An Astrological Perspective On Our New ‘Fisher’ King

As the extraordinary period of mourning that has followed the Queen’s death has now drawn to a close, and with the momentous spectacle of her state funeral now behind us, we have properly marked the end of the Elizabethan era, and are left to wonder what will follow it.  These last two weeks aside, most people nowadays probably don’t think that much about the royal family - there are, let’s face it, more pressing matters going in the world - to say the least!  But at a deeper archetypal level, I believe this change of era could have a really profound effect on the collective psyche, certainly among the people of the United Kingdom, but perhaps also the world. I’d like to offer an archetypal and astrological perspective perspective on this in terms of the transition to Charles III, and speculate upon what kind of role he might play. 

Whatever Queen Elizabeth stood for in terms of stability, endurance, dedication to duty and service, she was evidently a matriarch, a representative, at some important level, even in an increasingly secular society, of the divine feminine principle.  The first, seemingly obvious, yet quite profound change to observe, then, is that she will be replaced by a king, standing in symbolically for a divine authority that is palpably male.  How will this affect the psyche of the people? Will they even accept it, bearing in mind the enormity of social and cultural change that has occurred in the seventy years since Elizabeth took the throne, and the deep distrust of patriarchal power.  And added to that, our new king has shown himself to be a deeply flawed (and for that, a very human) character, whose weaknesses have been displayed on the most public of stages. 

Many people doubt whether Charles will be a popular or effective king.  Having been considered too sensitive in youth, without the strength of character to fulfil his royal destiny, he was probably brought up in quite a cold, formal manner by his mother, the Queen and bullied by his father, Philip. He was not allowed to attend the school he wanted, and suffered greatly at the one he did attend. Nor was he allowed to marry the woman he loved, for which his own suffering (and probable resentment) was transferred onto the woman he did marry.  She, Diana, completely overshadowed him with her charismatic personality, and later shamed him publicly for his neglect of her and their relationship.  And by the nature of her tragic and untimely death, she secured near immortal status as goddess, casting Charles’s reputation even further in the shadows.  Hardly the heroic path of kingship.

The signatures in King Charles III’s chart bear the hallmark of someone wounded in the core of their sovereign being.  He is born with his natal Sun, the ruler of his chart (having Leo ascendant) in an applying conjunction with Chiron (the wounded healer) in Scorpio in the 5th house of personal power and creative vitality.  This points to someone who is wounded in the very centre of his own power, crippled in some way in his ability to radiate his own divine destiny and birthright, but someone also imbued with the capacity and vocational calling to heal.

A mythic image that lies at the heart of the royal archetype, is that of the vitality of the sovereign being tied to the prosperity of the land and its people, and Charles carrying this signature, we are reminded of the Fisher King who, in Arthurian legend, is the last in a long line of rulers charged with the protection of the Holy Grail.  Like in the myth of Chiron, the Fisher King has an incurable wound in the thigh (or groin), and being immortal, he must the bear the pain of it eternally until he is relieved of it through an act of self-sacrifice. In the case of the Fisher King, the wound renders him incapable of fulfilling his sovereign duties until a heroic quest is completed, as in the tale of Parsifal.  His wound has a direct bearing on the land, which has become barren and infertile, an idea that inspires much of the Arthurian questing tradition and is the subject of T.S. Eliot’s famous poem, The Wasteland. If Charles is indeed a carrier of this archetype, as his chart suggests, then how appropriate that he should accede to the throne at almost the precise moment of the Pisces full moon (on 10th September), with the moon in an applying conjunction to Neptune, ruler of the sign of the fishes, marking a time of loss, of grief and surrender to a force greater than oneself.  And coupled with that, Chiron was also transiting the King’s mid-heaven in Aries, which marks both his singular destiny, and the vulnerability of his position now that it is realised.  The Chironic fragility of his position as he takes up the mantle of rulership at a time of cultural and spiritual breakdown and overhaul, is thus exposed now.

Along with woundedness, of course, comes the desire to heal and a particular sensitivity to what needs healing.  In regard to the mythic theme that ties the sovereign to the land, it is interesting that among Charles’s many philosophical pursuits and passions, his concern for the environment, and especially for the integrity of the soil, and for the promotion of organic agriculture will stand as one of his abiding legacies as Prince of Wales. Perhaps it is his Moon in Taurus that makes him green-fingered, but it more likely his Chironic nature that sensitises him to the unsustainability of modern farming.  It is a trait of the Sun-Chiron character to feel like an outsider, to be at odds with mainstream approaches to life, often due to being subjected in childhood to an environment that tramples upon the vulnerability of a sensitive soul.  This is certainly true in Charles’s case.  His father forced him to go to Gordonstoun school in Scotland to toughen him up, and the brutal treatment he received there had a very damaging effect on him, reinforced his outsider status and sent him further inward into poetry and philosophy.  

Charles studied anthropology at Cambridge and developed a particular interest in the origins of religion.  This, alongside his devout interest in the environment and natural harmony is perfectly reflected in his fourth house Venus-Neptune conjunction in Libra at the IC.  This conviction occupies the very roots of his being, inspiring in him an idealistic, Neo-Platonic vision of the world, which among things has led him to found the Princes School of Sacred Geometry and to co-author a book called ‘Harmony: A New Way of Looking at Our World’. Transiting Chiron is also currently opposing this conjunction at his IC.  Perhaps part of the wound he must now carry is that the imposition of his public office will of course make it very difficult for him to be able to pursue his campaigning for those things he really believes in, in the way he did as a prince.  This tension is aptly symbolised then by this transit of Chiron across his MC-IC axis.

Meanwhile, his hunger for meaning is evident in his Mars placement; in Sagittarius conjunct Jupiter and opposite Uranus in Gemini.  This is typical of someone whose quest for philosophical understanding stretches beyond that presented in orthodox religion.  He studied the work of Carl Jung, became interested in other religions, and was especially persuaded by the metaphysical beauty of Islam. In his youth, he sought out mentors who stretched his thinking, such as Laurens van Der Post, who wrote about animism and the wisdom inherent in tribal cultures. He corresponded closely with Kathleen Raine who encouraged him to adopt a Jungian perspective on the role of monarchy and with Ted Hughes who persuaded him of the shamanic aspect of a king who can re-unite the tribe and the land.  Charles carries a conviction about the sanctity of nature, the inherent truth carried by the mystery traditions and the prevailing veracity of what is often called the ‘perennial wisdom’, that understanding which dwells at the core of organised religion and to a large extent transcends the outer differences of respective faiths. This is a challenging conviction to hold when your destiny is to become head of the Anglican Church and ‘defender of the faith’!  He has been critical of modern Christianity as having lost touch with its unifying metaphysical aspect, and he has questioned whether the Church of England should be the sole source of spiritual authority.  In the famous Jonathan Dimbleby interview in 1994, he said that he resonated more with the idea of being ‘defender of the divine in existence, the pattern of the divine that is in all of us’.  

In 2000, Charles called for a return to the sacred, insisting that we should develop a new sense of the sacred in our dealings with the natural world, and with each other. ‘If literally nothing is held sacred any more’, he argued, 'then there would be nothing to prevent us treating our entire world as some great laboratory of life, with potentially disastrous long-term consequences.’  In a speech two years later, he made an even bolder statement of personal vocation, which seems to be wholly in keeping with the Sun-Chiron / Fisher King theme:

‘I have come to realise that my entire life has been so far motivated by a desire to heal – to heal the dismembered landscape and the poisoned soul; the cruelly shattered townscape, where harmony has been replaced by cacophony; to heal the divisions between intuitive and rational thought, between mind and body, and soul, so that the temple of our humanity can once again be lit by a sacred flame.’ (from a speech by Charles in 2002, cited in this article from The Spectator)

Such wisdom is needed more than ever now at a time when the sacred is being abandoned in favour of dogmatic scientism, materialism and a mundane intellectualism that lacks any soul or reverence.  Whether he will stand by his spiritual convictions or be allowed to take a stand for what he really believes in now he is king is another matter, of course.

It is interesting to observe that the Queen was also born on a Sun-Chiron conjunction, but in her case the aspect is separating and cross-sign (Chiron in late degrees of Aries, Sun in first degree of Taurus), with the Sun being the ruler of her intercepted moon in Leo.  This points more to the disallowance and sheer awkwardness of her emotional life; and in a chart where the Sun is overshadowed by Saturn, her dominant planet, and ruler of her Capricorn ascendant.  It rides high on her Scorpio mid-heaven, such a staunch symbol of duty, service and endurance, sitting exactly on Charles’s Scorpio Sun, marking the lack of warmth in their relationship; duty before pleasure, and respect for the tradition above all else.

Will Charles thrive as a king, or will it be a short reign, as many believe?  Will he live long enough to make any kind of impact? Will he win over the people, or will those who seek to dismantle the monarchy seize upon the opportunity to do so, exploiting the vulnerability of the situation now that the Queen has departed?  Astrologically, Charles must undergo two very challenging transits over the next two years, as Pluto makes a square aspect to his natal Moon in Taurus, and over a similar timespan, radical change-maker Uranus stations opposite his natal Sun in Scorpio. This latter transit occurs between July and October 2023, with a final pass in April and May 2024.  Such a transit can bring about a revolution in a person’s experience of their own sovereignty and vital force, and in a king’s chart, it takes on greater meaning beyond the personal. Could this symbolise events that strike to the heart of the crown itself?  Will it radicalise the king in some way to make significant changes to the way the monarchy operates, will he speak out for what he truly believes in, and will it shake the foundation of the royal entitlement?  

Whether the monarchy prevails or not over the coming years with the new king, and whether we believe it should or not, no-one can deny the extraordinary outpouring of love and devotion for our late Queen in the days since her passing.  Her funeral was spectacular, watched by more people than any other broadcast in history. That alone should persuade us of the place that the British royal family still occupies in the popular imagination, not just in the UK, but around the world.  I wonder then if Charles can capture the imagination of the people in his own, very different way.  An evidently wounded figurehead might evoke that grail question that Parsifal eventually finds the humility in his heart to ask the Fisher King:  “What ails thee?”.  Could the presence of a wounded king on a vulnerable throne serve to remind us of what is wounded in the sovereignty of our own hearts, and draw out the healing balm of compassion?