...

.....of Uranus, Neptune, etc. as they travel through the signs and houses and over the planets in your chart. He feels that, for instance, a Uranus transit to the Sun is essentially the same as a Saturn transit or even a Mars transit. The difference is in the time the planet remains in one place (over or in aspect to a natal planet or point).

Our bodies and minds are naturally conditioned to the fast transits of the inner planets and Moon; even to the relatively fast transits of Jupiter and Mars. By adulthood we have experienced several of these and instinctively, or subconsciously respond quite naturally to them. But when we experience a conjunction or hard aspect involving one of the outer planets, lasting for much longer, it seems different. It is different. Not in the ways we might first suppose: i.e. Saturn's influence is said to be restrictive or severe, Uranus brings the "unexpected", Pluto is the transformer....etc. the transit feels different because it lasts so much longer. In truth, the influence itself is the same in each case. Or so Mr Lewi theorises.

From chapter 12 (page 376) The Grand Strategy of Living - part 1: The Nature and Meaning of the Planets

"It used to be stated, or implied, in the older astrological texts, that each of the Planets had a different quality, character, or tone, because of something inherent in its nature, Thus Saturn might have been said to have the quality of iron, hardness, weight; the character of sobriety or gloom; the tone of G-sharp Minor below middle C, or of the rumble of distant thunder. Mars might have been said to have the quality of hot steel, the character of courage or recklessness, and the tone of an awakening bugle. Whether these attributes emanated from the physio-chemical structure of the planets, which caused them to emit rays of a certain quality, or from other causes, was not clarified.

The premise seems to have been that each Planet had a quality inherent in itself, differentiating it and its influence from that of other Planets because of this self-contained quality.

Over a long period of study, in contact with numerous charts viewed experimentally and clinically, I have come to the conclusion that, so far as their astrological influence is concerned, the Planets do not differ in inherent quality. We know from the astronomers, physicists, spectrum-analysts, and chemists that the physical structure of the Planets is different, quantitatively, with respect to the percentages in which the elements are found in them and their atmospheres; and qualitatively, with respect to their stages of hotness, coolness, age, youth, formedness or non-formedness. It is possible that these differences do bear on their astrological influence.

However, consistent observation of planetary effects in a very large number of charts leads me to the conclusion that, whether or not Planets differ in their inherent character, their chief observable difference as they act in the chart is traceable directly to the difference in the rate of motion with which they pass through the Vitasphere...................." (Grant Lewi calls the natal chart, or "map of your birth" the Vitasphere.)"Once we disabuse our minds of the idea that Planets differ in quality, and base our view of the chart on their differences in rate of motion, we come to grips with the basic realities of the Vitasphere, with the meaning of planetary influences in the forming of character and the timing of opportunity."

That the effects of outer planet transits might have more to do with the length of their stay than with the traditional definition of the nature of that planet, seems logical enough. Pluto, Uranus and Saturn are broadly similar - they bring changes. This isn't surprising. Their motion is so slow as to make a visit from them to natal planets something unusual - a change in itself, and fundamental changes of outlook do occur at these times. Neptune is not as easy to see as a bringer of change though - change of attitude, perhaps, rather than experiencing change of outside circumstances.

It's quite difficult to turn off the astrological definitions stored in memory. In spite of trying I still tend to fall back on traditional interpretations. Even so, Grant Lewi's idea is well worth keeping in mind.

(Edited version of post from August 2007.)

Astrologers' Words of Wisdom

Astrologers come in all shades, stripes, shapes and sizes. Something for everyone! My own choice is for the more down-to-earth variety, those who never lose sight of reason and rationality. There are, and have been, quite a few such astrologers. As an occasional feature I'll aim to choose a paragraph or so from the books or websites of some of these. Paragraphs highlighting points which are important to bear in mind, but can be forgotten or overlooked in the excitement of discovering all that astrology has to offer.

First up - snippets from British astrologer C.E.O. Carter's book The Astrological Aspects, first published in 1930; and from American astrologer Grant Lewi's Astrology for the Millions, first published 1940.

C.E.O. CARTER:The difficulties of writing anything reliable and capable of helping the practical student are great. For, while we can understand the abstract significance of the planets and so form a conception of the theoretical meaning of each aspect, it still remains true that when we descend from these abstractions to the effects of the aspects in actual life we find ourselves confronted with a very intricate task. That which is unitary above becomes many below; the trend of manifestation is always towards increased diversity. Thus, even in terms of character, the same aspect exhibits great differences in manifestation according to the almost innumerable possible concurrent circumstances that may arise. When we seek to determine the probable external form of the aspects in the affairs of life, we meet yet greater variation. What is more absurd than to suppose that the same aspect (whether radical or progressed) will manifest in the same way in the case of a convict serving a life sentence, a millionaire financier, a Bohemian artist, or a soldier on active service?

GRANT LEWI:...Consistent observation of planetary effects in a very large number of charts leads me to the conclusion that, whether or not Planets differ in their inherent character, their chief observable difference as they act in the chart is traceable directly to the difference in the rate of motion with which they pass through the Vitasphere (natal chart).....

Because Mercury and Venus remain always close to the Sun, their rhythms are merely slight variants on the solar rhythm, as viewed from the Earth. The Moon's rhythm also has a relationship to the solar rhythm, since the Moon goes all the way around the zodiac in approximately the same time that the Sun, Mercury and Venus are going through one sign.

If we consider you and the house you live in as the Sun, then Mercury and Venus and the Moon are those who inhabit the house with you, to whom you get accustomed and accept as an integral part of yourself and your life.........It is with the things that go on outside the house - that is to say with Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto - that we are primarily concerned (a) in interpreting and understanding past experience and (b) in projecting... into the future.

Throwing Light on the Moon

Grant Lewi, in his book "Astrology for the Millions" gives a very helpful description of how the Moon's position is reflected in the personality. I've always found it difficult to disentangle this from the Sun's reflection, and the ascendant sign. I usually think of these three as a kind of cocktail, stirred, not shaken, with Mercury and Venus as a cherry and an olive on the side. Just as you can't possibly extricate one ingredient from another in a cocktail, nor can I quite differentiate my own ingredients, because to me, they are just.....me! Grant Lewi helps me to peer through the swirling stirred cocktail then sip it and identify a particular ingredient.

Grant Lewi's astrological writing has been described as "the most brilliant ever published". He was one of the USA's leading and most popular astrologers in the mid-20th century. These are his words about the Moon, then, from "Astrology for the Millions" :

(Page 132, para.1)

"While the Sun's position by sign determines what motivates and urges dominate your life as it meets the naked eye, the sign position of the Moon tells the desire of your heart which may or may not be expressed or realized in your life. When you "know what you mean but you can't say it", it is your Moon that knows it, and your Sun that can't say it. "Thoughts that do often lie too deep for tears" are the thoughts of your Moon's nature. The wordless ecstasy, the mute sorrw, the secret dream, the esoteric picture of yourself that you can't get across to the world, or which the world doesn't comprehend or value - these are the product of the Moon in your Vitasphere (natal chart). When you are misunderstood, it is your Moon nature expressed imperfectly, through the Sun sign, that you feel is betrayed. When you know what to do, but can't find the right way to do it, it is your Moon that knows and your Sun that refuses to act in harmony. Also, when you "don't know why I said that", it was your Moon expressing despite your Sun..........Things you know without thought - intuitions, hunches, instincts are products of the Moon. Modes of expression that you feel are truly your deepest self belong to the Moon: art, letters, creative work of any kind; sometimes love; sometimes business."

Quality, Character or Tone of the Planets.

In his book "Astrology for the Millions" American astrologer Grant Lewi put forward a theory which I hadn't come across before, but which makes a lot of sense to me. He considered that, especially with regard to transits of the outer planets, it is the length of time they spend in a particular position which is paramount in their influence upon matters on Earth, and not any inherent differences in the planets themselves.

He believed that the nature of the experience under transits of Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto is substantially the same. "It is in reconciling the similarity of the experience with the lengthening out of the time process that you achieve an understanding of yourself, and of how to handle the influences"... of Uranus, Neptune, etc. as they come through the signs and houses and over the planets in your chart. He feels that, for instance, a Uranus transit to the Sun is essentially the same as a Saturn transit or even a Mars transit - the difference is in the time the planet remains in one place (over or in aspect to a natal planet or point).

Our bodies and minds are naturally conditioned to the fast transits of the inner planets and the Moon, and even to the relatively fast transits of Jupiter and Mars. By adulthood we have experienced several of these and instinctively, or subconsciously understand them. But when we experience a conjunction or hard aspect involving one of the outer planets, which lasts for much longer, it seems different. It is, but not in the ways we might first suppose - i.e. because Saturn's influence is said to be severe, Uranus brings the "unexpected", and Pluto is the transformer....etc. It's different because it lasts so much longer, but in truth the influence itself is the same in each case. Or so Mr Lewi theorises.

(From chapter 12 (page 376)"The Grand Strategy of Living - part 1: The Nature and Meaning of the Planets")

"It used to be stated, or implied, in the older astrological texts, that each of the Planets had a different quality, character, or tone, because of something inherent in its nature, Thus Saturn might have been said to have the quality of iron, hardness, weight; the character of sobriety or gloom; the tone of G-sharp Minor below middle C, or of the rumble of distant thunder. Mars might have been said to have the quality of hot steel, the character of courage or recklessness, and the tone of an awakening bugle. Whether these attributes emanated from the physio-chemical structure of the planets, which caused them to emit rays of a certain quality, or from other causes, was not clarified.

The premise seems to have been that each Planet had a quality inherent in itself, differentiating it and its influence from that of other Planets because of this self-contained quality.

Over a long period of study, in contact with numerous charts viewed experimentally and clinically, I have come to the conclusion that, so far as their astrological influence is concerned, the Planets do not differ in inherent quality. We know from the astronomers, physicists, spectrum-analysts, and chemists that the physical structure of the Planets is different, quantitatively, with respect to the percentages in which the elements are found in them and their atmospheres; and qualitatively, with respect to their stages of hotness, coolness, age, youth, formedness or non-formedness. It is possible that these differences do bear on their astrological influence.

However, consistent observation of planetary effects in a very large number of charts leads me to the conclusion that, whether or not Planets differ in their inherent character, their chief observable difference as they act in the chart is traceable directly to the difference in the rate of motion with which they pass through the Vitasphere...................." (Grant Lewi calls the natal chart, or "map of your birth" the Vitasphere.)

"Once we disabuse our minds of the idea that Planets differ in quality, and base our view of the chart on their differences in rate of motion, we come to grips with the basic realities of the Vitasphere, with the meaning of planetary influences in the forming of character and the timing of opportunity."

That the effects of outer planet transits might have more to do with the length of their stay than with the traditional definition of the nature of that planet, seems logical enough. Pluto, Uranus and Saturn are broadly similar - they bring changes. This isn't surprising. Their motion is so slow as to make a visit from them to natal planets something unusual - a change in itself, and fundamental changes of outlook do occur at these times. Neptune is not as easy to see as a bringer of change though, or if it is, that change is of a particular type, specific to Neptune.

It's quite difficult to turn off the definitions imprinted in memory, in spite of trying I still tend to fall back on the traditional interpretations. I like Grant Lewi's theory though, it's well worth keeping in mind.

A story about astrologer Grant Lewi

Here's a little story about 20th century American astrologer Grant Lewi. It's taken from the preface to his book "Heaven Knows What", first published 1935, my second-hand edition is 1947, and has a preface by Carl Payne Tobey, another American astrologer who was around at the same time as Grant Lewi.

We're told in the preface that Grant Lewi was "restless Sun-in-Gemini conjunct the node of Uranus, with Leo on the ascendant, Sun in opposition to Uranus". He didn't believe in paying for life insurance because he said he had no intention of dying right away. When he was 48 and a half he changed his mind and bought life insurance. Right after his 49th birthday he died of what was thought to be a cerebral hemorrhage. So he had saved himself 30 years of life insurance premiums. He finally paid one premium and the insurance company had to pay off!

Carl Payne Tobey recalls that he was told by folks in Tucson, Arizona where Lewi lived, that they thought he knew he was about to die. As well as the story about insurance, there were reports that he had refused to make any appointments for the month of August. He told people "I'll consider it if I'm still here." He had joked about not knowing whether he would even be around in August. He died on the morning of July 14th 1951. People were sure that he had been ready.

Apart from my little gripe about Grant Lewi's take on Aquarius Sun with Aries Moon (me), which I feel is undeservedly harsh, I warm to his style. It's said that he didn't use progressions or fixed stars - which information immediately recommends him to me ! "He wasn't concerned with why astrology works. He was more concerned with the fact that it does." Hmmm. I should try to emulate him in that respect myself, I guess.

I do like the astrologers of Grant Lewi's and Carl Payne Tobey's generation. Their general attitude and style of writing occasionally appear dated, but that's to be expected. What they have to say can be refreshing and enlightening. Second-hand copies of their books are available for next to nothing at Amazon and Alibris.