When Time Stands Still- Exploring Stationary Planets

When Time Stands Still:

Exploring Stationary Planets

© Michele Finey 2015, 2020

Note: This article was first published in the Oct/Nov 2015 edition of The Mountain Astrologer. Slight changes and edits have been made to this version.

As planets move through the zodiac, they take us on a journey through time. Past, present and future are examined through the lens of a chart of the heavens calculated for a specific moment. Planets that appear to be stationary represents key moments in that journey when, in a sense, time appears to stand still.

            In a traditional context, slow and stationary planets are perceived as debilitated, afflicted, or malefic. For the most part, they are considered to be weak. Yet, some astrologers, both ancient and modern, interpret stationary planets in quite a different way.

In Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, we read that stationary planets are akin to rising planets in terms of their potency. Ptolemy believed that a stationary planet — far from being weak or afflicted — was arguably one of the most powerful planets in a chart. Whether Ptolemy was an astrologer or simply a scribe who catalogued the astrological consensus of his time, his view was that stationary planets were very strong indeed:

“… the effect will be strengthened and augmented by their matutine or stationary position; but weakened and diminished by their being vespertine, or situated under the sunbeams, or by their midnight culmination [1]

            How we interpret stationary planets may depend on the type of chart we are examining. For example, in a horary chart, the stationary planet is thought to impede. Its lack of apparent motion is said to prevent further developments. This makes logical sense, because in horary work we are mostly concerned with that exact moment. As a rule, we don’t examine transits or progressions to the horary chart, so if a key planet is stationary, then the matter concerned is most likely at a standstill, at least for the foreseeable future.

Speedy motion symbolises strong impulse, so when a significator is direct in motion and moving swiftly, we judge whatever it signifies as moving directly towards its objectives and having a strong impetus to make something happen. This is a signature of someone with a strong will and a clear sense of purpose (however misguided that purpose may be). By contrast, a significator that moves slowly is regarded as hindered or impeded, suggesting hesitancy or protracted labouring over something difficult to accomplish. [2]

            In the June/July 2014 issue of The Mountain Astrologer, Kenneth Johnson’s article, ‘The Many Faces of Mercury Retrograde,’ discusses some of the ways that astrologers through the ages have interpreted stationary (and retrograde) planets. Vettius Valens, for example, was of the view that such planets were debilitated and weak, but Johnson points out that, in Indian tradition, retrograde and stationary planets were considered to be stronger than when moving direct.

            So, where does that leave us? Just how should we interpret these motionless planets that appear to be changing course? Are they strong or weak?

            Whether stationing retrograde or direct, planets that have no (or very little) apparent motion hover at the same zodiacal position for days, sometimes weeks. If we think of the zodiac as being a journey through time, then when planets are moving retrograde, they are, in a sense, venturing back into the past before resuming forward motion once more. When they are stationary, the present moment is therefore magnified, accentuated, or highlighted. Time appears to stand still. Planets are close to the Earth when retrograde, so their station marks a special moment in space–time when the planet concerned is very accessible. This suggests that planets are indeed strengthened by being stationary.

Those people born when a planet is stationary and appearing to change direction are likely to embody the nature of this planet to a great extent, for better or worse.

A stationary direct (SD) planet in a natal chart will progress over the years and will pick up speed. Conversely, a planet that is slowing down will turn retrograde by progression at some future time. We are not static organisms; we grow and evolve. Planets that station retrograde, or direct by progression often mark major turning points in life. Since the stationary planet is in the process of changing direction, this implies that it can herald reversals of fortune.

            In the natal chart, a stationary planet can present us with problems and challenges, or can be a real asset. Either way, they are powerful.

            In Retrograde Planets, Erin Sullivan says of the stationary retrograde (SR) planet:

“One often finds it difficult if not impossible to express oneself to one’s satisfaction. This can result in obsessive or compulsive types of behaviour or dedication to rigorous detailed work which through its thoroughness satisfies one’s sense of completion and success.” [3]

            SR planets can present us with some big challenges. We have to dig deep to find the fortitude required to harness their energy. These planets therefore foster endurance, staying power, focus, and dedication. The frustration that can accompany the SR planet is often a catalyst, but for some individuals, the challenges may be too much. This could be why stationary planets are said to block or impede. There is a powerful urge to express the stationary planet, but its lack of motion means that it takes a great deal of stamina and time to get results.

            Of the SD planet, Sullivan says:

“[It] has already constellated a great amount of power and is virtually trembling for an avenue for expression. Unless there are other aspects to the planet that promote a channel for the energy, then it is likely to have little grounding in the early years of one’s life.” [4]

            When resuming forward momentum, the stationary direct planet urges us to get moving, but at the same time this planet is not easy to master, especially early in life. It’s raw and fresh and has to move into uncharted territory. Over time, as the planet progresses, we have an opportunity to develop this natal planet, to express it outwardly as it gains momentum and speed, but at first it can be a real monkey on our back.

“The past can’t be changed, but the future is ours to shape, if we make the effort.”

— His Holiness, the 14th Dalai Lama (Jupiter SD 13.28 SC)

            The stationary retrograde planet tends to be more challenging than the stationary direct one. But whether we view these planets in a positive or negative light, whether they are capable of impeding or empowering, may ultimately depend on other factors, such as sign placement, or aspects to the stationary planet that can aid our interpretation.

            Still, other questions remain. What orb of exactness should we apply to stationary planets? In other words, how slow does a planet have to be for its slower motion to be considered significant? And what about the so-called shadow periods? These are the times before and after a station when the planet is travelling direct, but moving over the same degrees it traverses when retrograde. I decided to look more closely at stationary planets to try to answer some of these questions.

Shadow Periods

Over recent years, there has been a lot of discussion surrounding what are called ‘shadow periods’ — times when a planet is moving in direct motion, just before and after its retrograde period, and passing over the same degrees that it travels when retrograde. It has been said that these shadow times have some of the elements of retrograde periods, only to a lesser extent.

            Personally, I am not convinced that shadow periods have any merit. If you factor in these shadow degree areas and plot them over time, you will see why. In the case of Mercury, there are three retrograde passages every year, each of which spans three weeks. If we add on the shadow periods, we have an extra six weeks of shadow time per retrograde. This equates to about six months of the year when Mercury will be either retrograde or in shadow. Although Mercury is well known for its capacity as a trickster, six months seems rather a long time.

            In the case of Mars, it will be shadowy or retrograde for about six months every two years — roughly 25% of its synod. For Saturn, there are approximately six weeks between the end of one shadow period and the start of the next one. With the slower-moving planets, you end up with overlapping, or double, shadows. Uranus is always in shadow or retrograde and in the case of Neptune and Pluto, one shadow period is still in effect when the next shadow period commences. (See Table 3,)

Table 3: Pluto’s shadow. Two successive retrograde periods of Pluto are shown with their shadow periods. *Note that the first shadow period is in effect until Jan. 16, 2016 and overlaps with the next shadow, which commences on Dec. 29, 2015.

            I have not personally investigated these ‘double shadows’ to see if they have any particular astrological significance, but on the face of it, this calls into question the whole concept of shadow periods. If you go along with the idea of shadow periods, then you also have to accept that, for some planets, there are double shadows.

            Setting aside the idea of shadow periods, the real question is: What kind of orb should we allow for a stationary planet? In other words, how slowly does a planet have to be moving to have some kind of added intensity or other effect?

Synodic Cycles

Apparent retrograde motion occurs as part of a planet’s synodic cycle: the number of days between one conjunction with the Sun and the next. In the case of Venus and Mercury, each of which makes two solar conjunctions per cycle, this is the number of days between one inferior conjunction and the next. Most astrology software programs allow a few days for stations, and all stationary planets are flagged S for the same number of days. But if you consider that the length of each planet’s orbit differs, it is technically more accurate to allow for a variable orb according to a planet’s speed. 

Table 1: The number of days of each planet’s synodic cycle

Average Speeds and Orbs for Stations

Because planets move at different speeds and have synodic cycles that vary in length, the orb we apply to stations should take this into account. Using a planet’s average speed is one way to do this. But it turns out that a planet’s average speed is not an easy thing to calculate. It depends on a range of factors, such as the time period over which its motion is averaged. For Mercury and Venus, in particular, this can yield quite different results.

            In Deborah Houlding’s series on Horary in TMA, she points out that the average speeds for Mercury and Venus are often said to be the same as the Sun. [5]  

Other sources, however, list their average speeds as being significantly faster than the Sun, which is true. Astronomically, Mercury and Venus do move faster than the Sun.

            In the Solar Fire astrological software, the average daily speeds for Mercury and Venus are the same as for the Sun: 59°08’ when in fact they move much faster. I am not a computer programmer, so I have no idea why the speeds of Mercury and Venus are not accurate, but it must have something to do with the fact they are inferior planets. But I won’t labor the point here.

Using Solar Fire, the default setting flags planets with an S for two days before and two days after each exact station. Thanks to the developers of this fantastic astrology software, we are offered a choice in the way we set orbs for stations.

In the preference settings for stations, the default setting is option 1. This option gives you an orb of two days before and two days after each exact station, so that any planet falling within this time range will be flagged with an S to indicate that it is barely moving.  You will notice that the colour of the S in a chart will change at the exact moment of the station. This is the default setting, so unless you change it, all stationary planets will be flagged with an S for four days at their station retrograde and again for four days when they turn direct. For a very long time, I used this setting — until it occurred to me that choosing a variable orb would take into account the different synodic cycles (shown in Table 1) and speeds of the planets (see Table 4, **).

Diagram: Screen shot of Solar Fire’s preference settings for stationary planets. Option 1 is the default setting; option 4 takes into account each planet’s speed and their different cycles.

            Preference 4 lets you choose a percentage of a planet’s average speed, so that any planet moving slower than this will be flagged S.

Table 4: Average speed of the planets

(Source: https://www.starfisher.cz/starfisher/EN/ )

After choosing this setting, I set to work examining every chart in my database, in total, thousands of charts. I tweaked the percentage up and down, looking at natal and event charts to determine an orb that worked for all stationary planets.

            After spending weeks looking through my database and trying different percentages in option 4, I decided to use 30%. This means that whenever a planet is moving slower than 30% of its average speed, it will be flagged with an S.

            In the case of Mercury, using the 30% rule gives you a window of 4 to 8 days per station, which might account for any kind of so-called shadow effect. Rather than having a shadow of six weeks, you have a period of 4–8 days when Mercury is considered to be within orb of station, or slow enough to have a noticeable effect.

Note that because some planets have more elliptical orbits than others, their speed will be faster in some signs and slower in others, so their station orb will differ be slightly different from one chart to another according to its sign placement. Mars, Pluto, Chiron, and Mercury have quite elliptical orbits, and as a result, the length of their stations will be slightly different in each chart you calculate.

            While 30% might seem high, keep in mind that this is a percentage of average speed, and average speeds are much slower than a planet’s fastest motion. Though the way in which average speeds are calculated can vary, this setting works well — that is, the themes of the stationary planet in question appear to be quite obvious or prominent in the event or life of the individual.

In the case of Venus and Mercury, you may want to consider mentally factoring in an extra day or two before and after the S appears in charts, to account for the way that average speeds are calculated within your astrology software.

Since Mars has the longest synodic cycle, it also has the longest orb duration for its station. Using this 30% rule, Mars will be flagged S for about three to four weeks at each station. (See Table 5, **.)

            The 30% rule captures a range of charts that seem to support and validate this setting. Of course, you may have other ideas about what kind of orb to give to a station, but I urge you to consider the 30% rule as a starting point. Do your own research and see what works for you. But whatever you decide, it is important to consider a variable orb, rather than a blanket 4 day time period for all stationary planets.

Table 5: Planetary synods and station periods (using the 30% rule)

Stationary Mars

It’s a common mistake to think that Pluto has the longest synodic cycle, when actually it’s Mars. Consider that, from one year to the next, Pluto will not move very far, so its conjunctions with the Sun will occur at 367 day intervals. But Mars is situated in a similar part of the solar system as the Earth, so when viewed from Earth, Mars and the Sun only join in conjunction every 780 days, making Mars the longest synod.

            Mars has the least frequently occurring retrograde cycle, and it’s fair to say that it’s probably the most challenging. Because Mars is associated with forward momentum, drive, action, and activity, its stations can denote critical times when progress comes to a halt. Although stationary Mars can impede one’s energy and drive, it can also produce incredible stamina and staying power.

The different ways that astrologers interpret stationary planets may come down to the fact that, for some of us, the difficulties that these planets create can push us to strive for bigger and better things, but in other cases they can create insurmountable obstacles that we cannot overcome. The stationary planet can be both a hindrance and our greatest asset.

Gauquelin

The painstaking research undertaken by Michel Gauquelin (who was himself born with Mars SR) revealed that Mars rising or culminating is associated with sports champions. It’s a proven signature for athletic prowess. Yet, in the charts of some other outstanding athletes, Mars is stationary. Usain Bolt (SD), Martina Navratilova (SD), and Rafael Nadal (SR) are three examples. Having an ‘immobile’ Mars has not impeded their competitive spirit, energy, or drive, but has actually intensified it. There are also a number of great athletes with Mars retrograde, including Steffi Graf, Billie Jean King, and Tiger Woods. If a retrograde or stationary Mars only blocks or thwarts the action of Mars, how is it that we find it in the charts of elite sports champions?

            We also know that Gauquelin found that Mars rising or culminating is associated with the medical profession.  Using the 30 per cent rule, the charts of both Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung we find Mars is stationary direct in the 11th house (Placidus) a symbol of their pioneering work in the fields of psychiatry and psychology.

Table 2: More examples of stationary Mars

Stations in Natal and Event charts

If you calculate the chart for Christopher Reeve’s tragic accident using the 4 day default setting for stations, Mercury appears retrograde and asteroid Hygeia (health and healing) is direct. If you calculate this event chart using the 30% rule, both Mercury and Hygeia are flagged S, which highlights the fact that both planets were about to station and were therefore significant factors at that time. Similarly, in Reeve’s natal chart, using the standard 4 day orb, Hygeia would be flagged R, but using the 30 per cent rule it’s flagged S. [6]

            At the time of his accident, the transiting Mercury station at 17°55’ Gemini was in tight opposition to his natal Mars at 18°15’ Sagittarius, which sits in his 5th house (Placidus). Reeve’s chart has a very tight quincunx between Mars and Uranus in his natal chart, an aspect well known to be associated with accidents. This aspect was repeated in the heavens on the day he fell from his horse. With the transiting Mercury station powerfully positioned in its own sign of Gemini, opposing Reeve’s natal Mars, we have an extra factor that suggests the potential for an accident. Some moments in time are indeed more significant than others.

In the chart of England’s King George III, we see Mercury stationary retrograde in its own sign of Gemini and involved in a stellium with Saturn, Venus, and Neptune. The actual station of Mercury took place three-and-a-half days before his birth, so if you use the default setting for stations, Mercury would be flagged R rather than S. The exact station took place at 26°20’ Gemini.

            George III, known colloquially as ‘mad King George,’ developed a peculiar condition that was never accurately diagnosed. Some sources have suggested that the condition was a genetic blood disorder called porphyria. Recent research seems to have virtually ruled out this theory, and it is now thought that he suffered from a type of mania or other psychiatric condition. [6]

            One of the key symptoms of his illness was a tendency to talk incessantly. His speech became manic, and he would rave on incoherently, unable to stop himself. His written correspondence also showed this same tendency; sentences would run on and on, as his train of thought became increasingly confused. Towards the close of his life, he talked nonstop for days, not pausing to eat or sleep.

            When his illness first surfaced, George himself was of the view that the condition was triggered by his intense grief over the loss of his youngest and beloved daughter, Princess Amelia, who died at the age of 27 on November 2, 1810.

            SR Mercury in its own sign describes his inability to stop talking. Note that the Sun and Chiron are also positioned in Gemini, making a total of six planets in the sign of communication. The sextile to Jupiter in Aries would have served to exacerbate this condition.

            King George simply had no way out of this compulsion. He was destined to endlessly repeat himself, literally stuck in time. Whether or not it was grief that triggered his condition, by the end of his life he was completely insane — also blind and deaf, suffering from dementia, and unable to walk. George III died in January 1820.

Stationary Jupiter

Just as Mars is connected with sports and medicine, Jupiter is associated with actors, playwrights, top executives, military leaders, journalists, and politicians. Gauquelin showed conclusively that this planet is prominent in the charts of individuals engaged in these professions. In terms of character traits, the typical Jupiter type is extroverted, proud, authoritarian, humorous, ambitious, and independent, among other Jovian qualities.

            When researching charts that contain a stationary Jupiter, I was interested to discover that these occupations and traits cropped up time and again. In terms of both profession and personality, people born when Jupiter was stationary, or travelling at less than 30% of its average speed, strongly embodied the Jupiter archetype. The list of well-known people below includes a number of evangelists, spiritual leaders, politicians, actors, performers, activists, and other larger-than-life characters. Several people in this list are also given to hubris, another symptom of a hyper-functioning Jupiter.

            On first inspection, it seemed that Jupiter was stationary in the charts of entertainers far more often than in randomly selected charts. To test this, I looked at the percentage of people expected to have a slow or stationary Jupiter (using the 30% rule), compared to the entertainers.

            Jupiter’s orbit is not too eccentric. Jupiter will be travelling at less than 30% of its average speed for around 15–16 days at each station. Therefore, every synodic cycle of Jupiter (which is 399 days), we would expect to find Jupiter flagged S for about 30 days. This equates to 7.5%–8%.

            As I looked through my client database, I created a sample group, a total of 509 charts in all. Jupiter was found to be stationary in 37 of these charts, which is 7.27%. So far, so good. In another control group, I have the birth data of some Mensa members that I collected in the 1980s, which contains 241 individuals. Searching this group for stationary Jupiter, I found 17 charts, which is 7.05%.

            However, for entertainers — a group within the Solar Fire database containing a total of 435 charts — there are 42 charts with a stationary Jupiter. This is 9.65%, a higher number than expected by chance. (If it were 7.5%, there would be only 32 charts.) Looking at the Music & Dance database in Solar Fire — which contains many of the same charts as the Entertainment database, but also has a number of additional charts, 294 in all — we find that 32 of these individuals have Jupiter stationary, which is 10.88%. (In this case, the expected number of charts, based on 7.5%, is 22.)

            I then combined these groups, deleted any duplicates, and added a few notable performers whose charts I had collected previously, building a file of 678 entertainers, including dancers, musicians, actors, composers, and directors. Charts containing a stationary Jupiter in this larger group totalled 65, or 9.58% — again, above the average.

            It’s worth noting that Jupiter stations when making a trine to the Sun. But if you’re calculating charts using the 30% rule, a slow Jupiter will not necessarily be making a trine to the Sun. In some cases where Jupiter is flagged S, the orb of the Jupiter–Sun trine stretches out to 11 degrees, which is generally considered too wide an orb for a trine. In the following list of well-known people with a slow or stationary Jupiter (see Table 6, **), some have a Jupiter–Sun trine and others don’t. This serves to illustrate that it seems to be the slow Jupiter, rather than the Jupiter–Sun trine, that is the key factor in how S Jupiter manifests.

Table 6: Well-known people born with stationary Jupiter

            While more research needs to be done, these findings tell us that stationary or slow-moving planets are very far from being inert. Perhaps they really are the most powerful planets after all.

Chart Data and Sources

Christopher Reeve, September 25, 1952; 3:12 a.m. EDT; Manhattan, NY, USA (40°N46’, 73°W59’); A: birth certificate in hand, no time; Linda Clark quotes a letter from him with the time. Horseback-riding accident, May 27, 1995; 3:03 p.m. EDT; Culpeper, VA, USA (38°N28’, 78°W00’); source: public record. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/139937/still-me-by-christopher-reeve/

George III, June 4, 1738 New Style; 7:30 a.m. LMT; London, England (51°N30’, 00°W10’): B: Dana Holliday quotes John Brooke’s 1982 biography, George III, for “between 6:00 and 7:00 a.m.” Lois Rodden quotes Miss Pamela Clark, Deputy Registrar of the Royal Archives, for the same (May 24 Old Style

All other data have been retrieved from various software and Internet sources, including Solar Fire and AstroDatabank (https://www.astro.com), and from my personal research of births and events in the public record. None of the birth dates is in contention. A precise birth time or birthplace is not necessary for ascertaining whether a planet is stationary.

References and Notes

(All URLs were accessed in June 2015.)

1. https://sacred-texts.com/astro/ptb/ptb37.htm#page_54

2. Deborah Houlding, “An Introduction to Horary Astrology, Part 5: Accidental Strengths and Afflictions,” in TMA, Oct./Nov. 2013, pp. 75–76.

3. Erin Sullivan, Retrograde Planets: Traversing the Inner Landscape, Samuel Weiser, Inc., 1992, 2000, p.125

4. Ibid., p.126

5. Houlding, op. cit., p. 76.

6. All charts shown or cited in this article are calculated using the 30% rule for determining stationary planets. Any planet moving slower than 30% of its average speed is flagged S.

7. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22122407

© 2015, 2020 Michele Finey – all rights reserved