Multi-planet Configurations

[Jim Eshelman]

Standard aspect interpretations involve only two planets at a time. In astrological practice, we routinely see three or more planets interconnected at a time. When interpreting such a combination, we can use the two-planet interpretations as a starting point (since all individual aspects have a voice). We can tap quality texts such as The Combination of Stellar Influences by Reinhold Ebertin that propose interpretations of three-planet combinations. Most importantly, we can return to basic principles and interpret the aspects by planet symbolism.

Astrology texts often isolate particular forms of multi-planet configurations based primarily on the geometry of the aspect structures. That is, the interpretations distinctive to the pattern rely more on the type of aspect than the planets involved. I mention this first because relying on the aspect type is the most likely mistake an astrologer will make when diving into these often colorfully named patterns.

Keep in mind, therefore, the most important principle related to differentiated aspect types: The type of aspect matters little. The planets involved are nearly the whole story. If Moon, Saturn, and Pluto trine each other, what matters most is that this is a Moon-Saturn-Pluto aspect (Saturn and Pluto both aspecting Moon), not that three trines are connected.

The keys to rightly understanding multi-planet configurations are (1) the work of John Nelson and (2) basic midpoint theory.

John Nelson, working for the broadcast industry from the 1940s, learned how to predict sunspots and other solar disturbances. His work stretched over several decades and became increasingly complex with time, though always based on the simple principles developed during his early years. Because Nelson’s work involved natural energy movements (magnetic flux disturbances affecting solar surface features), the individual planets seem not to matter – only the geometry of the aspects. This makes his work uniquely valuable to astrologers.

Nelson’s first observation (working heliocentrically, since he was measuring the impact of planetary effects on the Sun) was straightforward: If two planets were in a close conjunction, opposition, or square and a third planet joined them – conjunct, opposite, or square either of them – a solar disturbance would occur. The third planet compounding the hard aspect structure signaled the eruption.

This was in line with what astrologers would have predicted. The most interesting new fact was how important the third factor was in amping up, or igniting, the simpler two-planet pattern.

What was not in line with astrological thought was that if the third planet formed a sextile or trine to either of the first two planets, this also would signal a solar eruption. Astrologers had thought the opposite: Regarding oppositions as harsh aspects (per the paradigm of the time), astrologers routinely said that with two planets in opposition, a third planet trine one and sextile the other would ameliorate the harshness, softening the hard aspect. Not so! A trine or sextile to the initial hard aspect was simply another pile-on, working the same as if the third planet formed a hard aspect.

The rule then became: If two planets are in conjunction, opposition, or square and a third planet makes any aspect to them, it ignites or heightens the discharge of energy, triggering an eruption.

However, neither a soft aspect by itself nor a multi-planet combination of only sextiles and trines would signal an eruption. At first, Nelson thought that the soft aspects did not have sufficient energy. Later, it became evident that they actively suppressed a solar eruption. Dr. Zipporah Dobyns reported that Nelson told her about one time he was watching a rip-roaring solar flare when a disconnected trine formed between two other planets. Suddenly, the storm calmed, as if a giant hand had lowered over it – and then resumed once the fast trine moved out of orb.

Therefore, hard aspects are primarily energy discharging while soft aspects are energy resisting. That, and the way three or more planets compound and intensify energy discharges, are the most important take-aways from Nelson’s work.

Three or more planets mutually aspecting alert us to think of them as a single unit, consistent with the Nelson findings.

Here follow the most common patterns that have been given special names you will encounter.

[Jim Eshelman]

T-square: Two planets in opposition and a third square them, so that a T shape connects them. This is a high-energy configuration, straight out of Nelson’s first findings, the team-up intensifying the energy of the combination.

My natal chart shows a T-square of moderate Mars oppositions to Jupiter-Uranus closely square Neptune. Mars’ oppositions are the widest aspects. Neptune’s aspects to the other three are closest: Neptune centers and focuses the T-square. On the 90° dial of my chart, it is easy to see that Neptune is in the middle of the others: With Neptune 1°20' Libra, the points halfway between Mars-Jupiter and Mars-Uranus – their midpoints – are 1°16' and 1°08' Libra, confirming that Neptune centers and focuses the configuration. This makes it easier to interpret the four-planet combination: Think of it as Mars-Jupiter and Mars-Uranus pairs separately aspecting Neptune.

Grand Square: Two pairs of planets in opposition square each other (four planets at 90° intervals). This is the same as a T-square but with intensity boosted even further by its six separate aspects. Focus is on intensive energy and action (hard aspect characteristics maximized). - As an example, see the chart of Arthur Leigh Allen, the Zodiac Killer.

Grand Trine: Three planets trine each other form an equilateral triangle. It brings the characteristics of soft aspects maximized, including unmoving structure. At best, grand trines are stable; at worst, they emphasize rigidity (being stuck). Noel Tyl insightfully called them closed circuits of self-sufficiency in terms of the three planets’ shared triplicity. A hard aspect to one of the grand trine planets will interrupt the circuit and give a path to concrete action. - As an example, see the chart of mass murderer Henri Desiré Landru with all three malefics tightly bound together in a Grand Trine.

Grand Sextile (“Star of David”): A rare configuration: Six planets at 60° intervals (three oppositions sextile and trine each other). Anticipate unusual rigidity and resistance to movement. The best avenue of movement and progress is through the three oppositions if they have close orbs. (I don't have a good public example at hand, as this is quite rate. Another murderer, Arthur Goode, almost has a Grand Sextile, though one planet is missing.)

Kite: This is another pattern named for its shape: a Grand Trine with one planet opposite a fourth planet that sextiles the other two. All six aspects have voice, though the primary avenue of action or progress is through the opposition (the only hard aspect). - My chart has a kite if you use Class 3 orbs (Moon-Venus-Jupiter-Uranus Grand Trine kited by Mars).

Sidecar: This name is not traditional. I coined the term because there was no available name for the most common (and therefore arguably most important) three-planet configuration. A Sidecar exists when two planets are in opposition and a third planet trines one and sextiles the other, as in Hermann Goering’s chart (Mars opposite Saturn trine/sextile Neptune-Pluto). This has three characteristics. First, as in John Nelson’s findings, the pile-on soft aspects significantly strengthen (intensify) the opposition. Second, although small orbs prevail over larger orbs, the opposition generally is the fundamental aspect and the Sidecar planet modifies the opposition according to the planet natures. Third, if the Sidecar planet’s orbs are smaller than the opposition’s orb, it adds psychological complexity understood through the meaning of the close-orbed planet-pairs involved.

[SteveS]