Retrograde Planets (Traversing the Inner Landscape)

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

"Geocentricity might well be egocentricity." The phenomenon of retrograde motion is based on our Earth-centered view of the solar system, but the movement and cycles of retrograde planets are based entirely on the apparent motion of the Sun through the zodiac. This book organizes and explains retrograde motion from a systems viewpoint the system of the Sun and planets and interprets retrograde planets natally, by progression, and in transit.

Erin Sullivan has penetrated the veil of myths, mystery, and false assumptions about the geocentric phenomenon of retrograde motion for students of astrology. She has carefully outlined the system of retrograde motion and applied it to both natal horoscopes and transiting cycles. Through her research and experience with client cases, Sullivan has explored all the possible cycles within cycles that retrograde planets perform. She has interpreted those movements in a way that is immediately apparent and useful to both novice and professional astrologer, and provdes both psychological and mundane interpretations of retrograde planets.

Erin Sullivan is an internationally renowned astrologer and author. Canadian born, she has travelled widely and in 1988 moved to London where she spent ten years. While in London she was the Series Editor for the Contemporary Astrology series, published by Arkana-Penguin, and taught for the Centre for Psychological Astrology in London, where she remains a faculty member. She has written Saturn in transit (Weiser: October 2000) and Dynasty: The Astrology of Family Dynamics (Weiser: Spring 2001), both originally published by Arkana. She has authored two other books. Erin Sullivan lives and practices in Tucson, Arizona.

The first talk I ever gave on astrology was to a group of about eight associates who were the unwitting core of what was to become the British Columbia Astrological Society. To this small coterie, in 1973, I presented ideas on retrograde planets. My foray into astrology in 1964 had been induced by Dane Rudhyar’s The Lunation Cycle, followed by C. E. O. Carter’s Aspects and numerous pamphlets, tomes and motley reading, so you can see it was a strange and disconnected beginning. My true companions were the Rosicrucian decade ephemerides, which I pored over incessantly, teaching myself to cast horoscopes and studying planetary motion. I was always intrigued by the apparent backward motion of the planets, signified by the mysterious ‘R’ in the columns of figures. Nowhere did I read or hear about that ‘R’ until a few years later, in 1968, I attended a Theosophical gathering in Los Angeles to hear a lecture by Manly Palmer Hall. At some point in the evening retrograde motion was mentioned and I had every hope that the mysterious ‘R’ was finally to be explained. Upon asking, however, I was told it meant nothing, and to disregard it in natal astrology.

To suggest to a Scorpio that something means nothing is as inflammatory as a red rag to a bull, its opposite sign, and I could not accept this interpretation. To disregard this eccentric motion seemed very odd indeed, especially since it was already becoming apparent to me that it was a cyclic phenomenon, with each planet quite regularly going through phases of apparently ‘meaningless’ backward motion.

I first noticed the regularity of the motion of Mercury retrograde early in the seventies but did not publish anything on it until 1983, when RKM Tape Club distributed a set of my taped lectures on Mercury retrograde.

I could see that the inferior planets might be a problem to any ancient sky-watcher because of their proximity to the Sun and the long-standing belief in geocentricity. As for the superior planets, however, I could not understand why greater mention had not been made of their import when they were retrograde, since they would have been viewed in the night sky when the Sun was opposed to them. When I finally surveyed some ancient sources, there were a few mentions of retrograde planets but primarily in the context of dire warnings about their stations and the terrible afflictions which they portended!

It has been said by many philosophers that what separates human- kind from the rest of the animal kingdom are our ability to reason and foreknowledge of our own death. Others have said it is our capacity for humour. I think one of the qualities of humanity which set us apart is the capacity for denial: In the face of the obvious, we can say it doesn’t exist or, if it does, it is irrelevant! With respect to retrograde planets, astrologers have alternately laden them with far too much importance, thus making themselves look ridiculous, or ignored them, thus appearing equally foolish. Both of these problems have arisen because we have tried to understand the retrograde planet alone, not the planet in relation to its system. Remove an individual from his relationship to his system, whether that is the family, the society, the culture or the epoch, and we see only an isolated and possibly irrelevant mote. When the individual is included within that system, much more begins to fall into place. I believe that this is part of what has happened with regard to retrograde planets.

One of the main arguments against taking retrogression into consideration as a philosophical underpinning of astrology is that the perceived backward motion of the planets is only ‘apparent’ This borders on the absurd - if what we see is not a valid perception, then we are lost. The ‘apparentness’ of retrograde motion is a reality in itself, and if we perceive a planet in retrograde motion then it és in retrograde motion, from the viewpoint of the observer. Given that we live on Earth and conduct our affairs (or perceive ourselves to conduct our apparent affairs) taking note of various things from both a subjective and objective view, then it stands to reason that we might not only ‘see’ retrogression objectively, but also might be involved with it in a subjective sense, that is, experience it as something different from direct motion.

Perhaps the problem of retrogression lies not in the planets themselves but in our understanding of the system of planets gathered about our Sun, and the relationship that the planets have with the Sun as seen from our geocentric viewpoint. Part of my own confusion in getting my mind around retrograde planets was clearly reflected in the traditional teachings to which we have all been exposed, indeed indoctrinated. My inability to grasp the ‘problem of retrogrades’ lay in my received understanding of planets in signs in- houses. Although these specifications are valid and rich with meaning, it seems that another approach is necessary to comprehend fully the retrograde planet.

You may notice a lack of emphasis on house position and sign placement in all sections delineating retrograde planets. This is deliberate for two reasons. First, the most significant power of a retrograde planet lies in the fact that it is retrograde, and, therefore, is implicitly in aspect to the Sun. Secondly, the power of a retrograde planet is dependent upon its place in the gestalt of the horoscope, that is, dependent on whether it has an exact aspect with the Sun; whether it is a singleton; or whether it is otherwise segregated from the main body of planets in the rest of the chart.

To catalogue interpretations for retrograde planets singly by house and sign would not only be erroneous and misleading, it would not work consistently. The reader is expected to synthesize his or her own knowledge of signs and houses with knowledge of aspects to or from retrograde planets to other planets, thereby coming to an understanding of what retrograde energy contributes within the context of the whole horoscope.

**Contents and Sample Pages**