Dec 11: Koch, Rajneesh, Lee, Onassis

[Jim Eshelman]

Koch, Robert. Dec 11, 1843, 11:45 PM LMT, Clausthal-Zellerfeld, Germany (B).
Rajneesh, Bhagwan Sri. Dec 11, 1931, 5:13 PM IST, Kutchwada, India [23N15, 77E23] (A).
Lee, Brenda. Dec 11, 1944, 3:24 PM CWT, Atlanta, GA (AA).
Onassis, Christina. Dec 11, 1950, 3:00 PM EST, New York, NY (AA).


BONUS:
Berlioz, Hector. Dec 11, 1803, 5:00 PM LMT, La Cote-St.-Andre, France (AA).
Born, Max. Dec 11, 1882, 3:30 AM LMT, Breslau, Poland (AA).
King, Anna-Kria. Dec 11, 1928,8:25 PM CST, Iowa City, IA (AA).

I'm intrigued that Max Born, an essential founder of quantum mechanics, not only has an engineering-mechanical biased chart, but has Moon in the degree (both in longitude and RA) of the Galactic Center.

[Jim Eshelman]

Onassis, Christina. Dec 11, 1950,3:00 PM EST, New York, NY (AA).

Christina Onassis is something of an astrological puzzle. For someone born into so much wealth, she had one of the most miserable, ill-fated of lives. I don't see it. (I'm not inclined to accept the ecliptical conjunction of Algol with her Asc, since these ecliptical angularities of stars haven't really held up historically; though that would otherwise be an easy answer.) Feel free to dig and tell me what I've missed; to me it just looks like the chart of an heiress. (I suspect the illness causing her death is indeed related to her background Mercury-Uranus square across Sagittarius-Gemini.)

[Patrick Machado]

Feel free to dig and tell me what I've missed; to me it just looks like the chart of an heiress.

Sun partile sextile-trine Neptune-Pluto. Mundanely, background Jupiter joins Mercury-Uranus, squaring them. And the Moon is afflicted by all three malefics, though not with very close orbs, but it's noteworthy.

I'm actually having more trouble seeing the heiress. Am I looking at the right chart? The Moon is 29º31′ Sagittarius, correct?

[Jim Eshelman]

My thoughts on these:

Sun partile sextile-trine Neptune-Pluto.

How would these account for the ill fate of her life? (Especially because they are static aspects.) - I would go with the Sun-Neptune if the negativity took the form of her own paralysis, inactivity, or diffusion, but it doesn't seem any such thing caused it.

Mundanely, background Jupiter joins Mercury-Uranus, squaring them.

Yes! - This aspect structure I take as one of the greatest of indications of good fortune, a mark of her privileged and blessed life. (Jupiter background isn't unusual for those who inherit money they didn't otherwise come into on their own; and, in any case, Saturn is even more background. The aspects tend to run with it in that case.)

And the Moon is afflicted by all three malefics, though not with very close orbs, but it's noteworthy.

This is probably the strongest indicator and, as you say, they aren't close. In fact, ecliptically Moon-Saturn is Class 3 - very wide - while mundanely it is Class 2 - wider than I tend to think is worth attention. This leaves Moon in moderate-orbed aspects to Mars and Neptune.

These aspects, if closer, are exactly the sort of thing that could cause the particular mix of family and health issues that plagued her, but it's hard to think that big of a deal with these orbs. - Of course, an entirely different interpretation is that these weaker afflictions to her Spoke mean mean that the hardships weren't all that hard - in the sense of "Boo hoo, poor little rich girl, your parents divorced and your four marriages didn't work out, and all you got were private schools, servants, and to become the richest woman in the world. Boo hoo." (There were worse things, of course, including somewhat early deaths of both parents plus her own very young death.)

I'm actually having more trouble seeing the heiress. Am I looking at the right chart? The Moon is 29º31′ Sagittarius, correct?

Yes. Moon in Sagittarius with two other planets is consistent with someone made for an aristocratic, privileged, and that stunning mundane Mercury-Jupiter-Uranus square you found are stand-outs - Jupiter square Uranus being only half a degree. This would normally mark someone with a surprisingly and unusually auspicious early life with much success in later endeavors.

[Patrick Machado]

How would these account for the ill fate of her life? (Especially because they are static aspects.)

Elsewhere, you said partile trines and sextiles tend to act more like hard aspects. Perhaps that shouldn't be overstated, but were it not for that consideration, I wouldn't have brought up this aspect structure.

Yes, diffusion, plus isolation or solitude, was what I considered: a lot (most?) of her troubles centered around her relationships, and that may have been at the core of her whole ordeal. Neptune-Pluto conditioning her anti-Venus, anti-Moon ego-center couldn't have helped the matter.

Yes! - This aspect structure I take as one of the greatest of indications of good fortune, a mark of her privileged and blessed life. (Jupiter background isn't unusual for those who inherit money they didn't otherwise come into on their own; and, in any case, Saturn is even more background. The aspects tend to run with it in that case.)

I hastily focused on the Jupiter piling up on the background Mercury-Uranus opposition, which you mentioned as a likely source of health vulnerability, possibly making things worse, but I see what you're saying. In any case, these three planets aren't acutely background, unlike (as you said) Saturn.

This is probably the strongest indicator and, as you say, they aren't close. In fact, ecliptically Moon-Saturn is Class 3 - very wide - while mundanely it is Class 2 - wider than I tend to think is worth attention. This leaves Moon in moderate-orbed aspects to Mars and Neptune.

Again making reference to your teaching (and this time a more established part of it), a counterpoint: in the context of her chart, these aspects could well have more relative importance. Yes, she has those six partile aspects which constitute the two major configurations we referenced, but after them, she doesn't have any other aspects within 3º. Those Moon aspects are among the next closest. Which means, after the (background, though not deeply so) Mercury-Jupiter-Uranus and (static) Sun-Neptune-Pluto structures, those are among the loudest voices (and, of course, they're luminary aspects).

[Jim Eshelman]

Aspects in that range will certainly have important psychological effects - wbi h is what I'm usually most interested in - but I think it would be quite rare for them to emerge as events, I think.

[Danica]

Eris is rising (conj Asc 1*22'), and it's her only angular planet, with the Sun being in Scorpio and Moon conjuct Mars as the strongest Lunar aspect; I think her psyche was in an internal war, between the Sag-Moon's needs to follow the already-prescribed path, continue the tradition etc, on one side, and the need for forging her own path of unique exploration into the chaotic and yet-unknown, on the other.

[Jim Eshelman]

That's pretty good.