No, your zodiac sign is not 2,000 years out of date

No, your zodiac sign is not 2,000 years out of date.
 
On 7 September 2025, the New York Times published an article entitled “Your Zodiac Sign is 2,000 Years Out of Date.”
To be honest, I stopped reading the New York Times years ago after they made a habit of publishing anti-trans op-ed pieces that have gone on to be submitted as reputable evidence in lawsuits deciding access to gender-affirming care throughout the United States. And because their coverage of the genocide in Gaza has been consistently biased in favor of Israel and against Palestinians who are being eradicated.

But my critiques of the New York Times aside, after several friends and clients messaged me asking what I thought of this article, I gave it a look. Articles like this one show up every year or so, and they generally demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the history and practice of astrology, namely that the signs of the zodiac are not the same thing as the constellations with which they share names. Many astrologers throughout that history and working today—including me, including most of the astrology apps you might read, and including most of the astrologers you might follow on social media—work with what is called the tropical zodiac. The tropical zodiac is a division of the path of the Sun as viewed from the Earth—called the ecliptic—into twelve segments, each measuring an equal 30 degrees. These signs are aligned with significant astronomical times throughout the cycle of the year, namely the equinox and solstice points. In the northern hemisphere, the spring equinox occurs when the path of the Sun crosses the celestial equator on its northern journey, and the hours of day and night are equal. The summer solstice occurs when the Sun has reached its maximum northern declination, and we experience the longest day of the year. The autumnal equinox occurs when the path of the Sun again crosses the celestial equator on its southern journey, and the hours of day and night are once again equal. And the winter solstice occurs when the Sun reaches its maximum southern declination, and we experience the shortest day of the year. The Sun’s journey through the sky relative to our observation here on Earth—which aligns with the cycle of the seasons throughout the year—is the basis for the tropical zodiac. In the tropical zodiac, the first degree of Aries is always aligned with the spring equinox in the northern hemisphere, the first degree of Cancer is always aligned with the summer solstice in the northern hemisphere, the first degree of Libra is always aligned with the autumnal equinox in the northern hemisphere, and the first degree of Capricorn is always aligned with the winter solstice in the northern hemisphere. So, from the Sun’s journey through the sky over the course of each year, we get the signs of the zodiac—the great circle of the sky divided into twelve equal signs, each with its own qualities derived from its place relative to the equinoxes and solstices, as well as the planets that are said to rule the sign, and elements that came to be associated with them. In other words, the significance of the signs of the tropical zodiac do not primarily derive their meaning from the constellations with which they share their names.
 
Constellations are groups of stars that have been seen as making a particular shape and then given names, most often associated with mythological figures or other cultural artefacts. Thousands of years ago, the tropical zodiac—described above—aligned roughly with twelve constellations through which the ecliptic—the path of the Sun—can be traced, from which the signs of the zodiac took their names. However, the signs of the tropical zodiac are not the same as these constellations. For one thing, these constellations vary dramatically in size, meaning that they have never been an even division of the sky into twelve segments of 30 degrees. Also, due to a phenomenon called precession—the wobble of the Earth’s axis of rotation over the course of 26,000 years, resulting in a gradual drift of the equinox and solstice points at a rate of about 1 degree every 72 years relative to the backdrop of the stars—the signs of the tropical zodiac no longer align with the constellations with which they share their names. Astrologers have known about this phenomenon for thousands of years. Hipparchus wrote about precession in the second century BCE, and Claudius Ptolemy wrote explicitly about using the tropical zodiac—not the constellations themselves—in the second century CE. The primary confusion that articles like the one published this week perpetuate is a misunderstanding of the difference between the signs of the tropical zodiac—which are tied to the cycle of the seasons and anchored to the equinox and solstice points—and the constellations with which they share names. Articles like this also somehow assume that astrologers don’t know anything about this distinction or the phenomenon of precession, which is an error.

It is worth noting that different astrological traditions work may with different zodiacs. The tropical zodiac which I have described above is the primary zodiac used throughout a tradition of astrology that emerged from the synthesis of Mesopotamian and Egyptian astrologies by the first century BCE. However, there is also what is called the sidereal zodiac, which is an abstract or symbolic division of the constellations themselves into twelve equal segments of 30 degrees, keeping the signs of the zodiac anchored to particular stars in the constellations. The sidereal zodiac has been the zodiac in use in India for thousands of years, a tradition that works with the fixed stars themselves as a primary system of reference. The development and practice of multiple zodiacs anchored in different systems of reference can also contribute to misunderstanding and confusion—especially for those who are not students or practitioners of astrology.

All of this is to say: if you or the astrologer with whom you are working or following online are using the tropical zodiac, then the signs in which your Sun, Moon, and other planets are located is based on the cycle of the seasons, not their relationships with the constellations. Regardless of precession, the signs in which the Sun, Moon, and other planets were located at the time of your birth will be calculated in reference to the 30-degree equal divisions of the ecliptic, anchored to the contemporary equinox and solstice points. It's also perhaps worth noting here that even the language of "your zodiac sign" is reductive if not misleading, most likely referring to your "Sun sign." But in fact, every chart includes every sign of the zodiac, and while the Sun can be an important consideration in a birth chart, you will have planets placed in a number of different signs and houses placed in all of the signs of the zodiac—and all of these factors are part of describing the story of the life you are living.
 
This recent article somehow names many of these factors—the range of different sizes of the constellations, the phenomenon of precession, Hipparchus’ observation of this phenomena, even a vague suggestion of a distinction between the signs of the zodiac and the constellations—while completely misunderstanding or misrepresenting the basis of the tropical zodiac. It’s disappointing that such a widely circulated media outlet would publish an article that is somehow well-researched in some ways while also misrepresenting its central topic—namely the practice of astrology.