 |
| Virgo from Erté's Zodiac Sign Collection |
Digressing for a moment, and considering the mystery of sign rulerships. I don't understand why communications planet Mercury doesn't rule the Air signs (Gemini, Aquarius, Libra). Air is thought to be the most mentally oriented of the four astrological elements: Earth, Water, Fire and Air.
Everything we humans do is initiated in the brain, even what seem like emotional responses, though coloured by Moon and the Watery element, actually do begin in the mental realm. As I see it, we ought to pay more attention to Mercury in the natal chart - equally as much as to Sun, Moon and ascendant.
In an Aquarian-driven, typically obtuse version of astrological rulerships, I propose that Saturn could rule the Earth signs (Taurus, Virgo, Capricorn). Fire signs(Aries, Leo, Sagittarius) would be ruled by Mars. Water signs by Venus (Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces). Mercury would rule the Air signs Gemini, Libra and Aquarius. But then, what would Jupiter do? Jupiter would have to rule over-all, in true Jupiterian expansionist fashion! It would be acceptable for Sun and Moon not to rule signs, they are luminaries, different from planets. The outer planets, Uranus Neptune and Pluto are too far away to rule anything, they will simply make themselves felt in transit when connecting with, or aspecting, personal planets.
Mercury's rulership of Gemini seems obvious: the consummate communicator, teacher, the all-round information collector. As ruler of Virgo, Mercury must be reflected as less abstract, more tangible. Virgo seeks and usually achieves near perfection in just about anything undertaken. Gemini roves around in the world of words and ideas, gathering them together, regurgitating them, sometimes in light-weight haphazard fashion, offering them back to a usually enthusiastic audience. Virgo is quite capable of doing this too, but with a far greater emphasis on accuracy and presentation - a more serious approach.
I do think Mercury's rulership of Virgo to be rather strange. To my mind strict, structure-loving Saturn would seem more compatible with perfection-seeking sign, Virgo. I'm probably missing something at a deeper level.
More on Virgo then...
I'm guided by 20th century British astrologer C.E.O. Carter and his piece
VIRGO ~ "A BEVY OF MAIDENS"
 |
| By David Palladini (1970) |
As I've said, many times in these posts, "there's no such thing as "a Virgo", "a Leo", "a Scorpio" or any other such zodiac sign-labelled individual. Those are sign labels not people labels!
A person could have Sun in Sagittarius, or any other zodiac sign, and still exhibit many Virgo attributes due to a variety of combinations of planetary placements, points, and aspects in their chart. He or she could then be called a Virgo-type, if one insisted on attaching a label, as could a person with Sun in Virgo, if the traits fit - and they don't always.
So, passing reader, it's my opinion that we should look on whatever astrologers write or say, when using that sign-label type of shorthand ("a Leo" "a Virgo" etc.) as simply writing or speaking of a particular type who may or may not have Sun in the sign in question, but demonstrates a majority of character traits related to that sign.
And so...eventually...a few less commonly mentioned Virgo-type traits as listed by Mr Carter within his piece linked above, which is a good read in full by the way:
Whilst Leo and Virgo are as different as chalk from cheese,
with only a few exceptions, Virgo and Libra [the next adjoining sign]
have a good deal in common...both, for example, have taste in literature and art
and dislike rough and uncouth things.
... interested in dietetics and often have their private fads
and fancies in that respect.
... their alleged sensitiveness. Most Virginians
have a pose of being sensitive. It is, of
course, the sign of the inferiority complex, although this
is not to say that all natives of Virgo are afflicted in
this way or that all so afflicted are born under Virgo.
Still, in principle I think Virgo stands for this sense of
personal inadequacy, which in a world as complex and
difficult as ours has become, with ever higher standards of
efficiency set before it, is an easily understood
phenomenon.
Another point is that by their very nature the Mercurials
notice and think a lot about details and what seem to your
Jovian to be trivialities. This may appear to be
sensitiveness to some, and in other cases one must dub them
fussy and for ever making mountains out of mole-hills.
This tendency is best sublimated by their taking up some
occupation that entails much attention to small matters,
such as watch-mending or embroidery.
So much for the maiden-archetype in its everyday
presentation.
In a higher (presentation), it is the virgin mother of the new-born Sun,
since the constellation Virgo rises in the east at midnight
at the winter solstice when the sun is "in the tomb" for
three days before beginning afresh his climb into northern
declination.
The sheaf of corn would imply that Virgo is often and
agriculturalist. This is probably true. We do not come
across many nativities of farmers, since they are a race
that is as a rule too occupied with the soil to aspire to
understand the heavens, but I suspect we should find plenty
of Virgo in most of their maps. This would agree with the
liking that many, but not all,Virgos show for small animals,
traditionally up to and including the ass, but not the horse.
Still talking of animals, I am reminded of Benjamin, the
donkey in Orwell's Animal Farm. Being invited to admire the
goodness of the Creator who had thoughtfully provided him
with a tail wherewith to flick away flies, Benjamin remarked
sourly that he would have been more impressed if there had
been no flies and no need for tails. This is a very true
specimen of Virgo philosophy.
A virtue often ascribed to Virginians is a capacity for
hard work, especially routine drudgery such as Leo and Libra
would soon tire of. I regret to say that I have known
Virgos who were anything but industrious. The only sign
which really likes hard work is Scorpio.
.JPG)