Latitude is the other half of astrology, which up untill now, has been largely ignored. The positions of all of your planets in astrology are measured in longitude or east-west across the ecliptic, but latitude, or north-south of the ecliptic adds a new dimension to all of this, especially when doing astro-locality.

I've often stared wonderingly at the twelve ascendant divisions of my astrolocality map and suspected something was missing here. How can a certain sign rising be the same in the northern hemisphere as it is in the southern? If longitude can be divided into twelve signs or slices on the globe then why not latitude? This would give 144 sections to deal with instead of twelve, or each sign rising would have twelve facets or levels to it. It would also place the planets, stars, etc. in their truer positions location-wise and add more meaning to each.

First I had to take a refresher on celestial mechanics which can be quite daunting. Great circles, planes, and spheres and how they interrelate is what gives us our astrology as we know it today. Two of the most basic or important were the dynamics between the Sun and Earth whose intersecting planes gives us our zodiac.

The ecliptic or Sun's apparent path is a belt of some 16 degrees thick(8° north and 8° south) where all the planets including our Earth orbit. Only Pluto and the dwarfs(as well as most stars) deviate from this belt. Wheareas east-west on the ecliptic is measured as LONGITUDE(in degrees), north-south of the ecliptic is measured as LATITUDE(in degrees). So planets in longitude and latitude in astrology refer to their position with respect to the sun's plane or ecliptic as seen from Earth. How this all translates to terrestial co-ordinates is another matter.

The Earth has its own flat disc or plane at the equator which extends outward and forms the basis of its celestial sphere -upon which all celestial objects are measured. Because of the Earth's tilt, it's equatorial plane intersects with the solar plane(ecliptic) and gives us our zodiacal starting point(0° Aries or the vernal equinox). Every planet has its own unique tilt and therefore zodiacal starting point. Exact 30° segments are measured from this equinox point or plane intersection giving us the twelve zodiac signs. The stellar constellations have nothing to do with the actual signs of the zodiac even though they roughly coincided over 2000 years ago.

How the solar or ecliptic zodiac(measured in longitude and latitude) overlaps onto the terrestial sphere(measured in right ascension and declination) is what astrology is all about. Because of the Earth's 23.5° tilt, the ecliptic zodiac will be projected fairly evenly or uniformly near the equator but will become increasingly twisted as it goes into the higher latitudes. This is where right ascension and declination come in. Right ascension measures from the vernal equinox along the Earth's equator in an eastward direction using the 24 hour clock, and declination measures north or south of the earth's equator using degrees, minutes, and seconds. RA and Declination is how everything is measured in terms of the Earth and its projected celestial sphere.

So there are two spheres or realities -1.the solar or ecliptic sphere/zodiac measured in longitude(east-west) and latitude(north-south), and 2. -how it overlaps or translates into the terrestial/celestial sphere measured in right ascension(east-west) and declination(north-south). Most good astrology programs will list all four co-ordinates for the planets and more, but showing it all visually is another matter. In this essay we will concentrate on the ecliptic plane and latitude in particular.

The longitudinal position of a planet is what gives it its sign and degree placement in the zodiac so that Mars at 3° Aries is Mars at 3° longitude east of the vernal equinox, but what about latitude? The latitude for Mars at 3° Aries can be a few degrees north or south of the ecliptic. Does this make any difference to the interpretation. I do not believe that a planet north of the ecliptic has the same effect as a planet south of the ecliptic. Much more so for Pluto and the dwarfs, and especially the stars which can go all the way to 70°+ north or south of the ecliptic. I feel latitude has(or should have) as much importance in astrology as longitude. It is the missing dimension in an otherwise "flat" or one-dimensional Earth-Heaven astrology.

Planets at the same degree of latitude(or declination) are called parallels and are said to work much like conjunctions while planets at an equal distance from the ecliptic(or equator) are said to be in contra-parallel and work much like an opposition, but is this all there is to it? If longitude can be divided into 12 equal parts, why not latitude? In the ecliptic scheme this would translate to 7.5° north or south of the ecliptic plane as the first or solar zone(where most of the planets are located), 7.5 to 22.5° north or south as the second zone, 22.5 to 37.5° as the third zone, 37.5 to 52.5 as the fourth zone, 52.5 to 67.5° as the fifth, 67.5 to 82.5° as the sixth, and 82.5 to 90° for the polar area. The zodiacal significance of each of these zones has not been determined, as far as I am aware of.

Or maybe latitude should have seven zones, with the ecliptic, tropic, temperate and polar zones as divisors? In ancient Sumerian astrology, latitude was divided into as little as three zones; the Anu zone from 30° South to 30° North and its stars and constellations, the Enlil zone or 30° to 90° North, and the Ea zone or 30° to 90° South. The Sumerian division of the Earth and Sky was the basis for three-dimensional astrology.

current two dimensional(flat) astrology

Sumerian three dimensional Earth/Sky depiction

Note: The declination of a planet or star corresponds to actual geographical latitude, so that Mars at 3 degrees north declination equates with Mars at 3 degrees north geographical latitude. This works like a paran and is where the native's Mars will be at it's strongest latitudinally speaking. The RA or right ascension point along that latitude will of course pinpoint the longitudinal influence as well. Most of the known planets have declinations within the tropical zones. Pluto and the dwarfs have more latitude and the stars can be anywhere -which makes for a fascinating study. Free astrology programs like RIYAL give excellent coordinate tables for all of these objects and more.

modern astronomical major latitide divisions

proposed latitude/declination grid

Whichever system of division is used, the inclusion of latitude in astrology would present a more accurate locational depiction of planetary and stellar objects as well as giving more depth or meaning to each placement. It would add a whole new dimension to astrology -especially locational astrology.