The medical astrologers of Ancient Greece: the iatromathematici, and the later European physician-astrologers, assumed a correlation between events in the heavens and those on earth that was relevant to both health and disease. Some of the early practitioners of modern scientific medicine did the same under the aegis of what we might term proto-cosmobiology, though none of them could provide an adequate mechanism to explain the nature of the link they believed existed between the skies and ourselves. With the discovery and elucidation of the pineal gland’s functions in the mid-twentieth century, which are discussed in detail, we were in a position to provide such a link, and to a great extent, we can now explain in conventional scientific terms how those influences of the Sun, Moon, planets and other celestial phenomena studied by the early iatromathematici and early cosmobiologists could, can, and do, affect us.

This article discusses trait-word extraction methodology as used in extensive analyses of US-Presidential biographies. It is made clear that there is an objectively verifiable methodoly for trait extraction which suggests that Ertel’s claims that the flawed methodology used by the Gauquelins invalidates the whole Character Traits Hypothesis (CTH) are not justified. The study continues by using the analyses of Simonton for each president, which includes a score on 4 scales (Interpersonal, Charismatic, Deliberative and Creative) to examine the correlations with Plus-Zone planets. Significant correlations are found on a small sample because the methodology of Ordinal data can be applied, in contrast to the Chi-Squared and other testing which is all that can be done on the Nominal data found in the Gauquelin source. The implication of this so-far neglected study (since 1997) is that CTH must be re-examined, and that the work of Simonton who has studied eminence over many years needs to be considered before ill-informed decisions are made to reject CTH. In addition the use of a methodology such as this would allow the study of small samples of the Gauquelin database with a view to re-examining CTH.

Michael Glykas is generally known as a learned conservative theologian who wrote a refutation of Byzantine Emperor Manuel Komnenos’ defence of astrology in the latter half of the twelfth century. However there exists substantial evidence that Michael Glykas had a dual identity as the shadowy Michael Sikidites who in his youth was known for his occult interests, suspected of political sedition against Manuel, and imprisoned and blinded as punishment for sorcery. With skill and critical astuteness, Glykas directs his refutation not so much against Manuel’s philosophical arguments as against the claims of his evidence, and thus seeks to cast doubt upon the moral and literary integrity of his Emperor in an attempt to redeem his own reputation. Within half a century of the reintroduction of astrology to the West, Glykas was the first person in many centuries to stir up all the old Christian objections against the fatalism of the stars.

From the 2nd century AD the coincidence of Passover and Easter was recognized as a problem for the Christian church by the church authorities, and in the 4th century, after Christianity became the Roman state religion, Roman authorities took steps to prevent Passover and Easter coinciding. This effort was complicated by the growing separation between the churches in Rome and Constantinople. Though from the 2nd century the majority of Jews lived in the diaspora, at least up to the 10th century the calendar was governed by a rabbinical court in Eretz Israel (the Land of Israel). Here we discuss the changes in the Jewish calendar in the 5-8th centuries AD, the middle (c. 636 AD) of which period witnessed an abrupt transition from Byzantine rule over Eretz Israel to Arab rule. In this period no serious changes were made in the basic mathematics of the Jewish calendar; the only changes had a political context. Here we discuss a single but singular feature of the Jewish calendar, the ‘Deĥiyot’ [postponements] of Rosh Hashana. Our major claim is that Deĥiyah D [postponement from Wednesday to Thursday] and Deĥiyah U [postponement from Friday to Saturday] entered the calendar c. 532 AD as an ingenious Jewish response to Emperor Justinian’s ban against the Passover feast (Nisan 14) falling on a Saturday, instituted to mend a famous calendar rift between the Roman and Alexandrian churches. Next we claim that Deĥiyah A [postponement from Sunday to Monday] became part of the calendar no earlier than when the 2nd day of the festivals Rosh Hashana [New Year] and Sukkot [Tabernacles] acquired the status of sacred day and we raise the lower historical boundary of Deĥiyah A’s introduction in the calendar up to the time of the first Gaonim [heads of talmudic academies in the Arab caliphate] (c. 658 AD). We also suggest the reasons for the timing of three other deĥiyot.

The annual total of births fell substantially in Hong Kong in the past 20 years, and the average fertility level of 0.9 births per family has now fallen below the notional replacement rate for the existing population. Nevertheless, short run periods of high birth rates have occurred, particularly in the Dragon Years of 1988 and 2000. This rise in fertility may be related to zodiacal beliefs about fertility and the presumed favourable time for births, but this needs to be investigated more systematically.

Georg Joachim Rheticus (1514-1574) was central to the development and popularization of Copernicus’ heliocentric theory. He is most well known for the first published account of the theory, the Narratio Prima in 1539, and his persuasion in obtaining Copernicus’ manuscript for publication, De Revolutionibus (1543). Rheticus’ poem ‘Concerning the Beer of Breslau and the Twelve Signs of the Zodiac’, written circa 1542, sheds light on two aspects of Rheticus’ early involvement with the heliocentric theory. The poem helps us understand the approach to astrology which would prove decisive in Rheticus’ acceptance of the heliocentric theory and offers a glimpse into Rheticus’ association with Wittenberg’s controversial group of young poets. This relationship significantly injured Rheticus’ career and the heliocentric theory in turn.

Geoffrey Dean gave an account of three tests of his Parental Tampering Hypothesis (PTH) that I had suggested to him that he conduct. He concluded (Dean 2000): “Three tests, three hits. I rest my case.” I scrutinised Dean’s procedure and found that his first test failed to support PTH (about planetary effects on desired days). He obtained the desired hit by reversing the hypothesis post hoc so as to accommmodate the new “prediction” to his result. The second test also had negative results (about a purported dependence of planetary effects on “seeing conditions” at the time of birth). Again Dean reversed his critic’s hypothesis so as to make a hit out of this failure. The third test failed no less (about combining all informative planetary effects rather than suing the dominant effect only). Dean obscured his actual finding. In sum, the three tests failed to prvide evidence for PTH. The present result is consistent with those of four earlier scrutinies. No further test is necessary to conlcude that Dean’s claim that Gauquelin effects are man-made artificact is utterly mistaken.

This paper analyzes the role of Israel Hiebner’s Mysterium Sigillorum (1651) in the astrological reform program of late seventeenth-century English astrologers. Hiebner was a professor of astronomy and mathematics at Erfurt, and the translation of his tract into English in 1698 was considered to be a landmark event among reforming and scientific astrologers such as Henry Coley and John Gadbury. In the face of astrology’s declining reputation among learned elites, Coley and Gadbury wished to cleanse their discipline of superstitious dross and illustrate it was ‘experimentally true’ via Baconian induction as well as by incorporation of discoveries in astronomy and natural philosophy. Hiebner’s insistence on accurate planetary observations in making astrological sigils, his use of maps in Hevelius’ Selenographia as guides in stamping his medical amulets, as well as his detailed and precise lists of ascendant planetary aspects thus was appealing to these astrological reformers. This paper also analyzes the role of the Mysterium Sigillorum in the ‘English Sigil War,’ a larger debate that existed among astrological physicians and natural philosophy about the role of these medals in medical healing.

The first part of this series (Wackford 2000/2001) was written as a one-off paper concerned only with the trigonometric determination of the angles in a circumpolar horoscope. As such it did not fully explore issues of upper and lower culmination, leaving instead an open question that will now be addressed. This paper continues examination of the semi-arc system (North 1986, Wackford 2002/3b), its applicatioin in the Polar regions and relationships between this method and the diurnal and seasonal cycles.

The influence of significant strands of late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century esoteric thought on the surrealist movement has often been noted, though has been little studied. Part 1 of this paper summarises current opinions on the esoteric interests of the surrealists in general and André Breton in particular. Part 2 includes an interview with Breton on astrology conducted by Jean Carteret and Roger Knare in 1954 and published in the French astrology journal L’Astrologue in 1968, reproduced by permission of André Barbault.