Monday, 6 April 2009

Princess Diana's death and the multi-composite chart

Diana's death sent astrologers all over the world into a frenzy. How could it not be so when she was such a prominent figure and much-loved by millions? The usual questions regarding such matters arose: Can death be astrologically predicted? Whether it can or not, is it ethically correct? Does the natal chart provide detailed information or, as Sue Thompkins put it, death is often shown in the charts of the ones close to the deceased? Whatever the case, astrologers examined Diana's chart thoroughly as well as her composite with Charles, but even though some more than interesting remarks were made, it seemed that astrology came up a little short. Nothing spectacular was found that could blow your mind away.
Diana, of course, had a full 8th house, which is the most obvious indication. But why did she die at that particular moment and shouldn't this be shown in her natal chart? Some people mentioned the eclipse that occurred the day following her death, others her progressed 8th house cusp, Joseph Crane used traditional methods to estimate her time of death based on the natal chart and ended up with the year 2000, three years, that is, after her actual death and, in general, a lot of useful ideas were put forward, but the vast majority of them could apply to any number of people without the same tragic consequences. It became clear that we needed something that would stand out, something strong enough that could not be easily disputed. I believe that one technique, capable of producing such amazing results in this case, is the multi-composite chart.
At the Astrodienst website they explain this technique in depth and, simply put, it's nothing more than a composite chart for more than two people. What one has to consider before he casts a multi-composite chart is what people to include in the chart and how many, depending on what one is trying to find out. I think in Diana's case, we should restrict ourselves to her nuclear family, that is, Charles and her two chidren, besides herself naturally, because in my mind those were the ones who were most affected by her loss. Her children lost their mother and Charles's marital situation changed forever. If it hadn't been for her death he would probably never have been able to marry Camilla, not to mention his personal feelings for the woman he once supposedly loved and had two children with. Here is the chart:

This chart has a Leo Sun conjunct Regulus, the most royal fixed star of all, trine Jupiter in its' own sign, Sagittarius, in the 10th house. You can't get more royal than that. This is a family that shines (Leo), unfortunately not for itself but for others (Sun in the 7th) in the most public way (Jupiter in the 10th). However, Jupiter forms a T-square with Pluto and Chiron, implying that there is a dark side lurking underneath this glamorous public image, an image that will be wounded in some time or other. The same goes for the Moon, very strong in Taurus, seeking stability and security, but its' efforts are constantly undermined by the Mars/Saturn conjunction in Scorpio, directly opposite. We've all heard the stories about Charles's love for Camilla, Diana's affairs with other people, her bulimia and so on. The Sun also squares Neptune in Scorpio, indicating that some sort of sacrifice has to be made and, again, that this family must serve the collective, something which has undoubtedly put some strain on it. Finally, and on the subject of Diana's death, Uranus (one of the chart rulers) is conjunct the cusp of the 8th house of death, meaning that something sudden and unexpected regarding literal or metaphorical death is bound to happen, especially when the 8th house ruler (Venus) is very weak and possibly dangerous (peregrine, in the 6th house, in a T-square with the Moon and Mars/Saturn). Saturn, the other chart ruler, is not in a very good condition either, close to the cusp of the 9th but in the 8th house and totally overpowered by Mars. A very strong chart indeed, with some very powerful aspects.
Diana died on the 31st of August, 1997, a little after midnight. At the time of death, transiting Uranus, that signifies death in this chart by being on the 8th house cusp, was making an exact square to the Moon, thereby triggering the very difficult T-square the Moon is making with Venus, the 8th house ruler, and Mars/Saturn and forming a grand cross with all these planets. This should be enough and we need not look any further, but bearing in mind that, however dramatic, this is only a transit and such heavy transits are not a rarity, we have no option but to go even deeper. By casting the progressed chart (made up of the four individual progressed charts) everything becomes clear.

At the time of death, the progressed Sun was conjunct natal Pluto. This is the sort of configuration that we would have expected to see in Diana's chart, but was lacking. Remember, Pluto is making a T-square with Chiron and Jupiter in the natal chart, which by progression had become even tighter, and this progressed aspect was happening right on the natal nodes. This, combined with the very important Uranus transit, which in the progressed chart had returned to its' natal position, would have made any astrologer advise extreme cautiousness, to say the least. Something was bound to happen to that family, something quite scary which would mark them for life. The chart, unfortunately, left little room for doubt.
I am most impressed by the accuracy of the multi-composite chart and I think it's evident what a powerful tool it can be, especially when you want to examine family demons and how they haunt each member by comparing it to the individual charts. It seems that it can bring to light things that appear vague in nativities. Give it a try.

No comments:

Post a Comment