Before we get to the ten astrologers, one name must be mentioned immediately — Carl Gustav Jung. He is not on this list because he was never an astrologer. But without him, almost none of these ten would exist in their current form. We discussed Why Jung Studied Astrology in a separate article. Here, we pick up where he left off.
Who are the ten? This is a serious question, and serious people may differ in their answers. This list is not of the “most famous”, nor the “most glorious”, nor the “most cited in the popular press”. These are the ten who shaped — literally, technically, and pedagogically — the astrology we live with today. If you read serious astrological literature, you read them. If you work with a modern astrologer, they are in their school. If you interpret a natal chart psychologically, you think with their tools.
The list is thematically grouped — by schools, not by rank. We start with the classical foundations, move through the transitional modern period, and arrive at the 20th-century psychological school and contemporary synthesis. The tone is serious but not academic. The goal is to gain a working understanding of the field — who's who, what they wrote, and why they are important. After this article, you will be able to delve into any astrological book and know which tradition it belongs to.
Classical Foundations
Before we talk about modern astrology, we must acknowledge the three who made it possible. Without them, none of what follows would exist.
Claudius Ptolemy (c. 100-170 CE)
Ptolemy was an astrologer, astronomer, geographer, and mathematician from Alexandria, who lived in the 2nd century CE. What he achieved in his lifetime was monumental — he systematized the entire astrological tradition inherited from Babylon, Egypt, and the Hellenistic world, into a single work: “Tetrabiblos” (literally “Four-Book Work”).
Why is he important? Because “Tetrabiblos” is the foundational textbook of astrology for the next 1500 years. From Roman astrologers through medieval Arabs, to Renaissance Europeans — everyone read Ptolemy. When a modern astrologer talks about “planetary rulers of signs”, about “aspects”, about a “house system” — they are using a system that Ptolemy codified.
Ptolemy did not have a modern psychological framework. He wrote in an era when astrology was a technical tool for prediction — of wars, harvests, royal destinies. But the technique he created remained. And everything that followed honors him, even when disagreeing with him.
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
Kepler is known as an astronomer — he discovered the three laws of planetary motion, which are still studied in physics today. Less known is that Kepler was also a professional astrologer. He drew natal charts for the imperial court, created horoscopes for many historical figures (including Wallenstein, the general of the Thirty Years' War), and wrote several astrological treatises.
Why is he important? Because Kepler was the first scientific reformer of astrology. He believed that most traditional astrological techniques were superstition and tried to build a new, rational astrology based on Pythagorean harmonic principles. He introduced minor aspects into astrology — quintile, biquintile, sesquiquadrate — based on mathematical division of the circle.
Kepler is the paradigmatic example of a person who is both a scientific revolutionary and a serious astrologer. This is exactly the opposite of the popular opposition “science versus astrology”. For Kepler, the two were not opposite — they were one and the same attempt to understand the structure of the cosmos.
William Lilly (1602-1681)
Lilly was an English astrologer whose book “Christian Astrology” (1647) is the pinnacle of classical horary astrology. Horary means a technique for answering specific questions by drawing an astrological chart for the moment the question is asked (not for the moment of birth).
Why is he important? Because Lilly preserved and systematized all horary and electional (choosing the most favorable moment) astrology at a time when it was on the verge of disappearing from Europe. After him, for about 250 years, horary astrology was literally forgotten in the West. Only in the 20th century — thanks to astrologers like Olivia Barclay and Robert Hand — did it revive, always following his textbooks.
Lilly was also the first to make “Christian Astrology” available in English (not in Latin, which was the academic language until then). This was pedagogically revolutionary — he democratized astrology.
The Transition to the Modern Era
After Lilly, astrology entered a long period of decline in Europe — from the late 17th to the late 19th century. Only at the beginning of the 20th century did it begin to revive, and under a new ideological sign — psychological. The two authors in this section are those who made the transition.
Alan Leo (1860-1917)
Leo was an English astrologer (born William Frederick Allan, using a pseudonym after his zodiac sign — Leo). He was the first astrologer to formulate the central thesis of modern astrology: “character is destiny”.
Why is he important? Because this sentence overturned a millennia-old tradition. Before Leo, astrology was predictive — it predicted events. Leo shifted the focus to character — what the natal chart describes about the person themselves, not what will happen to them. This was the first major step towards psychologization.
Leo wrote dozens of books — “Esoteric Astrology” (1913), “The Art of Synthesis”, “The Progressed Horoscope” — which together formed a whole new paradigm. He founded the Astrological Lodge of London, which still exists today. Without him, the subsequent psychological astrologers — especially Rudhyar — would not have had fertile ground.
Dane Rudhyar (1895-1985)
Rudhyar was born Daniel Chennevière in Paris, later emigrated to the USA and adopted the name Rudhyar (from Sanskrit). He was simultaneously a philosopher, composer, poet, and astrologer — a rarely combined intellectual personality of the 20th century.
Why is he important? Because he is the founder of humanistic astrology. In “The Astrology of Personality” (1936) — published while Jung was still alive, and directly inspired by him — Rudhyar declared that astrology is not about predicting fate, but about self-knowledge. The natal chart describes the direction of psychological development, not fate. The Sun is the goal of individuation. The Moon is the starting point.
Rudhyar literally translated Jungian psychology into astrological tools. Before him, astrology was a “technical art”. After him, it became a “psychological tool”. The entire subsequent generation of astrologers — Arroyo, Greene, Sasportas — honor him as their intellectual father.
He wrote over 30 books, founded “The Astrological Review” magazine, and remained an active teacher and author until his death in 1985. His name is little known outside astrological circles — but within the field, he is a central figure.
The Psychological School
This is the heart of modern astrology. Four authors, all working within the framework that Rudhyar established. They are the most influential living or recently deceased astrologers in the world. If you read modern astrological literature, you read them.
Stephen Arroyo (born 1946)
Arroyo is an American astrologer-psychologist who published his first book — “Astrology, Psychology and the Four Elements” — in 1975. This book received the “Astrological Book of the Year” award and remains one of the most widely read astrological books to this day.
Why is he important? Because Arroyo translated Jungian theory into accessible astrological practice. He writes clearly, systematically, without esoteric jargon. The amateur can read Arroyo and understand. This is pedagogical heroism — before him, psychological astrology was accessible only to specialists.
His main works: “Astrology, Psychology and the Four Elements” (1975), “Astrology, Karma & Transformation” (1978), “Relationships and Life Cycles” (1979). All three are mandatory for a modern astrologer.
Liz Greene (born 1946)
Greene is a British astrologer-psychologist who, along with Howard Sasportas, founded the London Centre for Psychological Astrology in 1981. This center became the epicenter of psychological astrology for the entire Western world. Thousands of astrologers passed through its courses over the next forty years.
Why is she important? Because Greene writes the deepest psychological analyses of individual planets in modern astrology. “Saturn: A New Look at an Old Devil” (1976) — the only study that transformed Saturn from the “bad planet” into a central psychological force. “Relating” (1977) for synastry. “The Astrological Neptune” (1996) for idealizations and illusions.
Greene is also a Jungian analyst — trained in Zurich, at the Jung Institute. She literally brings Jung into astrology at a level unattainable by most other authors.
Howard Sasportas (1948-1992)
Sasportas was a British astrologer-psychologist, co-founder — along with Greene — of the London Centre. His book “The Twelve Houses” (1985) is the standard for psychological understanding of the astrological houses. Before it, the houses were usually described superficially. After it, every serious astrologer reads Sasportas.
Why is he important? Because Sasportas did something rare — he combined depth and accessibility. His books are easy to read but pedagogically dense. Besides “The Twelve Houses”, he wrote “The Gods of Change” (1989) — one of the best studies of the outer planets (Uranus, Neptune, Pluto) in the natal chart.
Sasportas died prematurely in 1992, at the age of 44, from an HIV-related illness. This was a serious loss for the field — he was at the peak of his intellectual power. But his books remain.
Melanie Reinhart (born 1944)
Reinhart is a British astrologer who works at the London Centre with Greene and Sasportas. She is the most important author for Chiron in modern astrology. Her book “Chiron and the Healing Journey” (1989) transformed Chiron from a little-known asteroid into a central psychological tool.
Why is she important? Because Reinhart unites astrology with the wounded healer theory — a concept that Jung developed, but which became a bridge between the two fields only through her work. Without Reinhart, Chiron would have remained a technical curiosity in the natal chart. After her, it is a central element in modern psychological interpretation.
The Contemporary Synthesis
The two authors in this last section represent the contemporary synthesis — a combination of psychological depth with technical precision. They are less known to the general public, but within the field, they are fundamental.
Bill Tierney (1942-2005)
Tierney was an American astrologer whose book “Dynamics of Aspect Analysis” (1983) is the standard for psychological understanding of aspects. He did something no one had done before him — he translated Jung's theory of integrating opposites into a detailed theory of astrological aspects.
Why is he important? Because Tierney declared a radical thesis — aspects are not “good” or “bad”. They are easy or difficult, and the difficult ones are more important for development. Trines provide gifts that often go undeveloped. Squares and oppositions create tension that drives psychological individuation. This is a directly Jungian position, translated into technique.
Besides “Dynamics of Aspect Analysis”, Tierney also wrote “Alive and Well with Pluto” — a study of Pluto in the natal chart, which remains one of the most profound on the topic of transformation in modern astrology.
Robert Hand (born 1942)
Hand is an American astrologer who does something unique in the contemporary field — he is a bridge between traditional and modern astrology. In the 1990s, he led the Hindsight project, which translated ancient astrological texts (from Greek, Latin, Arabic) into English. This revived an entire lost tradition and made it accessible to modern astrologers.
Why is he important? Because without Hand, modern astrology would have been only psychological — cut off from its own roots. He brought back into the field the Hellenistic and medieval techniques that Lilly preserved, but which were subsequently forgotten. The result is a “revival of traditional astrology” — a movement from the 90s to today, which enriches psychological astrology with classical technical precision.
Hand wrote dozens of books — “Planets in Transit” (1976), “Planets in Composite” (1975), “Horoscope Symbols” (1981) — all mandatory for a serious astrologer. He is also among the few contemporary authors who work at a level comparable to the classical foundations.
What Unites These Ten
After all these biographies, the natural question is — what truly unites these ten?
One answer. Each of them changed how astrology is viewed — not just what is viewed. Ptolemy systematized it. Kepler brought it mathematical rigor. Lilly democratized it. Leo began its psychologization. Rudhyar transformed it into a tool for self-knowledge. Arroyo made it accessible. Greene brought it Jungian depth. Sasportas updated the houses. Reinhart integrated Chiron. Tierney revolutionized aspects. Hand restored its roots.
A second answer. Each of them works at a level that cannot be read superficially. They do not write newspaper horoscopes. They do not make zodiac predictions for the general public. They write for the field — for people who already know the basics and want to delve deeper. This is why their names are less known than those of popular TV astrologers.
A third, and perhaps most important, answer. Each of them is a pedagogue in the most serious sense — writing, teaching, training the next generation. The London Centre of Greene and Sasportas has created thousands of professional astrologers. Arroyo has led seminars for decades. Reinhart continues to teach to this day. Hand works in academic institutions and has lectured worldwide. This is a field that is passed down from teacher to student. These ten are the most important teachers.
If you want to seriously get to know modern astrology, start with one of them. The recommended sequence for a beginner is as follows — Arroyo for general foundations, then Greene for depth, then Sasportas for houses, and Reinhart for Chiron. If you are interested in history, add Rudhyar. If you want technical precision, read Tierney. If you want ancient roots, go to Hand. This is working knowledge, not a list to memorize.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why isn't Nostradamus on the list?
Because Nostradamus was not an astrologer in the modern sense. He was a prophet who used astrology as part of a broad occult practice, along with other methods of divination. His “Prophecies” (1555) are literary and esoteric, not astrological. In the modern field of serious astrology, he plays no role — neither technically nor pedagogically.
Why are there no older astrologers than Ptolemy?
Because ancient astrologers before Ptolemy — Babylonian priests, Egyptian decanates, early Greek astrologers — did not leave sufficiently detailed written works to form a stable school. Ptolemy is the first whose work survives in its entirety and forms a basis for all subsequent generations. Before him, astrology existed, but as an oral and fragmented tradition.
Which astrologer is best for beginners?
Stephen Arroyo. His book “Astrology, Psychology and the Four Elements” is written specifically for people who want a serious approach without esoteric jargon. He is pedagogically one of the most accessible authors in the field, without sacrificing depth. After Arroyo, the natural next step is Liz Greene.
What about Vedic (Indian) astrology?
Vedic astrology (Jyotish) is a separate tradition with its own great authors — Parashara, Varahamihira, Kalidasa, and contemporaries like B. V. Raman and K. N. Rao. It operates on a different zodiacal principle (sidereal instead of tropical) and has different techniques. This list is only for Western astrology — the tradition we follow in Europe and Bulgaria. For a serious overview of Vedic authors, we would need a separate article.
Are there living astrologers who will be on such a list in 50 years?
Possibly. Among contemporary authors making serious contributions — Demetra George (asteroids), Nick Dules (horary), Charles Obert (Hellenistic), Bernadette Brady (fixed stars). But an astrologer enters a “foundational” list decades after their work is published, when it is seen whether it endures or is forgotten. Therefore, this list does not include the most contemporary names. In 30-40 years, the list will look different.