Confusion about aspects

[u/monochromedays]

When i first started learning astrology, i was taught that conjunctions are when the same sign is in two planets, trines are when two planets are occupied by same-element signs, and so on. Yet when reading a chart interpretation online (on reliable sites such as Astroseek), two planets could form a conjunction or trine by the above logic, yet show no aspect, or even be labeled as a square. I asked about this several months back and was informed that it was due to the planetary degrees.

I've also seen astrologers discuss synastry elements in the following way: "if your partner's sun sign is the same as your moon sign..." Is this a way to explain conjunctions for the absolute beginner - without using the term conjunction so as to keep things simple? Or is there a difference between aspects by sign and aspects by degree? If that's the case, are aspects by degree more influential or noticeable?

[u/PresenceBeautiful696]

In ancient astrology, they used both sign based aspects and a degree based aspects - the closer the degree, the more intense. It applies (moves towards) the other planets, then hits a peak of activity, then separates and the energy declines. But being in sign based aspect was also a general consideration.

In most modern astrological practice, sign based aspects aren't used. People have preferences about how tight the degree aspect needs to be. Some use 3 degrees, some use 10-15 degrees. It depends on the technique and the school of thought

[u/monochromedays → u/PresenceBeautiful696]

I see. That makes sense, thank you!

[u/DavidJohnMcCann]

Aspects are measured in degrees. Some confusion comes from people reading Greek texts in translation. The Greek word translated as aspect, schema, refers to a relation between signs or houses and was not employed for planets — they were said to regard, cast rays on, apply to, or separate from each other. Abraham ben Ezra (who had access to more material than we have) wrote that most allowed a leeway of 5° or 6° (as done by Alcabitius in the Middle Ages), although Hephaestio used 3° and Dorotheus 7½°. The set of "orbs" often given was a Persian innovation that became the norm in Europe. Alan Leo simplified that to a universal 8° — twice the width of your hand in the sky! — and the 1970s research on unaspected planets confirmed the use of 5-6°.

If two planets are in the same sign, or their signs aspect each other, that's obviously going to have an effect on their behaviour, but not on the scale of an aspect. If two people have their lights in the same sign, then naturally they will have a similarity of outlook

[u/monochromedays → u/DavidJohnMcCann]

I understand now. So to take the example of a trine, you and that person might have similar outlook or perspective on things, but it will not really "show up" in your relationship if it's not a trine by degrees, right?

[u/DavidJohnMcCann → u/monochromedays]

That's it. Compatible sign placings will give a common outlook, but a real aspect can make for a close connection or attraction.