The problem with ancient astrology in a modern world
There is currently a bit of a battle in the astrological community between astrologers studying the techniques of ancient astrological sources and “modern” astrologers, those who use psychological techniques and concepts that are somewhat Eastern in origin, such as past lives and person evolution rather than a defined set of predictive techniques. I first wrote about this debate back in 2007 and you can read more here if you like. It seems to me that astrologers have enough of a battle fighting against those who denigrate the divine craft without fighting with each other, but we are in contentious times, and this has seeped into the astrological world as well.
The roots of modern astrology can be found in the works of Dane Rudhyar in the 1960s, and evolved through the 1970s and 1980s as various forms of psychological astrology and later, evolutionary astrology. (I call my own work “transformational astrology” because I seek not only to define and predict, but also to assist in transformation and personal evolution).
In the early 1990s, a group of astrologers who were largely based in more traditional fields of astrology such began studying ancient astrological texts in their original Greek and Latin languages. Project Hindsight was spearheaded by Robert Schmidt, who was already a scholar in Greek and mathematics from the time of his early college years.
In 1998, after having spent quite a few years in this translation project, Schmidt said in a lecture:
[E]ven though we have been spending all this time with the Greeks, our intention is really to basically to rid ourselves of the burden of the Greeks [emphasis added]. It is very hard to get free of the Greeks. It is very hard […]
