posted December 29, 2003 06:15 PM              

Has anyone here had experience with them and which is preferable?

Thanks,

.gloria

posted December 29, 2003 06:44 PM              

YIKES! I've been singled out.

It's my drive once I start researching something I get into it a great deal. I enjoy getting first-hand experiences and enjoy the interaction.

I will check that Liz Green article out, I don't think I've read it. I read some other stuff out there on Davison, but never really had a comparison of preferences in front of me.

As for Gemini in my chart. My time of birth is debatable, and my mommy was on lots of hospital druggies when I was born. As it stands, my Asc is Taurus 29.48 degrees. I don't feel like any one Asc, more like a combo of Taurus & Gem.

.gloria

posted December 29, 2003 07:25 PM            

Some of the things he says in his introduction:

"Many times I have taken the charts of utter strangers, and by using the composite chart, described the most intimate details of their relationship with each other. I have been able to describe not only how they get along on a day to day basis,, but also details about major events in their relationship.
In reading composite charts, I have found little or none of the ambiguity that occurs with conventional techniques of synastry. Creative and positive relationships are recognized clearly and unambiguously, and so are difficult and realtively unrewarding ones."

astro junkie, it's a great book if you're interested in composite charts. They are determined by mid-points between the charts of the two individuals involved.

Now, I once spoke to someone at Astro Communications who mentioned another type of composite, perhaps something like that of Davison, I don't really know. But that composite was determined by the time, place and date when the two people meet. I don't know anything more about it than that.

posted December 29, 2003 10:33 PM              

If anyone has experience with the two let me know.

Composite - mid-point planet placements between two charts

Davison - mid-point of the TIME and DATE of birth of two people

Hmmmm... at first the Davison would seem to make less sense than Composite, but I've read good things about both.

.gloria

posted December 30, 2003 09:03 AM            

...but...

Wouldn't the midpoint between the TIME and DATE of birth between two people be pretty much the same as the Robert Hand method of Composite? The midpoint would determine the rising sign, etc. Because, after all, one's chart is comprised of the planet placements at one's time/date/place of birth.

posted December 30, 2003 12:56 PM              

With Composite it's like looking at the wheel. One person is Aries Sun, the other is Libra Sun. You take the midpoint SIGN.

With Davison, one person is born July 4, 1970, the other born August 29, 1975. You find the DATE between those two dates and do a chart for THAT DATE.

They come out different. If you try it at astro.com you will see.

.gloria

posted December 30, 2003 01:50 PM            

Interesting premise, and I'll read about it. But my gut reaction is to question the relevence of a mid-point date. I can't call it an arbitrary point in time, I guess, but it seems that way. The date you come up with, well, it's not like it's the date on which the relationship was born.

But that's just a gut reaction. I do love the Robert Hand Composites, though. And they make sense, taking the charts of two people and creating a composite, it's like seeing the synergy of two people.

Does anyone have any experience with the Hand version? I have a chart I'd love some feedback on....

posted December 30, 2003 02:21 PM              

But I've read that they are finding accuracy in Davison, so I guess we the Knowflakes need to investigate.

Is the Robert Hand Composite the one that comes out in astro.com free interactive chart for AstroClick Partner? If yes, I have done it and really really like it a whole lot!!

I tested the heck out of it too. Using a couple of other people I had relationships with already, and that I knew how it would end. And it was extremely accurate.

.gloria

posted December 30, 2003 08:17 PM            

The AstroClick thing is different...

posted December 31, 2003 06:50 PM              

Actually, I've never thought of using the date we meet to do a chart on it. That would be cool. I'll try it. Do you know any programs or whatever that will do that? With the date you meet?

Davison is NOT the day you meet. Simply put, it's like if my birthday was July 1, 1960, and your birthday was July 3, 1960, the Davison program would automatically do a chart for the midpoint, which would be July 2, 1960.

As for what I saw in failed relationships after-the-fact, usually issues of trust.

.gloria

posted December 31, 2003 07:31 PM            

But I still like the composite charts. My current love interest and I, well, I can totally see us, our synergy, in our composite chart.

posted December 31, 2003 07:43 PM              

What I'm saying is, in order to TEST whether the Composite was accurate in itself, I entered a couple of other partners from my past, to see if it would sound as positive as the FIRST person I entered.

So it's like, I KNEW the relationship failed and WHY.... but BEFORE I did the Composite. I was just testing to see if it would expound upon what I already knew.

Wasn't sure if you understood that, and hope you didn't think I broke up a relationship because of astrology. No.

So the issues had to do with trust. Things like you could turn into bitter enemies. Head games were also highlighted. Anyways, like Trillian said, I could see "us" and the synergy. But AFTER the fact.

That's how I tested the validity of the Composite.

Is this clearer? Or did you want to know more details as to the causes of the break-ups?

Thanks for sharing,

.gloria

posted December 31, 2003 08:06 PM              

The Davison Chart is computed for a mid-point in time, in relation to a geographical mid-point. The birth date and time of the Davison chart is the midpoint of the two partners birthdata. The outer planets and the MC are usually similarly positioned in both Composite and Davison charts. The important difference is that the Davison Relationship Chart is based on a real point in time, thus enabling one to use all the known techniques such as Solar returns, transits, progressions and other directions in order to explore a developement in time. Davison chart is a real chart.

Composite chart is the midpoint chart. For each pair of partners planets the mid-point is calculated. In a sense this shows us the essential structure of the relationship. Composite charts are abstract and do not represent a real astronomical situation thus many prognostic techniques (Solar returns, Solar Arc directions, transits) cannot be applied here. The aspects made between the composite planets offer an insight into the different elements that combine to make the relationship what it is. Do not fear the challanging aspect in your Composite, for any relationship to last the test of time, there needs to be some strength and stability shown by what are usually called adverse aspects such as the square or opposition. Oppositions can be complimentary with one side of the balance being met by the other and vice versa. The squares provide the challenges and the stability, especially when coming from fixed signs. Without these and with too many easy flowing aspects of trines and sextiles it all becomes too laid back and neither party will put in the effort to make things work.

The chart for the first meeting is NOT relationship chart, usually Davison chart is called "relationship chart". The chart casted for the first meeting between two poeple can tell a lot about what attracted the partners at first place and how the relationship will take off. The synastry/comparison between the chart of first meeting and the natal chart of each individual is simply the transits each one had during the first meetings..
Both Davison and Composite are important in terms of interpreting the character of the relationship. here is an excelent article by Liz Green on Composite, its GREAT to read it. If you cant open the link - its on astro.com, under articles by Liz Green on the main page.
http://www.astro.com/astrology/in_composit_e.htm?cid=rlefilexK9cjF-u975892574

posted December 31, 2003 09:36 PM              

Just finished reading that whole passage by Liz Greene and I WAS BLOWN AWAY.

Very very cool, thank you millions for providing the link. For anyone out there, I highly recommend you read it. It is SO RIGHT ON!

.gloria

posted December 31, 2003 11:48 PM              

Woah, I know just what you mean.

After reading that article, I was left sitting here almost with my mouth open, lol.

That was so good! And yes, I agree.

Everyone should have this information about what the Composite Chart is really about vs. what the Synastry Chart is all about at the same time.

Great read! Thanks for posting the link, Jazzebel!

posted December 31, 2003 11:58 PM              

BTW, just what link do you click on to get the official reading of this Davison chart anyway?

I am lost right now, lol.

Thanks for posting back, and...

Happy New Year to you and to everyone here!

posted January 01, 2004 02:38 AM              

I go to www.astro.com
then click on FREE CHARTS in upper left
then scroll down to EXTENDED CHART
and you'll see all the options
let me know if have trouble

.gloria

posted January 01, 2004 10:59 AM            

Jazzebell, thanks for all the info, and I will read the article. But I wanted to add that Robert Hand does indeed say that transits can and do impact a Composite Chart. Using composites, according to him, is relatively new, and not many astrologers have done extensive work with them, and as with all things astrological, there will be a difference of opinion.

For myself, I have seen transits work with composites.

posted January 01, 2004 11:10 AM            

Though she and Robert Hand don't exactly see eye to eye on everything. No matter, there is learning from both.

posted January 01, 2004 12:34 PM              

There could be some truth to the effect of transits on Composite charts, I`ve seen it by personal experience, even thou it wasnt storngly felt - the influence definitely was there. After all Composite is a midpoint chart- the Uranian astrologers (midpoints astrologers) regularly use transits to midpoints.

Glad you liked the article, guys. It`s a must reading, and Lis Green is simply a wonderful writer.

posted January 01, 2004 01:07 PM              

So I guess the learning experience (if I EVER learn my lesson) go very slow and see if the person is really worthy of my trust. I just have that trusting/giving nature where I give people the benefit of the doubt in the beginning, until they prove me wrong.

It's not working for me, so I need to address this. Thanks for making me really think about it for the first time.

There also tends to be issues of stubbornness where me and whoever end up butting heads.

Hmmmmm...

.gloria

posted January 01, 2004 09:24 PM              

Thanks so much for the help with finding the Davison Chart on astro.com.

Lol, I guess I still have a bit of trouble navigating my way around that place.

I wish that site gave us READINGS on what all the stuff means though, instead of only a picture like they do that way.

Now...

Calling on anybody with a little more knowledge about Composites than what I have about them, which is probably just about everybody else here, lol...

what would anybody surmise that it means when
the Composite for you and and someone else matches up this way...

He and I each have our Natal Sun in the 10th House, and our Comp. places OUR Sun in the 10th House

He and I have each have our Natal Mercury in the 10th House, and our Comp. places OUR Mercury in the 10th House

He and I each have our Natal Venus in the 10th House, and our Comp. places OUR Venus in the 10th House

He and I each have our Natal Saturn in the 1st House, and the Comp. places OUR Saturn in the 1st House

He and I each have our Natal Uranus in the 6th House, and the Comp. places OUR Uranus in the 6th House

He and I each have our Natal Pluto in the 6th House, and the Comp. places OUR Pluto in the 6th House

and finally...

His Natal Neptune is in the 8th House, and the Comp. places OUR Neptune in the 8th House.

So, is it a very good sign that the Comp. places so many planets in the exact same Houses as we both have them in our natal charts as well?

I mean, I might take that to mean that the relationship could feel very familiar and right to the both of us since it is in a similiar pattern to what we have each already experienced, and to what we each will continue to experience in our individual lives as we go on together, correct?

Wouldn't all of these same placements in comparison between the Ntal and Comp. charts indicate that this relationship woudl feel much more familiar and seamless to us if we entered into it together?

Thanks for any insights here!

posted January 01, 2004 11:38 PM              

I can't wait to read what someone has to say about that. I'll look into it too in the meantime because it sounds too cool.

Is that how you feel in this relationship? Like it's comfortable with a sense of familiarity and recognition?

Yeah, the astro.com thing has that Interactive Click section which gives you the full explainations for personal and composites, you know about that right? You have to click on the parts of the wheel.

But unfortunately, it's not available for any features within the EXTENDED CHART section. Well, I guess that awesome site offers so much for free already, you'd have to pay for a report for Davison.

.gloria