Should the ‘discovery’ of the new 13th zodiac sign cause an identity crisis? That star (Sun) signs DO NOT determine your character nor determine whether or not you will meet the love of your life today is in itself a major reason why you shouldn’t be concerned; that aside, there is absolutely no reason to give the 13th zodiac sign, bandied about by irresponsible media and half-baked astrologers, another thought.

Astrologers work from a geocentric view of the cosmos because the geocentric model exactly pictures the spiritual truth of the structure of the universe and provides a perfectly adequate means of tracking its planetary phenomena. In this model the outermost sphere is the Sphere of the Zodiac. This sphere is utterly invisible and carries no stars in it – what it does carry are the signs of the zodiac which have no connection with the constellations of stars that bear the same names.

The Sun’s path against the sky, known as the ecliptic, crosses 12 sections – these 12 sections of the zodiac, each 30 degrees in size, form a 360 degree circle through which the planets orbit. This zodiacal sphere depicts at any given time where the planets (and other bodies) are in the sky in relation to earth. This is called the Tropical Zodiac and is one of the many spheres of the cosmos; the Tropical Zodiac has been used by Western astrologers since at least 100 BC and this zodiac starts at the spring equinox.

The Sphere of the Fixed Stars (planets that move very slowly in relation to earth, roughly 1 degree every 72 years) is the next sphere coming in towards earth which astrologers concern themselves with, and constellations are to be found here that bear the same name as the signs of the zodiac found in the Sphere of the Zodiac but they are 2 completely different things! This sphere moves slowly, relative to the sphere of the Zodiac, producing the precession of the equinoxes (the constellations move relative to the equinox where the Sun is at 0 Aries).

There were 48 constellations known to the ancients although many have been added since the 1600’s, with the International Astronomical Union (IAU), the world authority for assigning names to celestial objects, officially recognising 88 constellations today; these constellations cover the entire sky. The 48 ancient constellations are grouped into three categories: the zodiacal constellations: Aries through to Pisces; the northern constellations consisting of 21 constellations and the southern constellations which consist of 15. These constellations are irregular star groups lying on the ecliptic which demand symbolic interpretation; people fail to understand that the signs and constellations are not directly connected. It would have saved a lot of misunderstandings if our ancestors had called the constellations by different names to the zodiac signs - Dopey, Sneezy, Grumpy etc. might do. In the traditional cosmos, the sphere of the fixed stars - which is where the constellations are, of course, is separate from the sphere of the zodiac.

It is within the Zodiacal Constellations – each housing planets which fall within these constellations – that the problem lies. The Constellational Zodiac is a modern invention and is a Zodiac that corresponds to the physical constellations – it is within the Zodiacal Constellation that many now wish to place Ophiuchus (which has existed for thousands of years in the Northern Constellations of the Sphere of the Fixed Stars, it is not a new discovery) citing 13 “zodiac signs” instead of 12. This is the most popular of various different sources for the '13th sign' – trying to use a nonsensical constellation zodiac and transform it into the Tropical Zodiac. This is incorrect for many reasons, but the 2 most obvious ones are that a) there is no understanding that they are not dealing with the Sphere of the Zodiac here, but with the Sphere of the Fixed Stars – 2 completely different things indeed; it is similar to saying we are going to add a 6th gear to the gear box but we won't use a gear mechanism, we will use a tyre rim! And b) while Ophiuchus does indeed lie on the ecliptic, this is neither here nor there.

As anyone would know if they had embraced the scientific principle of studying something before pontificating about it, the signs of the zodiac are not the same as the constellations that carry the same name. The signs are a division of the zodiac into 12 equal sections, just as the degrees are a division of the ecliptic into 360 equal sections. That Ophiuchus intrudes on the Zodiacal Constellations (all constellations are irregular and overlap on one another) has no more bearing on this than does the fact that the constellations are of different sizes.

Footnote: The Real Astrology and tuition notes by John Frawley are quoted in this article.