SO YOU WANT TO LEARN ASTROLOGY?
There are quite a few stellar teachers and teaching tools in this world. There’s also an incredible amount of utter bullshit going around. Here are a few things to keep in mind:
Astrology is old.
Like at least as old as 3000 BCE. Astrology’s maturity makes it wildly expansive. Like philosophy, biology, anthropology, law, or any other number of disciplines, astrology contains a multitude of sub-sectors. Some of these are defined by place, like “Traditional” or “Vedic”. Others are designed by time such as “Babylonian” “Hellenistic”, “Medieval” or “Modern”. Still others are designated by a niche philosophical or practical focus, such as “Evolutionary” or “Electional” respectively. Any fundamentals course or book should be specific about what kind of astrology is being taught. Because even the fundamentals of each subsector vary to extreme degrees.
ASTROLOGY IS TECHNICAL…
Each school of astrology contains a different set of techniques that function well when combined with the other techniques specific to their subsector. And while there is surely space for overlaps, there is also ample space for error when this happens.
& INFLUENTIAL
Astrology is the study of the movements and relative positions of celestial bodies interpreted as having an influence on happenings on human affairs and the natural world. In a consulting space, astrology is a powerful tool, for better or for worse. If believed and taken to heart, any delineation, whether or not it is a good one, can have a tangible impact on the way people live their lives.
Modern Astrology is young.
“Modern Astrology” is large subsector which spans the 20th and 21st centuries and contains various smaller subsectors. Modern Astrology is relatively recent and came with a wave of astrologers who drew connections between astrology and psychology. Gaining traction around rapid industrial advancements in publishing while most English translations of ancient texts were lost or nonexistent, a lot of (but not all) Modern Astrology is a mish-mosh of random techniques and intuitive channeling that made its way into books and texts without a lot of proofing or even the possibility of verification via the ancient doctrines. This is not to discredit Modern Astrology. It is to say that many of the techniques which are found within Modern Astrology have shorter and less-tested lineages than other subsectors by nature of being younger and having less resources.
“Good” astrology teaching practice references lineage.
I wouldn’t discredit all Modern Astrology but I would be very careful as a student trying to discern what techniques are founded within which lineages. A lineage is sequence that goes back in time. One generation back isn’t a thorough enough lineage for me to learn from. You get to decide how much lineage matters to you. Ideally, to nurture a strong technical skillset, someone teaching Modern Astrology also has or is establishing roots in additional, more mature astrological lineages.
Astrology is distinct from intuition.
I think there are a lot of self-proclaimed astrologers who are actually just/also really strong intuitives. And I’m worried about people who are teaching technique that is rooted in intuition rather than, well, technique. To be clear, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with intuition - in fact I use it in my practice all the time and it makes me a better counselor. But it’s not the base of my astrological practice.
Technique is critical. Astrology isn’t a practice of channeling or intuitive hits, even though those skills might present themselves in a reader. And while intuition with little technique can suffice in a counseling session, it does not suffice in the sphere of learning and teaching astrology.
Astrology teachers need to be technically skilled.
Intuition and creative channeling is something that can be taught to a degree, but they aren’t astrology. Teachers, specifically of “astrology fundamentals” should have a strong technical skillset they can translate to students. They should know where their techniques come from. They should also be able to reference where they learned the information they are teaching and where you can dive deeper into the subject matter presented. If they can’t give you the names of their teachers, critical base texts, etc. then there’s a good chance that what they are teaching either isn’t rooted or comes from a lineage that looks a lot more like a game of telephone than masterful study.
MY PRACTICE & TECHNICAL LINEAGE
I’m a Traditional Astrologer. I primarily use a Whole Sign house system, the Tropical Zodiac, and various Traditional (primarily Hellenistic) techniques. I occasionally incorporate some Modern (Evolutionary) techniques into my practice. I also incorporate a ton of intuition, attachment theory and self-designed ritual in my consults. My primary living astrology teachers are Demetra George, Jason Holley, Chris Brennan, and Kelly Surtees. Demetra George was a student of astrologers Robert Schmidt and Alan White. Chris Brennan was a student of Demetra’s, as well as Robert Schmidt and others. I take live classes, and attend webinars and conferences. That said, I am mostly book-taught. I learn from many living colleagues including Michael J. Morris, Diana Rose Harper, Maeg Keane, Jo O’Neil, Kristin Mathis, Kirah Tabourn, Pallas Augustine, Drew Levanti, and Sabrina Monarch, among others. Most of what my teachers teach comes directly from ancient translated texts by Valens, Teucer, Antiochus, Ptolemy, Porphyry, Hephaistio, Firmicus, Paulus and Rhetorius, and others.
Pieces of astrological technique can be taught as entrances to other teachings. This is different from teaching astrology as a holistic discipline.
I do not know if I will ever teach Astrology Fundamentals as an intensive in the future.* It’s important but it’s not what interests me as an educator currently. I prefer to incorporate specific fundamental techniques that serve as a jumping off point for teaching about ritual, attachment, collapse and other subjects. If you’re an astrologer or astrology student, who is in your lineage? What is your “school” of astrology? If you’re a follower of my work, what are you interested in learning? You can let me know in an e-mail erin@etshipley.com.
My PDF Astrology 101 is a way to get to know some basic primary elements of your natal chart but I wouldn’t consider it a complete fundamentals course.