skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Octoscope giving promising statistical results
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 4:25 am    Post subject: Octoscope giving promising statistical results Reply with quote

Hi all and sorry for the long post,

I was a frequent contributor here a few years ago. Then I stopped astrology altogether. I was fond of statistical studies and scientific view on astrology, I also studied extensively the sidereal zodiac. Then I concluded that astrology simply doesn’t work, or if it works, then possibly on the intuitive / divinatory / occult level, which I am not interested in.

Still recently I’ve been drawn to the statistical studies on astrology again. I had some of my old software left and most importantly, lots of samples from the old Astrodatabank CD-rom.

In the past years I studied especially thoroughly the houses, different house systems, first the usual ones, then whole signs, then even Indian Sripati style houses, where the houses spread on the both sides of the cusps. The results were poor. The twelve houses, let alone their rulers, simply don’t behave on the real charts as expected, not with any kind of system, not with whole signs, no tropically, no sidereally; neither statistically nor on the charts of friends or loved ones.

Also the Gauquelin results baffled me. How come that the most influential areas are located in houses that are classically considered cadent and therefore weak?

Then I found out about Cyril Fagan’s idea of Octotopos or Octoscope, an ancient(?) eight-fold house system, where the houses have the same meanings as the first eight houses of the usual 12 house system, but the last house is the house of death, and that’s it. Neat, isn’t it? Fagan suggested that these houses are located on the both sides of the cusps, Sripati style, and they run clockwise, the first house being located on the both sides of the Ascendant, the second house after that above the horizon spreading over the classical 11th house, the third house on both sides of the MC, and so on.

The problem was that there seemingly was no way to study Octoscope statistically with Jigsaw. But actually there is: Diurnal arc, divided in 40 sectors. Five sectors = one house. Fine!

But if Gauquelin was right, then the first house should not be located on the both sides of the Ascendant, but it should start on the Ascendant, clockwise. The 1st house (”the Saturn house”, if we think about the Chaldean way of associating houses with planets) would then contain the classical 12th house and half of the 11th house; the 2nd house (Jupiter) would be half of the 11th house and the 10th house; the 3rd house (Mars) would begin from the MC and contain the classical 9th house and half of the 8th house; the 4th house (the Sun) would contain half of the classical 8th house and the 7th house; the 5th house (Venus) would begin from the DC and contain the classical 6th house and half of the 5th house; the 6th house (Mercury) would contain half of the classical 5th house and the 4th house; the 7th house (the Moon) would contain the classical 3rd house and half of the 2nd house; and finally the 8th house (death) would contain half of the classical 2nd house and the 1st house.

I like the idea of the early houses dealing with physical and public things being located above the horizon, and the latter, ”deeper” houses being located below the horizon. It fits well with the diurnal / nocturnal concept. I also like the idea of planets located in the house of death being just below the horizon, invisible but ready to rise again.

I like it how the 1st and 2nd houses are on the sanguine, wet and increasingly hot quarter of the horoscope; the 3rd and 4th houses associated with fiery Mars and the Sun being on the hot and dry midday quarter; the 5th and 6th houses associated with creative and inventive Venus and Mercury being on the melancholic evening quarter; and finally the 7th (the Moon) and 8th houses located on the wet and cold night quarter symbolizing rest and inner life.

Enough for poetry, let’s do some calculating to test this idea. I have 174 different samples, mainly from AstroDatabank, but also some Gauquelin data and samples from Jigsaw. I created a huge (>48000) charts from random data for comparison and run all the 174 samples through using Jigsaw and Excel. The idea was to look, in which Octoscope house the tropical Ascendant ruler is most often located in every group. Would groups with similar themes be gathered under the same houses? Would those themes reflect the suggested house themes?

The results were convincing. The winners seem to flock in the first Octoscope house exactly as we should expect from a cardinal house (no 12th house themes here!). I give some examples: 147 conductors, 132 opera singers, 362 fine art artists, 312 composers, 622 fiction writers, 237 dancers / teachers, 293 poets, 101 critics, 107 fashion designers – all of those artists have the Asc ruler most often in the first Octoscope house. The individual statistical effects of each group are not statistically significant as such, but together they would seem to make a pattern.

There’s also another 1st theme represented, that of a beautiful, healthy and vigorous physical body. 366 good looking people, 80 tennis players, 191 outdoors people, 83 PR people, 150 adventurers, 667 army servants, we can mention those 237 dancers also here, and 109 polices all have their Asc rulers most often in the 1st house. Again, if we looked at individual results, they might well be accidental, but all of them together… maybe not so accidental.

Let’s look at the 8th Octoscope house for comparison, which should mainly be the first house in the classical 12h house system. What do we see here, Gauquelin’s 9279 infant birth deaths, out of that group 1263 charts have the Asc ruler most often in the 8th Octoscope house, in the house of death (the expected value being 1167). Just as they say in books, except we have always thought that the area in consideration should be the first house, not the last. The effect is again not big as such, but when we find that also Gauquelin’s 622 murderers have their Asc ruler most often in the 8th Octoscope house, that kind of rises one’s hair up. What else do we find here? 322 acute delusion cases (Gauquelin), 81 nervous breakdown cases (ADB), 876 mentally deranged people (Gauquelin), 85 rapists (ADB) and 1265 schizophrenics (Gauquelin). This is beginning to sound really scary!

Fortunately we realize that there is a brighter side too: 682 people with kids more than three, 82 nurturing personalities, 33 psychiatrists, 41 US presidents (Jigsaw), 145 sports coaches / managers, 169 baseball players, 142 football players and 90 people excelling in martial arts all have their Asc rulers most often in the 8th Octoscope house. What’s the unifying theme here? Maybe sacrificing your individual aspirations to a bigger cause, be it children, your sports team, or the welfare of the United States. The classical 12th house themes, but found in the area we thought would mainly be the 1st house.

I’ll take one more, the 2nd Octoscope house because that is especially interesting. We are looking at the Jovian house of money (also friends in hindu astrology) and what do we have here? 202 people with a happy marriage (the effect is so strong that it’s actually statistically significant alone giving a p-score < 0,05: 47 charts out of 202 when the expected value is 26); 186 gracious / social people, 1002 politicians (Gauquelin), 198 social activists, 86 restaurateurs, 234 political activists, 1102 politicians (ADB), 37 trade union activists, 394 attorneys, 460 editors / publishers, 78 bigoted personalities, 134 ambitious personalities and 400 journalists. Money means politics in today’s world! Such Jovian themes: society, extroversion, influence, power.

These are not the only results that I’ve got, but this is too long a post already. Now what we need is that astrology software makers would start to include Octoscope in their programs. Programmers, please?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johannes susato



Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 1418

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hallo and welcome back again on Skyscript, Papretis!

Thank you very much for you informing us of these results of your huge and most ingenious research. By this you really provide us with a lot to think about! Thumbs up Very Happy

Johannes

PS. Your text is not too long. Indeed it could be much longer!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 2686
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 2:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

interesting post papretis.. thanks for sharing.. i seem to recall asking about this 8 house system in the last year and it's origins.. if i find the thread, i will share it here.

here is the thread here - http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7342&highlight=fagan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4924
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Sari,

Delighted to see you back on Skyscript! I always enjoyed your posts and I was really sad to see you drop out of things. Very interesting research. The subject interests a lot of astrologers but often tends to be dismissed by authorities on hellenistic astrology like Robert Schmidt since he questions if the source texts really support the idea this was ever actually a house system at all. Instead it is suggested it was an elaboration of the initial eight whole sign houses.

Chris Brennan's reply to James from the thread link he given above encapsulates that view:

Chris Brennan wrote:
Quote:
With respect to the Octatopos, there has been a lot of debate and confusion over that in the past century. I think that Bouché-Leclercq was one of the early people who interpreted it as being a full division of the circle into 8 sectors, and a number of people probably followed his interpretation after that.

On the other hand, other scholars have been saying for a while now that the Octatopos isn't a full division of the circle into 8, but instead it is just a system which gives significations for the first 8 whole sign houses. A large part of the argument here is that usually when the Octatopos is mentioned the astrologers will refer to the signs rather than the houses, which implies that they are still using whole sign houses. So, for example, they will say "the 2nd sign signifies this, and the 3rd sign signifies this", and so on. The argument is that this would only make sense if they were just talking about the first 8 signs.

I found a letter between A. E. Housman and F. E. Robbins where Houseman pointed out to Robbins that the Octatopos is just the first 8 signs, so this alternate view has been in circulation since at least the 1940s. Goold followed Housman's interpretation and mentions it in his translation of Manilius, and then more recently Robert Schmidt has made the same argument.

I'm not sure if there are any proponents of the other view at this point. I think that the Gauquelin's may have flirted with it a bit at one point in the late 80s or early 90s, and then I think it Patrice Guinard wrote a paper about it at one point a while ago as well, although I'm not sure he still advocates this interpretation of the Octatopos.

Still, the subject clearly continues to generate considerable interest. For example, in his book Introductions to Traditional Astrology:Abu Ma'shar & al-Qabisi Dr Benjamin Dykes proposes an exploration of an eight sector dynamic system. Dykes develops Schmidt's distinction between whole sign and dynamical places first set out by Robert Schmidt in 1996.

http://cura.free.fr/quinq/02schmi.html

Dykes accepts Schmidt's basic argument and suggests working with whole sign houses as topics/house meaning but using dynamical divisions as strong/weak placements for planets. Dykes describes such planets as more more active or busy.

Although, the question arises if the eight sector system was only about assessing strength why were topics assigned to it in the first place?

I have read that the astrologer Marc Penfield has utilised an eight sector house system for many years but I am not sure of the details.

Bill Johnson has written an article on this subject. However, he challanges Fagan's assumption that any eight sector system should be assumed to be clockwise in direction. He suggests the sources dont support Fagan's position.

http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/aoctobj.htm

Patrice Guinard has written a more philosophical piece which makes a case for working with an eightfold division of the chart. It occurs to me that those familiar with eastern thought will more readily relate to such an eight fold division. Hence The Chinese 8 trigrams which permeate all of Chinese philosophy including The I Ching, Feng Shui, and numerology. In Buddhism we have the eight fold path while in Hinduism there are the Eight Limbs of Yoga presented by Patanjali. However, Guinard also examines Gauquelin sectors. Guinard states:

Quote:
Despite the exuberance of authors who refer to the work of French astro-statisticians, rare is the one among them who has shown awareness of what in my opinion is the only really valid discovery, made unawares, namely: the presence in the global curves of the eight astrological houses.


http://cura.free.fr/11domi2e.html

I also found this piece on Natasa Koprivica's site. I was especially intrigued to see what she said about the use of an eight sector system in a renaissance decumbiture chart by Nicholas Culpeper.

Natasa states:

Quote:
Especially interesting examples of octatopos vestiges can be found in Culpeper’s “Judgement of Diseases" from the Decumbiture of the Sick where he writes about the decumbitures comprising eight houses, as opposed to the, then far more widespread, decumbiture of the 16 houses (hexakaidekahedron). He states that the octatopos system was used by Hippocrates and Galen. A decumbiture chart is drawn for the moment of disease’s inception, the occurrence of the first symptoms or the first visit to the doctor’s, that is, the first examination.


http://www.horaryastrology.info/2010/11/octatopos.html

Papretis wrote:
Quote:
But if Gauquelin was right, then the first house should not be located on the both sides of the Ascendant, but it should start on the Ascendant, clockwise.


I dont think so. I have seen him present his material into 36 sectors for more fine tuning. Equally, I am not sure Guinard is really right in his conclusion that Gauquelin proposed a simple eightfold division. Gauquelin often organised the chart into 36 sectors but the high effect/intensity sectors were grouped into 4 groups of 4 sectors: (a) sectors 36 and 1 to 3 and (b) sectors 9 to 12, as well as the opposite sectors, which are (c) sectors 18 to 21 and (d) sectors 27 to 30.

Gauquelin therefore counted the area just below the rising degree
(zone 36) as part of the more dynamic/powerful sector. He didn't find the strong zone started/finished exactly at the ASC degree as you seem to be suggesting.


In simple terms this equates to 9 sectors or zones of 40 degrees each.

I dont really use dynamical divisions as house meanings myself so I am interested in any software that breaks the chart up into different divisions such as the 36 divisions used by Gauquelin . Intriguingly this may take us back to the original conception of astrological houses set out in the Salmeschoiniaka

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6257

Recent research by Dorian Greenbaum and Micah Ross points to an Egyptian origin to the idea of sign division influenced by the 36 star based decans.

The question I have is are these different divisions really highlighting topics (ie. house meaning) for us or instead pinpointing planetary strength/busyness? I prefer to think of them more as activity or strength zones/sectors indicators rather than think of them as 'houses'.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly


Last edited by Mark on Tue Jul 02, 2013 6:07 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you, Johannes, for positive encouragement. I might go on and tell about my findings about the 3rd, 7th and the 4th Octoscope house.

The traditional themes of the 3rd house are siblings and travel, in hindu astrology also sports and competition. The Chaldean significator is Mars. And yes indeed, in the 3rd Octoscope house we have here 104 military pilots, 130 combats, 34 NASA astronauts (Jigsaw), 216 people with military careers and 145 assault & battery criminals, so clearly Martian themes. Another theme is scientific, orderly, calculating attitude, and examples of that are 108 physics, 76 chemists, 118 researchers, 75 architects, 87 bankers, 140 clerics, and 84 farmers (farming having to do with natural sciences and chemistry).

I wondered what are the 72 people with unusual diets doing here (having the 3rd strongest effect), until I realized that Mars has to do with military self-discipline and self-restraint, without which it would be impossible to win championships or fight in hard conditions. Simone Weil (3 Feb 1909 5.00 AM Paris, France, rating: AA), who starved herself death during the WWII for her political idealism, had Mars in her 1st Octoscope house and the Asc ruler Jupiter in the 3rd. Unfortunately Jupiter was in its detriment and retrograde, so Weil was kind of a failed freedom fighter, not the hero she wanted to be.

Also “Religion / spirituality: philosophical / humanistic” (83 persons) is represented in this house, and I guess this means more or less scientific or atheistic worldview in contrast to a religious one, which I guess belongs to the opposite, 7th house. Mars is in its fall where Jupiter is exalted and vice versa in the sign ruled by the Moon (significator of the 7th house), so Mars - and also the 3rd house - might represent a scientific worldview or even militant atheism.

Let’s take a closer look at the opposite, 7th Octoscope house then. The traditional meaning of the 7th house is marriage, but that’s a bit difficult to discern here. Otherwise we have again a pattern, and it seems to be about teaching, writing and delivering of information. We have 124 people with exceptional minds, 969 teachers, 128 Nobel Prize winners and 302 physicians. Then we have 402 playwrights, 100 humour writers and 674 journalists (Gauquelin). We also have 203 psychics / mediums and 313 religious leaders. And finally we have 349 producers, 300 government empolyees and 66 diplomats.

Themes emerging are wisdom, expertise, knowledge and teaching, and I cannot help thinking about the Moon as the Egyptian mythological figure Thoth “the author of all works of science, religion, philosophy and magic … the true author of every work of every branch of knowledge, human and divine” (Wikipedia). On the life cycle the 7th house would represent wisdom of the old age, because the next and the final house is death.

Finally I would like to take a look at the 4th Octoscope house being located opposite the 8th house. The Chaldean significator of the 4th house is the Sun, and if the 8th house is the house of death, then the 4th might be the house of life. But this seems to be a bit tricky.

One emerging theme seems to be dangerous and risky lifestyle. Here we find 392 military aviators (Gauquelin), 616 liberation fighters (Gauquelin), 176 political criminals, 172 race drivers, 278 thiefs, 422 people with prison sentences, 215 people with extreme amount of sex partners, 97 people in sex business, 85 assault / battery victims and 69 kidnapping victims.

On the other hand we find people who listen: 134 alternative healers, 2237 astrologers, 175 psychologists, 249 western ecclesiastics and 153 magazine writers (doing interviews).

Maybe the general theme of the 4th house might be survival. Traumatic experiences but also trauma therapy. Going deep. I know that these themes are associated with the classical 8th house in the 12 house system, but statistically they seem to spread well over to the classical 7th house too. I’ve noticed in my acquaintanceship, that people having an emphasis in the 4th Octoscope house tend to project quite a discernible toughness. “If it doesn’t kill you, it makes you stronger”, might be the motto here. As an anecdote, our own Finnish Formula driver Kimi Raikkonen, “Ice man” (17 October 1979 3.40 PM Espoo, Finland, time from the Finnish astrological circles), has all of his seven traditional planets + the North Node in the 4th Octoscope house.

Mark and James, thank you too for your very interesting responses and warm welcome. I’ll reply to you later today.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

James and Mark, thank you for giving a larger perspective for Octoscope (Octotopos, Octatopos, Octotropos…). I didn’t know that Gauquelin flirted a bit with Octoscope in the 80/90’s. Bill Johnston’s and Patrice Guinard’s articles were familiar to me.

Contrary to Johnston’s opinion, on the basis of studies both of Gauquelin and mine I’m quite convinced that the houses run clockwise and the powerful areas are above the horizon and after the MC. Mark, your point about the strong area starting before the cusp is valid. I didn’t take that into consideration to keep things simple, and to look whether the idea of Octoscope has any validity at all.

I took a look at some of my best results putting the beginning of a house one sector (1/40 or one fifth of a house) backwards.

I for example made a combined “super group” of the groups having the Asc ruler most often in the 1st house and having to do with the appearance and the well-being and maintaining of the physical body; that is conductors, opera singers, good looking people, tennis players, outdoor people, PR people, adventurers, people served in the army, people suffering from arthritis, nurses, dancers, polices, fashion designers and actors (Jigsaw). After removing duplicates, that is charts belonging to more than one category, I got a sample of 2630 charts. By starting the 1st house exactly from the Ascendant, 439 (16,7 %) had the Asc ruler in the 1st Octoscope house when the expected value is 327 (12,4 %). The P-score indicating the probability of this result happening by chance is 0,001. When trying the same by starting the 1st house 20 % before the Ascendant, the result dropped to 419 the expected value being 339 and the P-score was 0,009 – still good but not as good as in the previous case. I was quite surprised about this result.

I also looked at some of the Gauquelin samples simply by calculating raw counts. There may be something I don’t understand, but when I look at these raw counts, I see no reason to count the last sector before an angle as part of the power area. When dividing the diurnal arc into 40 sectors, Jigsaw even shows a pit just before the MC. The strong area is quite excatly five sectors forward (clockwise) from he MC, as we are used to see. Also the area just under the Ascendant doesn’t show any special emphasis, the emphasis starts only above the Ascendant. (I tried to insert a picture but then I noticed that the picture should be on the net.)

Also the Moon and writers gives a similar graph. This time there is a pit both before the Ascendant and the MC.

The question about the dynamic houses having also to do with topical things or only with strength is an interesting one. In my previous studies a few years ago I didn’t find much evidence for the whole sign houses either topically or “strength-wise”. These recent Octoscope studies would seem to point clearly to the dynamical divisions or houses showing topical content along with planetary busyness. The odd houses (1, 3, 5 and 7) would seem to be topically more fortunate and successful, and the even houses (2, 4, 6 and 8 ) would seem to be not only weak but actually qualitatively quite unfortunate or challenging, except the 2nd house.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4924
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sari wrote:
Quote:
I also looked at some of the Gauquelin samples simply by calculating raw counts. There may be something I don’t understand, but when I look at these raw counts, I see no reason to count the last sector before an angle as part of the power area. When dividing the diurnal arc into 40 sectors, Jigsaw even shows a pit just before the MC. The strong area is quite excatly five sectors forward (clockwise) from he MC, as we are used to see. Also the area just under the Ascendant doesn’t show any special emphasis, the emphasis starts only above the Ascendant. (I tried to insert a picture but then I noticed that the picture should be on the net.)


I couldn't really comment on what your limited sample of Gauquelin data looks like on Jigsaw. You would surely accept though that Gauquelin's samples were far larger than anything you have attempted. I refer you to Gauquelin's book Neo-Astrology, a Copernican Revolution (1991). I think its quite evident from Gauquelin's numerous chart illustrations in the book that his research shows the plus zone starts/finishes below the ASC.

I accept the statistical spike is stronger around the ASC and well into the 12th. However, it starts/finishes in the 36th sector. According to Gauquelin sectors 1-3, 9-12, 18-21, 27-30, and 36 are the "plus zones" for planets.

Sari wrote:
Quote:
I didn’t find much evidence for the whole sign houses either topically or “strength-wise”.


I am no statistician but you seem to be missing out one obvious factor which makes whole sign houses much better at reflecting the Gauquelin results than any other conventional house system. In whole sign houses planets are frequently counted in the 1st house which would be counted as being in the 12th house using any of the quadrant house systems or using the equal system. I am not aware of any other conventional 12 house system that counts planets above the ascendant as angular are you? The only marginal exception being the so called 5 degree rule which some traditionalists use so that 12th house planets in the last 5 degrees before a cusp are counted in the the next house.

However, with WSH you could have a planet in the first degree of a sign and an ASC in the last degree of the sign. That planet would still be delineated as in the first house and angular using whole sign houses. This kind of phenomena simply couldn't occur using conventional quadrant or equal houses. In short whole sign houses are much more likely to have their 'angular' planets in Gauquelin plus zones than angular houses in any of the quadrant or equal systems.

The only exception to this might be the traditional Indian system of Sripati houses which put the angles in the middle of the houses rather than at the start. This approach would more readily allow planets to be considered 'angular' in Gauquelin plus zones than any other quadrant system I am aware of.

Of course the more radical proposal is to base all the houses in clockwise order as you suggest for an 8 division system.

The late French astrologer Jacques Dorsan did in fact propose such a clockwise house system nearly 30 years ago. I assume you are familiar with his work as a fellow western siderealist? He first set out his case for a clockwise house system in his book Le véritable sens des maisons astrologiques , in 1984. Its now been translated into English.

I haven't read Dorsan's book yet but I am quite intrigued what he has to say. I see he discusses the option of an Octuple division in his book. Although, I think he settles on a 12 sign system.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Clockwise-House-System-Foundation-Astrology/dp/1584200952

Have you tested out Jacques Dorsan's clockwise house system in your research?

Reading the Amazon reviews there seems some dispute over the favoured house system. Dorsan seems to have preferred Campanus houses but it appears the editor of the book favoured Placidus and presented the charts that way. Plus another reviewer working with the 'Clockwise house system' claims equal houses work better. Typical astrological discord over houses!

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Mark,

Quote:
I couldn't really comment on what your limited sample of Gauquelin data looks like on Jigsaw. You would surely accept though that Gauquelin's samples were far larger than anything you have attempted.

I don't know if my Gauquelin data sample is limited. It contains 2087 charts, the same group in C.U.R.A. site contains 2088 http://cura.free.fr/gauq/902gdA1.html . I don't know, where one sportsman is disappeared, but I don't think it affects the end result a lot.

Here's the graph of raw counts, when the diurnal arc is divided into 40 sectors: http://sdrv.ms/11MjZRc . As you can see, there's no emphasis before the cusps (clockwise) and the main peaks are located in the first five sectors after the Ascendant and the MC. The same happens with 1352 Gauquelin writers and the Moon: http://sdrv.ms/14gDGTm .

Quote:
In whole sign houses planets are frequently counted in the 1st house which would be counted as being in the 12th house using any of the quadrant house systems or using the equal system.

But not all of them, that's the problem. With whole sign houses the results get blurred, part of the Mars positions stay in the 12th house and part of the move to the 1st house, same happens on the MC: http://sdrv.ms/11JdKfQ . The emphasis is still on the "cadent" side!

Dorsan's book sound really interesting, I hadn't heard of him before. Also Natasa Koprivica's article you mentioned earlier was interesting too. I've got many good references from you all.

About the reversed houses: if the right house system were 12 houses, but in a reversed order, in a study like I've presented here the houses would show clear and powerful results, just their topical content would be surprising. When this kind of study, where different samples are gathered under the houses where they show strongest emphasis, is done with a house system that doesn't work, every house gathers a mixed bag of samples of which is difficult to find any unifying theme without a really creative imagination. But with eight houses finding the unifying themes is amazingly easy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 2686
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

papretis,
i agree with mark that the use of whole houses would change the results and complicate your interest in making a connection between gauguelins work and research on any house system in connection with their work.

on another note i happened to notice an interesting 95 page pdf that i have yet to read that may suggest why the idea of 12 houses was adopted.

Did the division of the year by the Babylonians into twelve months lead to the adoption of an equal twelve-sign zodiac in Hellenistic astrology? - by Chris Mitchell

http://www.astrozero.co.uk/articles/documents/babylonian_zodiac_chris_mitchell.pdf
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi James, you wrote:

Quote:
i agree with mark that the use of whole houses would change the results and complicate your interest in making a connection between gauguelins work and research on any house system in connection with their work.

Yes, they definitely would change the results and possibly complicate my interest. But in practice they don’t, because I’ve previously studied Whole Signs extensively with almost the same methods I use now, both tropically and sidereally.

For example, if you look for samples that have either the Ascendant ruler or planets in general most often in a certain Whole Sign house, you’ll get a mixed bag of samples which don’t give any general themes or any “golden threats” to follow, or any hints of the meaning of that house.

I also used to search in AstroDatabank for people who have as many (traditional) planets in a certain house as possible. But the themes of that house didn't show up in the lives of those people in the way I expected. Whole Signs weren't any better in that sense than any twelve-fold house system.

Also, if you put Gauquelin samples, which give such interesting peaks when using diurnal ascending and culminating points as reference, to the Whole Sign houses, the peaks will get flattened, the planets will distribute more evenly in several houses, and the effect will be gone. Which in turn means that dynamical houses would seem to give us more meaningful information.

Also, if we want to strip astrology from esotericism (which I admit all astrologers don’t see as necessary), and to find some kind of “scientific” explanation to why astrology works, then we might think astrology as a science of time, studying quality of time. We might think of earth as some kind of a giant clock, where we are living inside. We all can see and experience the diurnal and seasonal changes in nature (we are experiencing one today at the solstice point), but what if those diurnal and seasonal patterns affect us in a more deep and complicated way than the majority of humans currently realize? What if those diurnal and seasonal patterns put their “stamp” on everything that comes into existence, including newborn babies?

In that case the horoscopic reference points would be the same that define our diurnal and seasonal patterns, our clocks and calendars; that is, the diurnal ascending, culminating, descending and anti-culminating points of the sun, and the seasonal solstices. That would make the tropical zodiac and dynamical houses as the most self-evident starting point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4924
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Paperetis wrote:
Quote:
I don't know if my Gauquelin data sample is limited. It contains 2087 charts, the same group in C.U.R.A. site contains 2088 http://cura.free.fr/gauq/902gdA1.html.


Oh I see! Sorry I assumed your sample is much smaller than this. Most of your sample is therefore still the original gauquelin data? I have access to quite a lot of Scottish AA data if your interested.

Have you looked at planets other than Mars?


Papretis wrote:
Quote:
Here's the graph of raw counts, when the diurnal arc is divided into 40 sectors:http://sdrv.ms/11MjZRc .
As you can see, there's no emphasis before the cusps (clockwise) and the main peaks are located in the first five sectors after the Ascendant and the MC. The same happens with 1352 Gauquelin writers and the Moon: http://sdrv.ms/14gDGTm .


Well there is no doubt your spike is focused above the ASC. Graphs don’t lie. I just don’t understand how you can be reaching a different conclusion from Gauquelin on essentially the same data.

Could it be the decision to present in 40 sectors? I think (?) Gauquelin always used a variation on Placidus houses. Hence all sectors variations could be trisected by three ie. 12, 18, or 36. He settled on 36 eventually.

I do think this issue needs to be resolved. Its obviously fundamental to your approach to start the 8 divisions at the ASC and count diurnally. However, everything I have read about Gauguelin seems to indicate his ‘plus zone’ around the ASC includes about 1/3 of the first house and all of the 12th.

If that is correct(?) no house system starting at the ASC can come close to capuring most of this zone. However, its worth pointing out the plus zones at other angles are smaller. So its less of an issue there.

Looking at conventional house systems the only realistic contenders seem to be those that can start the 1st house well above the ASC.

There are only 3 systems I am aware of are:
a) Whole sign
b) Sripati (derived from Porphyry houses but the cusps are in the middle of the house not the beginning)
c) Vehlow-Raman (similar to equal except the house cusp is in the middle of the house and the house starts 15 degrees before and finishes 15 degrees after the ASC)

If we see the Gauguelin plus zones as making up 40 degrees around the ASC those systems that start at the ASC have a very poor correlation ( Placidus, Alcabitius, Equal, Koch, Topocentric, Campanus, Regiomontanus etc). These systems coincide with the plus zones around the ASC by only about 25%. Its marginally better if astrologers use the so called 5 degree rule which considers 5 degrees above the ASC as in the 1st. This puts the correlation up to about 38%.

Vehlow and Sripati do much better at 60% around the ASC-DESC. I think it harder to work out an exact percentage for whole sign as the correlation % will very depend on the specific random sample of nativities selected. Its obviously, lower for nativities with ascendants less than 15 degrees into the sign but progressively higher for cases where the ASC is above 15 degrees.

Overall, Sripati probably performs best using a conventional house system.

I see your position that a more radical solution is called for. Hence we have your proposed Octuple, or starting the houses clockwise from the ASC (Dorsan). Francoise Gauquelin suggested simply changing the numbering of the astrological houses so that the 12th became the 1st. Like Dorsan she suggested the houses should be clockwise not in zodiacal order.

The bigger issue is how much should astrologers simply accept the Gauquelin research? That is really the elephant in the room here.

If we simply adopted Gauquelins research we wouldn’t be left with much astrology. Gauquelin concluded the following elements of astrological technique had no statistical validity whatsover:

-The Sun, Mercury, and the outer planets (Uranus, Neptune and Pluto) are excluded from consideration as there is no evidence of their impact in the plus zones.

-The Zodiac is dispensed with as there is no evidence of its effect according to Gauquelin’s research

-The Aspects are dispensed as there no evidence of their effect according to Gauquelin’s research

So if we follow the Gauquelin findings as our sole guide we need to abandon several planets, the zodiac, aspects and conventional house systems.

In fact all Gauquelins research validates is the influence of Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Venus and the Moon in the plus zones in providing a slight statistical correlation with certain careers and personality types.

Moreover, even this effect completely disappears according to Gauquelin if the births are induced. This is an increasingly common feature in modern Hospitals.

So if we restricted astrological practice to what was empirically verified we wouldn’t have next to nothing left to work with in astrological terms beyond the influence of planets in plus zones.

Nevertheless, I think the Gauquelin data on plus zones is very interesting and one I am more inclined to seek to respond to in my astrological practice. As astrologers we cant keep citing Gauquelin as providing some 'grain of gold' for astrology if we are going to totally ignore his findings.

Your thread is very thought provoking and has really made me question my approach to houses. So thank you for that.

I will give some more specific feedback on your Octuple or Octoscope research later.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly


Last edited by Mark on Sat Jun 22, 2013 12:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 2686
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hi papretis,

i bolded some parts of your comments that i thought were worth making more prominent. a house system is not the first place i would be looking for to try to make some sort of scientific claim for astrology. trying to make any claim of this nature is like fighting an uphill battle too.. gauguelins research was statistically valid but the scientific community wanted nothing to do with it..that ought to tell anyone interested in astrology something right away. when the ''scientific community'' wants to consider some of the ideas you've expressed here that i have bolded, then it might be the right moment.. until then i view these types of studies as interesting to follow but i can't help but comment and think the energy would be better expressed in some other direction.. kudos for anyone 'who' continues to try to find a way of making valid astrology whether scientific or not..

Papretis wrote:
Whole Signs weren't any better in that sense than any twelve-fold house system.

Also, if you put Gauquelin samples, which give such interesting peaks when using diurnal ascending and culminating points as reference, to the Whole Sign houses, the peaks will get flattened, the planets will distribute more evenly in several houses, and the effect will be gone. Which in turn means that dynamical houses would seem to give us more meaningful information.

Also, if we want to strip astrology from esotericism (which I admit all astrologers don’t see as necessary), and to find some kind of “scientific” explanation to why astrology works, then we might think astrology as a science of time, studying quality of time. We might think of earth as some kind of a giant clock, where we are living inside. We all can see and experience the diurnal and seasonal changes in nature (we are experiencing one today at the solstice point), but what if those diurnal and seasonal patterns affect us in a more deep and complicated way than the majority of humans currently realize? What if those diurnal and seasonal patterns put their “stamp” on everything that comes into existence, including newborn babies?

In that case the horoscopic reference points would be the same that define our diurnal and seasonal patterns, our clocks and calendars; that is, the diurnal ascending, culminating, descending and anti-culminating points of the sun, and the seasonal solstices. That would make the tropical zodiac and dynamical houses as the most self-evident starting point.


but what if any particular moment was capable of affecting us, or us affecting it in some significant way that we failed to recognize or acknowledge, not just the birth moment?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Mark and James,
thank you for your very interesting and thoughtful posts. I happen to have got original Gauquelin data from an astrologer, I think it was here in Skyscript that someone contacted me a few years ago when I was doing this kind of studies last time. The data is also on the C.U.R.A. site.

Quote:
I just don’t understand how you can be reaching a different conclusion from Gauquelin on essentially the same data.

Me neither. I cannot understand, how Gauquelin decided to include the previous sector into the power zone, when his data doesn’t seem to support it. But I leave open the possibility that there’s something that I simply don’t know.

About the methods Gauquelin found valid: I don’t know if Gauquelin studied rulerships and dignities at all, at least I haven’t seen any evidence of that. That would leave their validity open. In the study I’ve presented here the Ascendant rulers in (Octoscope) houses would seem to give good results. That would validate both signs and (traditional) rulerships. If rulerships are valid, then possibly detrimets are too.

In the past few days I’ve gone through the same 174 samples I used in the Octoscope study and looked for samples that have certain planets in the 1st or the 3rd Octoscope house, that is, in the Gauquelin plus zones, in order to find out about the nature of the planets like the Gauquelins did. It has given some results, and though the results are maybe not as clear as in the Octoscope study, they go along similar lines than with Gauquelin.

The Moon would seem to do with writing and also somewhat with care (Kids more than three, nurses, psychiatrists).

As with Gauquelin, the Sun doesn’t show clearly any specific significations, but because of its nature as the center and power supplier of the solar system, its role may be as a more general energy source.

Mercury might have some connection with calculating practicality (economists, private personalities, public officers, producers, outdoor people, thieves - the traditional signification of Mercury!).

Venus is prominent with people dealing with beauty and popularity (the US presidents – 19 out of 41 having Venus in the 1st or 3rd Octoscope house, sex symbols, architects, social workers, football players, sport coaches / managers, psychologists, fashion designers, song writers, critics, music teachers).

Mars shows up with Gauquelin’s sportsmen (of course), but also with Gauquelin’s scientists and military men, with people served in the army (from AstroDatabank), polices and executed people.

Jupiter is strong in the charts of military men (Gauquelin, along with Mars), actors, politicians (Gauquelin), NASA astronauts, adventurers / explorers, military pilots (Gauquelin), photographers and textbook writers. Classical Jovian expansion themes.

Saturn is a real malefic, showing prominence in the charts of violent criminals, psychotic people, bigoted personalities, nervous breakdown cases, assaulters, people with prison sentences and rapists.

The Nodal Axis would seem to have something to do with having an intelligent and/ or intuitive mind (North Node) versus being a simpleton or having a distorted mind (South Node).

I also went through some asteroids and the outer planets. A bit surprisingly, the most common asteroids (Vesta, Pallas, Juno, Ceres) would seem to give some results along with Uranus, but Neptune and Pluto give nothing very meaningful.

Uranus might signify intelligence and high education (doctors, politicians, public officers, highly educated people, attorneys, teachers, government empolyees, social workers, journalists). I noted a few years ago that the Uranus transits through the signs seem to correlate with trends in popular music, and Uranus is frequently found in the power zones of pop singers and song writers.

But Neptune and Pluto give such variable collection of samples that you cannot pull anything meaningful out of them. It may be because of them moving so slowly that with a certain age cohort they are always more frequently in certain houses (because of the variable rising times of the ascending signs), so the random control data should be composed very carefully matching the birth years of a sample. I actually tried to do that with the Gauquelin data, but it didn’t help.

The other option is that they simply don’t have any astrological significance! In any case I think Neptune and Pluto are given far too much emphasis in chart interpretation.

What about Vesta, Pallas, Juno and Ceres then?
- Vesta: business, especially business having to do with home and cooking (restaurateurs, real estate agents, business owners, rich people).
- Pallas: science (Gauquelin’s scientists, clerics / secretaries, Nobel Prize winners, mathematicians, engineers, military pilots, researchers, eccentrics, private people).
- Juno: metaphysical things (metaphysical writers, people with mystical experiences, people with metaphysical world view, religious / spiritual writers, religious leaders, western ecclesiastics).
- Ceres: music (instrumentalists, jazz musicians, conductors, composers, critics).

James, though I would like to see astrology getting accepted in scientific circles, unfortunately I’m too weak and academically uneducated to make that happen by myself Smile . But what really interests me is to find astrological techniques and significations that really work on large amounts of charts and thus for example in blind readings. I love it when I look at the charts of my friends, family members and celebrities and see things that I’ve found in these studied working in single charts.

One example: Roy Orbison (23rd April 1936 at 3.50 PM Vernon, Texas). He had his Asc and MC ruler Mercury in the 3rd Octoscope house along with the Sun, Moon and Mars. First I was baffled: the 3rd house should be about travel, vehicles, machines, technics, etc. – what did Orbison have to do with those things? Until I read in Wikipedia:

Quote:
Orbison was fascinated with machines. He was famous for following a car that he liked on sight, and making the driver an offer on the spot. He had a collection worthy of a museum by the late 1960s. He and Claudette shared a love for motorcycles; she had grown up around them, but Orbison claimed Elvis Presley had introduced him to motorcycles. However, tragedy struck on June 6, 1966, when Orbison and Claudette were riding home from Bristol, Tennessee. She was struck by a semi-trailer truck and died instantly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Orbison

This is simply mind-boggling.

Another example (help me, I cannot stop, if I start!): in the statistical study the 7th Octoscope house didn’t show any specific emphasis on the classical 7th house meaning of marriage, but on single charts things change.

Let’s take Cary Grant (18th January 1904 at 1.07 AM, Bristol, England) and Elizabeth Taylor (27th February 1932 at 2 AM, Golders Green, England), both actors and classic heart breakers of the Hollywood golden era. Grand was married five times, Taylor notoriously eight times with seven husbands. Grant had his Asc ruler Venus, MC ruler Sun along with Mercury and the Moon in the 7th Octoscope house. Taylor had her Sun, Mercury, Mars and North Node in the 7th house.

This may be too creative for the tastes of many of you, but if I rectify the whole hour birth time of Taylor 22 minutes backwards to 1.38 AM, then Saturn joins the existing 7th house planets, the 7th house Mercury becomes the MC ruler and the new 7th house ruler Jupiter is found in the 3rd house, the possible significator of fame and career (because of the MC).

In Yoko Ono’s chart (18th February 1933 at 8.30 PM, Tokyo, Japan) the Asc ruler Venus and the 7th house ruler Saturn conjunct together in the 6th house of eccentricity and inventiveness = Yoko and John Lennon met at her experimental art exhibition, and since that they were inseparable until once she initiated a temporal separation (Venus is separating from Saturn). Also the MC ruler Moon is found in the 7th house of marriage = her fame comes from first and foremost from her marriage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4924
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Papretis wrote:
Quote:
Mars shows up with Gauquelin’s sportsmen (of course), but also with Gauquelin’s scientists and military men, with people served in the army (from AstroDatabank), polices and executed people.

Saturn is a real malefic, showing prominence in the charts of violent criminals, psychotic people, bigoted personalities, nervous breakdown cases, assaulters, people with prison sentences and rapists.


Hello Sari,

However, I think Gauquelin and subsequent research confirmed a connection between Saturn and scientists too.

Have you read Gauquelin's book 'Spheres of Destiny': Your Personality and the Planets? You can still pick up a used copy dirt cheap on Amazon. In the book he tries to offer a more popular presentation of his research in terms of 'planetary types'. He sets out his reasons why the he sees the Saturnian type as matching those into science. He also follows the astrological idea of key words for each type.

Gauquelin suggests that sometimes you get a personality type in a field dominated by another planetary type. For example Einstein was a Jupiter type in the Saturnian field of science. Equally, Richard Nixon was a Saturnian type in the Jupiter dominated field of politics.

Incidentally, this excellent article updates the idea of Gauquelin plus zones in light of the latest research. It suggests the plus zones were smaller than Gauquelin originally suggested.

In the article below David Cochrane states:

Quote:
Another consideration in analyzing the diurnal position of planets is the method for measuring the planet position in the diurnal cycle. Gauquelin used a method that we are referring to as Placidian arcs. Astrologers typically project planet positions onto the ecliptic plane and the resulting positions are known as ecliptic positions or zodiac longitude positions. Less used by astrologers but more often used by astronomers are positions projected on the equatorial plane and these positions are known as right ascension positions. After producing graphs in longitude and right ascension measured from both the rising point and the culminating point and comparing these to various golden ratio positions, only the zodiac longitude positions appeared to provide a good correspondence with the peaks and troughs in the graph of Mars for sports champions.


http://www.astrosoftware.com/Reassessment%20of%20the%20Mars%20Effect.htm

I have taken the liberty of displaying this table used in the article:



Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly


Last edited by Mark on Sat Jun 22, 2013 4:12 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4924
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Sari,

Your proposal to work clockwise or diurnally seems to reflect the similar conclusions of several French writers influenced by the Gauquelin research. I have already provided links to the paper by Patrice Guinard and the book by Dorsan.

Michel Gauquelin's wife Francoise was interested in astrology. She suggested that the Greek astrological tradition (especially Ptolemy) went down a dead end in moving away from the focus on the diurnal movement of planets in Babylonian astrology. Hence a planet rising would be seen as in a position of power rather than weakness prior to the Greek conceptualisation of houses.

Here is a link to Francoise Gauquelin's paper from 1985 entitled ''The Greek Error or Return to Babylon''

http://cura.free.fr/xxv/24app3-3.html

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated