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.

I conducted a refinement of the synastry control experiment (1) in which the birth dates of married partners were shifted 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 days The surplus of aspect frequency gradually decreased with increasing shift magnitude. The maximum frequency appears at the zero shift. These findings reinforce the conclusion that the previously reported synastry effect is not due to methodological errors.

The majority of those who read their ‘star signs’ can identify aspects of their personality in what they read and it is possible that this may influence their attitudes and actions. The research literature has neglected astrological signs as possible predictors of suicidal behaviour and ideas. To see whether astrological birth signs are associated with suicide and method used, data were collected from the Public Healh Department in North Cheshire on Coroner’s verdicts of suicide and open verdicts in all deceased aged 60 and above between 1989 and 2000. The timing of suicide deaths was compared with those occurring from natural causes. Most of the comparisons were not statistically significant, except for suicide by hanging, which was significantly elevated in those with a birth sign in Virgo, and lowest in those born in Saggittarius and Scorpio. In addition suicide by violent methods showed a significant excess in thos born in summer months.

An attempt to replicate Ruis’ recent results on a further 20,000 couiples suggested that the results do not generally replicate. However, there was an excess of synastry aspects to the wives’ Suns in 5,000 non-eminent couples.

Kelly’s and Saklofske’ crilticism of Smithers’ 1981 study are examined and it is suggeseted that they have not fully appreciated the argument presented: that astrology may be an unwitting source of self knowledge. Since people vary in their knoweldge of astrology and of themselves, it is not surpprising that the apparent sun sign correlations should not emerge in all studies. Further data are presented to show that it is extremely unlikely that the patterns described in Smithers’ study were produced by some weakness or artefact in the measuring technique. lt is important to establish whether the apparent astrological effects on self image are transient or nt. This is currently being investigated.

According to Geoffrey Dean’s tampering hypothesis, superstitious parents of just-born babies who later would become eminent professionals tended to report wrong birth dates at registration offices so as to make the births fall on auspicious days, including Christian feast days. I scrutinized the validity of this claim by counting births on Christian feast days for a sample of French priests (Gauquelin data, N=884) and Belgian Benedictine monks (Verhulst data, N=1506). Dean’s sample of non-clerical Gauquelin professionals (N=15,942) served as a mundane reference sample. Since Christian families bringing up future priests and monks are generally more religious than families bringing up children of mundane professions, their motivation to shift their children’s births on Christian feast days should be stronger than among families with mundane offspring – provided that such motivation exists at all. Consequently, birth counts on Christian feasts of future priests and monks should be more numerous compared to birth counts on Christian feast days of future actors, journalists, military leaders etc. However, the results show that births of future clergy on Christian feast days are not significantly more numerous than birth counts of mundane offspring. Birth counts differ between fixed and movable feasts, with births on fixed feasts alone perhaps slightly supporting Dean’s stance, but births on movable feasts entirely disconfirm his hypothesis. The fixed versus movable feast difference is unexpected and escapes any interpretation in terms of tampering. It is concluded that birth counts on Christian feasts cannot responsibly be used as indicators of superstition.

Wunder takes issue with my study of rural-urban differences of popular belief whose results showed that Geoffrey Dean’s eight indicators of superstition are not valid. He doubts that country people from Gauquelin samples were more superstitious than townspeople. A review of past studies on rural-urban differences, however, provides abundant evidence that country people, even still of late decades, do tend to be more superstitious and more conservative in general than townspeople. Seeming counter evidence from studies of recent changes in urban and rural beliefs, provided by Wunder, makes sense only in particular contexts (such as revivals in urban settings of esoteric practices) which have no bearing on widely acknowledged differences between rural and urban belief systems. The critic thus fails to save Dean’s explanation of Gauquelin planetary effects, which is based on a theory of parental tampering.

The importance of harmonics in describing the diurnal distributions of natal planetary positions for groups of professionals in data collected by the Gauquelins is discussed. The hypothesis of “parental tampering” is is explored although it is considered unlikely because the distributions are, in some respects, contrary to traditional astrological expectations.