I followed the controversy about Pluto not being a planet and, despite my likings for astrology, i couldn’t help but think… a Rose by any other name wouldn’t still smell the same?
The thing is, whether it is a planet or a dwarf planet or an asteroid, it will still have the same mass and take the exact same amount of time to revolve around the sun. People are not really aware of the proper place categories play into our knowledge of the world… And besides, the category of dwarf-planet did not exist before the reclassification, so the “downgrading” is actually only an specifying.
But the thing is, i discovered recently that, together with Pluto being “demoted” to dwarf-planet, two other celestial bodies where promoted to this new category. Ceres, previously classified as a asteroid in the belt between Mars and Jupiter (and possessing 1/3 of the belt’s whole mass), and Eris, an object 27% larger than Pluto even farther away than it. And obviously all that data set me into making wild theories!
Dwarf planets are things big enough to be spherical but not enough to clean the debris along it’s orbit. It is important to remember that there is all kinds of debris all around the sun, even near the orbits of the giant planets. The thing is — we’re talking about gigammense empty spaces here, it should resemble more the cloud of dust that sprinkles out of that old blanket when you spank it than to your neat (or not so neat) science-fair model with nine rings around a yellow ball.
But what i find important in this description is that the dwarf-planets have enough “personal matter” to be reasonably dynamically stable. That is, we can guess they will still be there some hundreds of turns around the sun from now. We can’t say the same about, for example, Chiron, which is something between an asteroid and a comet, and will probably escape to the void beyond what is beyond the beyond Pluto. Something like it, i realize it doesn’t sound good.
It is said that, despite for now only three objects in the solar system being considered dwarf-planets, probably some more will fit the category with further study. But we can take each one of the 3 biggest as the “representative” of their particular sets of bodies: the asteroid belt, the Kuiper belt and the “scattered disc”. That is, Ceres might be joined as dwarf-planet by Vesta and Pallas, but they will still be the semiplanets from the asteroid belt.
If we suppose that the belts and disc are actually proto-planets, that is, matter in a state previous to planet formation, we can take each of them for one energy. We can treat the sets of bodies as not-stabilized stages of consciousness, or some esoteric mumbo jumbo to the same effect. But, from the perspective of the system of astrology, it just fits perfectly to simplify things and treat each of the main bodies as a point in the chart.
With 4 rocky planets (three without the Earth), 4 giant gaseous planets, 3 dwarf-planets, more 2 luminaries, we have 12 chart points. We get rid of double rulerships. It is an astrology in equilibrium.
Obviously this will raise the most heated disputes, but my best guess for now is like this:
- Ceres rules Taurus and the second house. With an orbital period of 4.6 years it seems consistent with the turns and twists of possessions and ownerships and money and finances. It also in my opinion has some relation with the myth of the plant-grower, goddess of agriculture, growth and cereals. I kind of can get the idea that cereals would be the archetypal coin — like the koku in Japan.
- Eris rules Gemini and the third house. I even have a symbol for it (though i don’t really feel like finding a way to put it there) based on the Principia Discordia, a maybe-parody on conspiracy freaks — which also serves as justification for the mythological part of it. The long, long orbital period is harder to accommodate with the idea of “communication” of the third house, but if you think of it in terms of vocabularies and world-views it makes sense that such things will be versatile in themselves, but will take a long long time to change.
I rather find it difficult to accept that those names, chosen in ways as spontaneous and casual, could have such very apropos meanings. The sarcastic insightfulness of the “Discordian Society” is very geminian.
Just as an endnote, Ceres as goddess of cereal remembers me more Taurus, but if we look for Demeter, well… things change a bit. Dig this, Demeter could also be called Thesmophoros “giver of customs” or even “legislator”. And this is so Libra. Damn. I’ll have to examine further.
One way or the other, i would be very pleased to have more female deities in the zodiac.