Hi there! I'm just new to the board.

I've been studying the myths associated with the signs and right now I'm bothered with a certain connection if I may call it that. Scorpio is traditionally associated with Pluto. Scorpio and the planet Pluto deals with destruction of the self to recreate, ergo self-transformation, with the Phoenix myth associated with it. The Phoenix is also associated the sun gods Ra (Egypt) and Phoebus Apollo (Greek). And I find it intriguing that Apollo came from a root word that meant "to destroy." Apollo has many myths that are concerned with destroying something and rebuilding something (e.g. the Pythian monster and the city and temple of the Pythian oracle that was rebuilt after that).

There's also a planet (which has not yet been discovered yet) named Apollo which is closely linked with the current rulership of Venus over both Taurus and Libra. Will the discovery of Apollo signal a co-rulership of Taurus or of Libra? I gravitate more to Taurus since the Apollo and Pluto myths will correspond with the Taurus-Scorpio axis.

Am I just over-reading things? What do you think?

Greetings Dan

First, the traditional ruler of Scorpio was Mars. Pluto was given rulership of Scorpio after it's discovery. Personally I find there is still a strong Mars element in the Scorpio nature. But that is a longer post.

The main point of this reply is about using mythological sources to fill in the nature of astrological influences. The 5 historical planets, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn were all named after traditional gods. However, the names of each of these planets were given because these where the influences that best represented the the nature of the planet.
With the advent of the telescope, modern astronomy has had to name a great many objects. Astronomers have found thousands of asteriods, and a dozen new Centaurs are being discovered each year. Many of these new bodies have yet to be given official names yet but the naming process has nothing to do with any possible astrological influence. Using the mythological heritage of these new names could prove very problematic. What would happen is say a new Planetiod was named "Popeye". Would this new planetiod then be said to govern the eating of green leafy veggies; the attraction to women with vey flat chests; the willingness to get in knock-down drag-out fights with big burly men? To me, if there is an astrological influence in any of these new bodies, they need to be studied and learned, not pulled from the happenstance of names pulled out of dusty mythological text books. Enough evidence has now been accumlated about Uranus, Neptune and Pluto to have a reasonable confidence in their astrological natures. Speculation is all fine and well, but it doesn't replace good solid research gain from well documented case study.

Ben