My problem with the Celtic astrology, as presented by Graham Phillips, is that it contradicts other traditional systems reputed to be Celtic astrology. In addition, the Tree Oghams which seems to be the basis of Celtic divination does not coincide with the Tree Zodiac as constructed by Mr. Hancock. Therefore for me, comparing the two systems (Celtic and Chinese) is like comparing apples and oranges. Trees, that grow in particular climates, have no point of connection with traditional Chinese systems of elements and animals.
Furthermore in examining Mr. Phillips’s Tree Zodiac, I find that it has little in common with traditional Celtic lore. He includes trees that are not a part of that lore, and excludes others. He leaves out traditional trees such as willow but includes maple, a non-traditional tree. But by itself, the Tree Zodiac is well constructed for an astrological system.
Again, I tested the Tree Zodiac against myself, my brother, and girlfriend, since we share the same birthday. According to the Tree Zodiac, we are Buckthorns. Because Mr. Phillips constructed his system with a wide sample of people, we are depicted accurately. We are entertaining but fussy. My mother-in-law, who was born earlier in the month, is a Chestnut. Although she loved reading, she was also a social person (not a Chestnut characteristic but a Buckthorn one).
My problem in learning Celtic astrology is that, as I understand it, it really does not exist in a usable form. Mr. Phillips’s Tree Zodiac is fun and interesting to learn, but to me is not Celtic. My other question in learning the Tree Zodiac is that since trees are climate specific: how do you work out future events.
Daugherty, Michealin, The Celtic Tree Calendar, 2006, Ireland’s Own, 12 Mar. 2009
Murray, Liz and Colin, The Celitc Tree Oracle, Eddison-Sadd, London, 1988.
Phillips, Graham, The Tree Zodiac, 2006, The Official Graham Phillips Website, 13 Mar. 2009
Copyright: Virginia Carper, 2009