Eris – Rulership and Rehabilitation

After an astrologer friend suggested the notion that Eris was the true ruler of Libra I thought about it (for a very long time – about a year now). It was her opinion that Venus didn’t seem to be the true ruler of Libra but rather Taurus and we talked at length over the course of this year about the legend of Eris and some of the qualities that really don’t fit Libra. First of all there are more Libra generals than pretty much any other sign, they are amazing tacticians and well-known for being fierce competitors, and in my experience they are the most competitive of all signs. They are creative and visual, no doubt which is why they fell under the purview of Venus for so long. However they are not sensual like Venus, Taurus however is. Taurus loves great food, fine wine, beautiful things, and has a curvy sensuality that Libra is missing. Libras are more intellectual, more in their head and often disconnected from their bodies. While it is true that they like nice things as long as they are intellectually stimulated they can do without them. Taurus however needs to eat a great meal no matter how little money they have they will use what little they have on the perfect gourmet spice or amazing wine. They are also willing to work for other people without taking this on as their identity. They can separate work, seeing it as a means to an end – the end being a nice lifestyle where as a Libra would rather be a pauper who works for himself doing what he loves than a rich man who works for a paycheck just to support himself in a luxurious lifestyle. Now I’m not saying all Taurus people live a life of luxury, I’m just saying that work is work and their lives are not defined by it in the same way – it’s just a job. To a Libra its time wasted when they could be busy daydreaming or working on something of value to them personally.

At first I resisted the idea that Eris was the ruler of Libra after all she isn’t really considered a very “nice” Goddess and Libras are generally thought to be very nice – they avoid conflict, they don’t like disharmony and I have Mars in Libra and have many Libra friends so I felt sort of bad thrusting this sort of odd ball Goddess on them. However after much thought I think my friend’s observation is correct. Eris is the sister of Aries. Aries is the other side of the astrological coin to Libra. And in many ways she fits the Libra traits if we strip away some of the judgment put upon her by the ancients.

The legend or myth basically tells the story of a wedding in which all the Gods were invited except Eris (due to her association with disharmony). She was upset by this and came up with a strategy to get even in a very clever and covert way, she threw a golden apple into the proceedings which read: To the fairest. Of course all the egotistical Goddesses thought it was for them, Hera, Aphrodite and Athena. The three women fought over it and then asked Zeus to judge who the apple was for, being the father and husband he decided it wasn’t a good move to judge such a competition and asked Paris to do the honors. Each of the Goddesses offered him a bribe. Aphrodite’s won out and he was given the most beautiful mortal woman in the world to take as his wife Helen of Troy. This of course caused the Trojan war.

Now on the surface this is kind of a nasty thing to do, however one must admit that Eris was prejudged and instead of internalizing the hurt she turned it around in a clever way to make a point. She waged a war against those who had castigated her. If she had been a man, this would have been a sign of strength – she was in fact a warrior. Her strategy used psychology and surprise – very modern war methodology, in fact it very much resembles the Trojan horse that was to come in the wake of this supposed event. She used her enemies vanity and megalomania against them and in fact they are the ones who chose to respond with bribery and promises in order to win this imaginary and empty competition. She used her understanding of psychology to manipulate those who had hurt her, in order to teach them a lesson – after all they had been unfair to her.

Now her strategic genius would make sense in relationship with Libra. It would explain why there are so many generals who have been Libras and (I believe famous chess players as well). It would also explain the competitive spirit Libras have – the challenge they find and need to fuel them in their work, whether it is competing with themselves to do better, or with a rival they want to show up.

I was told by a prominent astrologer I studied with early on (many, many, many years ago) that there were more people born with Libra rising in the US than any other sign. He said it was something close to 50 percent (or something of that nature) totally out of balance with what one would expect, due to the fact that we are far north, and Libra rises for the longest period of time during most of the year. And we are by far the most competitive people on the planet, we take great pride in our work and love being entrepeneurs and working for ourselves.

In many ways Libras have much in common with Aries people, except Libras, instead of being direct and straightforward, work behind the scenes, get their ducks in a row and then strike. They don’t like being in the center of an arguments especially prolonged ones. They prefer to plan their attack and then let nature take its course. This can upset the apple cart, but that’s OK as long as they aren’t there when it turns over (much like Eris).

So instead of seeing Eris as the Goddess of Discord I prefer to take her back to what I imagine was probably her proper place – before her power was taken away due to the change from a matriarchal society into a patriarchal, and think of her as a supreme warrior and brilliant strategist capable of winning even when all the odds and all the Gods were against her!

I’ll dissect how it affects people as individuals and what it means in people’s charts in the next post on her.

Best wishes and many blessings,

Denise

Clarification, and History…

I wanted to address this comment from Javahaa. 

javahaaa

Denise and readers, The two strains that began our nation were not ‘idealism’ and ‘religious zealoutry’. They were, in reverse order of importance, religion and capitalism. The earliest and larger settlements , like Jamestown, were capitalistic ventures, sponsored by specific British companies to seek new sources of revenue. Somehow, _that_ isn’t taught in elementary school. I’m no fan of religious zealoutry, but put blame where it is most due. By far, capitalism was the force behind slavery, not religion, and it was the force behind native genocide/displacement. Religion might have been used to buttress it (just as the money powers used it to dupe working/middle-class christians to start voting GOP in the 80s), but if it had not been an extremely profitable institution, it would have been dropped like a hot potato.

Hi Jahavaha,

I have to say that you are both right and wrong in that of course capatilism and greed are the real motivators behind the evils we have visited on other people and cultures. However if you look at the history of the Christian religion, it is blood soaked. One of the greatest genocides of all time was perpetrated by the Catholic church against “witches” and/or “pagans,” (exchange heathen here) most of these women (which turned out to be aproximitely 25% of all european women) were murdered during the burning times. And lets take the middle ages and the Spanish Inquisition where indescribable torture was visited on “witches,” “pagans,” and “heretics.” Granted the church benefited greatly from stealing the land from wealthy women land owners once their husband’s died and they had no protection and were suddenly pronounced “witches,” but people, the vast majority of people who participated in these atrocities believed they were doing God’s work. So to clarify, the people up top maybe motivated by greed, but the masses who do their bidding are motivated by fear.

And yes, religious zealots are to blame for murdering the “heathen,” Indians. Many if not all were motivated by greed, but they used their religion as an excuse, so I ask you what difference this makes? If a religious idealogy can be warped into a weapon of torture and war, is it truly spiritual? Eastern religions have never been used this way, nor did the “heathen,” Indians, or “pagans,” or “witches,” or anyone before the 3 major western religions popped up. I don’t think this is mere coincidence despite arguing with people who were of those religious persuasions for years, there is something intrinsically wrong with a religion that can be used to defile, destroy, murder, rape and torture others. Here’s what it is: Intolerance.

Yes, that’s right. When one believes that they alone have the only answer and control the only freeway to the Almighty, then arrogance, hypocracy and perversion are born. In all other religions (excluding the 3 major western ones) there is a belief that “all Gods are one,” meaning it doesn’t matter what your God looks like or what your religious system is, it’s all the same at the core and should be respected. Heck, in ancient times it was common for people to incorporate other Gods into their pantheon after visiting foreign lands, hence we have Jesus brought to Rome which is the birth place of the New Testament put together by the Roman emperor Constantine who adopted Christianity for its belief in one God for political reasons.

At the time Rome was split in 2, there was Rome and Constantinople, Constantine wanted a religion that reflected his belief that the state should be one unified body and thus gathered together a group of scholars to look over the letters that different Christian sects used in their house gatherings were they would worship. Each group had a different set of letters and interpretations of Christ. Actually, most of the first home churches were started by women, but anyway, up until Constantine the Christians were considered freaks and persecuted for their belief in just one living God who they claimed was the only way to heaven.

Unusual that the Romans persecuted them because historically this new brand of righteous religious zealot willing to be martyred and eaten by lions for angering the ancient Gods was not done before monotheism was introduced into the culture. Also, there may have been a back lash against the Christians as this religion came up while Rome was going down and some may have felt the old Gods were abandoning them for tolerating this group of people who wanted not just to co-exist with the old ways, but to overthrow the old ways and eliminate the old Gods. 

Anyway, Constantine’s scholars actually picked through the different writings attached to the house churches and put together the New Testament. Constantine of course ordered that the Christians stop being persecuted and publicly claimed to become a Christian although it is said that he never actually converted and was heard on his death bed calling to the old Gods. The people whom were closest to Constantine, his soldiers and advisors claimed he had stayed true to his original faith and had used monotheism as a justification for the unification of Rome. It wasn’t long after that Rome entirely fell apart.

In the 1980s papers from the original New Testament were carbon dated at between 50-300 years after the death of Christ. Most thought it closer to 300 years. Even the Catholic church acknowledges this fact. This is significant because even 50 years after His death much of what He did and said would have become legend rather than fact, like playing a really long game of telephone, some of his words and teachings could have been misconstrued, such as that He was the “only son of God,” even the King James version which some have suggested takes liberties with interpretations, He actually never calls himself anything, but the “son of man.”

Since Rome was in desperate need of a saviour and the idea of a living God was very much a part of the culture, this interpretation of Christ’s teachings could be very wrong. Imagine living in a world where the Emperor is a God. Well, some Jewish guy who has some great spiritual ideas really wouldn’t cut it, hence this weird paganization of Christ could have happened. He had to be a living God for that religion to take hold in Rome.

So he may have said he was the only son of God, his Jewish followers may have believed he was the Messiah or just an amazing prophet and wise man, we don’t know for sure because so much of the truth was lost by no one during his lifetime, not him or his immediate flock, writing anything down when it actually happened.

Hope that clarifies things a little.

Best wishes and many blessings,

Denise