In your PERSONAL experience, is the composite chart accurate?

[Revigres]

I think the title of the post says it all !

Give your opinion. Do you find the Composite Chart to be reveal the meaning of your relationships?

[Draco]

No. I find composite charts insignificant.

No doubt I'll ruffle everyone's feathers again with my logic, but there ya go.

I understand that in astrology, being an art, and genuine astrologers being artists, the concern is over that which is 'significant', not that which is deemed 'accurate', leave that to the astronomers and mathematicians, so I found that I could only answer the question in terms of what I find significant.

I much prefer relationship, or 'Davidson' charts. A composite is not a real horoscope, it's a chart, but not a real horoscope. A relationship chart represents a real configuration that actually took place in the skies around us at a specific time and place on earth, this in itself makes it somehow more valid to me.

In a composite, we get configurations that are simply not possible, such as the Sun being in square with Venus for example, which can never happen, and the very fact that certain configurations can never actually happen tell us something about the nature of the relationship between those planets.

It is very perplexing to me that in the relationship section we see nothing but composites, composites, composites, never any relationship charts.

A relationship chart, takes the middle time and the middle coordinates between two person's birth place and times, and so it symbolises where these two people 'meet in the middle', in terms of time and space, not simply in terms of space alone, and only the middle spacial distance between planets in the charts, not space in terms of the actual, real space between the two people in the physical world.

In the relationship chart, the older party takes the ascendant, as this person will already have been alive at the time when the horoscope that the relationship chart represents was actualised. So this older person takes the ascendant, the younger the descendant, and we can differentiate between them in this way.

This is very interesting in the case of twins, where we can differentiate between them quite clearly in seeing the first born in the ascendant, and the second in the descendant.

Relationship charts represent a real horoscope, the composite chart does not, and features impossible configurations between planets, which are impossible because they tell us something about the nature of the relationship between those planets. I think that the obsession with composite charts, is a symptom of the material, mathematical and therefore anti-spiritual, anti-astrological, obsession of our era.

[Neptune Rising]

I find this fascinating. I never heard of the Davidson chart method before now, so I compared a composite chart with a Davidson chart on Astrodienst. I found the North and South node swapped places, and the planets have changed. It gives a whole new meaning to the chart. Although I'm unsure what the difference is between 'corrected' and 'uncorrected' charts.

Neptune

[Draco]

Hi Neptune.

You know, I was apprehensive about reading this post, as I was sure someone would come along to crack me over the head with a mallet for criticising the efficacy of composite charts, which I'm sure is to come, but it turns out you're intrigued.

You may not have heard about Davidson charts, because everyone seems to focus almost exclusively upon composites, which are not even horoscopes.

Although I'm unsure what the difference is between 'corrected' and 'uncorrected' charts.

Yes! This is exactly what I'd like to know! There does not appear to be any difference between the two as far as I'm aware. I'd like to know the answer to this too

[Draco]

The difference between the 'corrected' and 'uncorrected' charts appear to make a four minute difference to the ascendant, that's all.

[wintersprite1]

I like composite charts as a beginning point of reference. To use the chart as the end all, would be likened to basing all natal astrology to just the Sun sign. I try to remember the composite is really a midpoint chart... and not one that shows midpoints between various aspects and planets, only the planet to same planet aspect and that being on the closest midpoint and not the opposite (but just as important) one.

I believe to read a composite and say, "that is it..." would be no different than to lump all Sun signs as the same in a formula manner. I would really like to think that no one takes the information of a composite and make life decisions based off of it. That would kind of take it back to the I am an Aries and you are a Virgo, we can not get along type thinking.

TK

[wilsontc]

TK,

I like the idea of mid-point composite charts, since I like to look at charts as "energies" a person has. A mid-point composite chart simply indicates that, when these two energies of each person "meet in the middle" this is the energy that results. To me, that makes more sense than making up a fake date, place, and time of birth (Davidson charts). But actually I don't use composites that much. My experience has been that very few couples operate so that they "meet in the middle" with their energies until they work out all the issues in their synastry charts. So I focus on synastry charts and only look at composites for couples who have been together a LONG time.

Compositely,

Tim

[Neptune Rising]

Originally Posted by Draco

The difference between the 'corrected' and 'uncorrected' charts appear to make a four minute difference to the ascendant, that's all.

Thanks Draco.

One of the things I love about this forum is the varying opinions on different things I would never have thought of. It's quite mind opening.

Neptune

[DeeBo]

I haven't found much significance with composit charts.

not yet anyway.

D

[Girl_from_Jupiter]

So far, I haven't found composite charts to be very accurate. When I take a closer look at a relationship, I actually look at the synastry chart first and then at the Davidson chart. It's been my personal experience that the Davidson is much more accurate. From a logical point of view, the way the composite chart is calcualted doesn't make any sense to me at all.

[Howl]

Hmmm, good question. Not sure yet.

Draco, was interested to read that you can assign the older party the ascendant in a Davidson chart. In a previous interpretation I got, I wondered why the interpreter seemed to assume that I related to venus, and my partner to mars. I thought they were assigning me a planet according to gender, but now that I see the logic they were using, I might take the reading a little more seriously and look again.

All I can say at first look is this:

In synastry we have an exact opposition between Aries Moon (him) and Libra Saturn (me). I see this as significant because these planets rule our respective seventh house cusps (I have Capricorn descendant, he has Cancer descendant). The rulers of our descendants are in opposition.

The davidson chart sets me up as a Libra ascendant, and him as the Aries descendant, on the same degree of Aries/Libra as the Moon/Saturn opposition we have in synastry (18').

That is a 'coincidence', isn't it? There's no mathematical reason why the Davidson ascendant/descendant axis would correlate exactly to our natal Moon/Saturn synastry, is there?

[madribub]

Question: what's the difference between synastry and composite charts?

[Lissa]

I find the concept between composite charts to be quite accurate,and my experience tells me that progressed composites are even more accurate.

So I had this boyfriend of mine and we had a composite chart where Venus,the Sun and Jupiter were exalted,Mars and Saturn dignified and a kite poiting at Jupiter.When we first started everything seemed to be going like in the composite,and we had a typical teenage fairy-tale start(quite nice since we're both teenagers lol),but we simply didn't last long.And that was reflected in our progressed composite where Venus and Mars were debilitated and the Sun was also out of it's exaltation,with no kites in the chart but only some t-squares.

The concept between composite charts is actually quite nice:the composite joins each person's planets in their midpoint,showing the point where the two come together as one.

Sounds quite romantic when you think about it that way.

[Liquid Green]

I have only really had one experience with composites......
the only guy i have ever loved and myself.....
I have never really had a go at reading them myself but got a free reading of the composite, on line. I must say it touched on things that really rang true.....our relationship was kind of "open", something that was mentioned in the report. We also grew alot from the relationship and both of us changed psychologically...it also mentioned that. Of course thats what happens in most relationships and they also feel fated.....but the mention of our "openness" was the bit that really made me somewhat believe in them. Dont know....I would be reluctant to base any beliefs on something that i have only personally encountered once....
If i could get into another relationship though, I would be happy to give them ago again!

I have to say, i have never looked at a davidson chart.

Will go and have a look........

[wilsontc]

madribub,

Synastry charts are about each person in the relationship while composite charts are about the relationship itself. There are two main types of composite charts: the midpoint chart created by finding the midpoints betweeen PLANETS in each person's chart, and the Davison chart created by finding the midpoint in SPACE between each person's chart. More about these charts here:
http://www.bobmarksastrologer.com/re...vidson26.0.htm

Better late than never,

Tim

[rahu]

i find composites valid.i find it amusing when composites are attacked as not being "real".we are dealing with astrology ,where everything from why it works to what it means is hypothetical in the first place.composites are a bit simpler to interpret than synastry as one does not have duplicate elemements. if A's venus is square B's mars is good,does B's venus square A's saturn negate the previous aspect.i also find that composites respond to transit timelines as well as natals do.
rahu

[Liquid Green]

I looked at the davidson charts at astrodienst and find them as amusing as the composites......to pick a date that is the middle of the two person birthdates is as bizarre as the composite chart.....
How 1 can be ok, and the other not, i find hard to understand......My guess is it depends on what you want the answer to show!......no doubt we all just try to find the answer we want.......objectivitity then just goes out the window!
If anyone can enlighten me, when they are both not really real charts(based on an actual time), that would be great.....................

Maybe i should just stick with synastry!

[moondirt]

I think that it is! This is why: Usually when I meet someone, if I do a composite chart between us, I find hardly any aspects at all or maybe good aspects but not a lot of them. However, when I do a composite chart between my mom and me and my dad and me there are TONS of aspects. In the composite chart between me and my dad there are saturn aspects to almost every planet and point which is interesting because our synastry together doesn't have many saturn aspects. I can definatley relate to the saturn, plus he IS my dad which is saturn symbolism, right?

Another thing I'd like to point out about the composite chart is that just because you have good composite chart and good synastry with someone doesn't mean you'll have a connection with them I've found, rather, if you DO have a good connection with someone you usually have important synastry and composite. Plus, the aspects don't necessarily have to be considered "good" to be important.

[MaeMae]

Originally Posted by wilsontc

TK,

I like the idea of mid-point composite charts, since I like to look at charts as "energies" a person has. A mid-point composite chart simply indicates that, when these two energies of each person "meet in the middle" this is the energy that results. To me, that makes more sense than making up a fake date, place, and time of birth (Davidson charts). But actually I don't use composites that much. My experience has been that very few couples operate so that they "meet in the middle" with their energies until they work out all the issues in their synastry charts. So I focus on synastry charts and only look at composites for couples who have been together a LONG time.

Compositely,

Tim

Early on in my learning about composites, I would rush into making a composite and look at it as a holy grail. It was only after years of hit and miss that I came to understand that the composite is best used in relationships that are at least a year in solidity or more. It's after the "rush" that we start to understand the kinks and pinks of our relationships and a composite can show where and how those kinks and pinks can arise.

It is a 50-50 share of "me and you" that becomes "us." Though I have seen composites which directly, unmitigatingly, point to a one-sided relationship (look at a composite 6th house for example, where planets might cluster. The energies of one partner, or their needs or life situations, often hold precedence over the relationship to the detriment of the other partner, who is then the one placed in the "service" or ancillary role to the other.)

The composite Moon is crucial in relations, as it determines the tone and color of comfort the two have with another. I had a relationship with a man, his moon aquarius trine my moon gemini and both our sun's conjunct in aquarius, trining, conjuncting and sextiling our natal sun/moon/asc's. You'd think it would be smooth understanding, but our composite moon in low aries - square my natal mars, opposing his libra asc - we would bicker and argue and get in heated battles 75% of the time we were together.

Only a composite can point out this kind of dynamic.

[Seasoul]

Originally Posted by Draco

No. I find composite charts insignificant.

No doubt I'll ruffle everyone's feathers again with my logic, but there ya go.

I understand that in astrology, being an art, and genuine astrologers being artists, the concern is over that which is 'significant', not that which is deemed 'accurate', leave that to the astronomers and mathematicians, so I found that I could only answer the question in terms of what I find significant.

I much prefer relationship, or 'Davidson' charts. A composite is not a real horoscope, it's a chart, but not a real horoscope. A relationship chart represents a real configuration that actually took place in the skies around us at a specific time and place on earth, this in itself makes it somehow more valid to me.

In a composite, we get configurations that are simply not possible, such as the Sun being in square with Venus for example, which can never happen, and the very fact that certain configurations can never actually happen tell us something about the nature of the relationship between those planets.

It is very perplexing to me that in the relationship section we see nothing but composites, composites, composites, never any relationship charts.

A relationship chart, takes the middle time and the middle coordinates between two person's birth place and times, and so it symbolises where these two people 'meet in the middle', in terms of time and space, not simply in terms of space alone, and only the middle spacial distance between planets in the charts, not space in terms of the actual, real space between the two people in the physical world.

In the relationship chart, the older party takes the ascendant, as this person will already have been alive at the time when the horoscope that the relationship chart represents was actualised. So this older person takes the ascendant, the younger the descendant, and we can differentiate between them in this way.

This is very interesting in the case of twins, where we can differentiate between them quite clearly in seeing the first born in the ascendant, and the second in the descendant.

Relationship charts represent a real horoscope, the composite chart does not, and features impossible configurations between planets, which are impossible because they tell us something about the nature of the relationship between those planets. I think that the obsession with composite charts, is a symptom of the material, mathematical and therefore anti-spiritual, anti-astrological, obsession of our era.

Dear Draco,

I am unsure if you are even still active here, but I found something interesting regarding the Davidson chart/Asc, Dsc positions:

My partner is the elder - Davidson Asc is in Virgo
I as the younger - Davidson Dsc is in Pisces

Now the interesting part: My natal moon is in Virgo, and my partner's natal moon is in Pisces.

I haven't looked at anything else in this chart, but I thought you, and perhaps others, may be interested to know this.

[fullmoonlibra]

Originally Posted by wintersprite1

I like composite charts as a beginning point of reference. To use the chart as the end all, would be likened to basing all natal astrology to just the Sun sign. I try to remember the composite is really a midpoint chart... and not one that shows midpoints between various aspects and planets, only the planet to same planet aspect and that being on the closest midpoint and not the opposite (but just as important) one.

I believe to read a composite and say, "that is it..." would be no different than to lump all Sun signs as the same in a formula manner. I would really like to think that no one takes the information of a composite and make life decisions based off of it. That would kind of take it back to the I am an Aries and you are a Virgo, we can not get along type thinking.

TK

Is synastry more evident than?
Me and my partner have lots of oppositions and squares in our synastry, but a beautiful grand trine in composite with sun conjunct venus in Cancer in tenth.
We do fight a lot (synastry: moon square moon, moon opposite mars, mars conjunct IC, other mars conjunct AC, sun opposite pluto..) But we can have a really fun time together with lots of love, care and compassion.