The natal chart — the geometrical portrait of the heavens at the precise moment of an individual’s birth — occupies a foundational position across the depth-psychological astrological literature, yet the interpretive traditions brought to bear upon it diverge considerably. Tarnas frames it as an archetypal map of the psyche’s inherent dynamics, a ‘geometrical portrait of the heavens from the perspective of the Earth at the moment of an individual’s birth,’ encoding planetary archetypes that unfold creatively across the life span. Rudhyar, writing from a holistic and personalist vantage, treats the birth-chart as a ‘seed-form of destiny,’ a totalizing symbol of the individual’s existential potential whose meaning is not predictive but revelatory of the soul’s telos. Liz Greene and Howard Sasportas embed natal-chart analysis within the tradition of psychological astrology, reading planetary configurations as portraits of parental complexes, developmental wounds, and unconscious patterning. Cunningham, by contrast, privileges the therapeutic and practical register, employing natal positions as tools for self-awareness and constructive engagement with transits. More recently, Dennett has applied natal-chart analysis within a clinical depth-psychological frame, treating Wilson’s chart as hermeneutic evidence for archetypal complexes underlying addiction and individuation. A persistent tension runs through the corpus: whether the chart is best understood as a fixed blueprint of character or as a dynamically unfolding field of archetypal possibility requiring active psychological engagement.