16
AJ wrote in reply to Martin (9 Jan 2022):
I assume that your comment was comparing Houck value to Solar Fire's Krishnamurti ayanamsa. It is also used in Swiss Ephemeris so most Western astrological software uses this value for KP ayanamsa. It turns out that the Solar Fire Krishnamurti ayanamsa is a bit of a special animal.

If you're using Solar Fire they use 22-21-50 (epoch Jan 1, 1900) which is off by 14.5" due to Robert Hand not realizing that the ayanamsa tables were calculated for April 15th. Clearly Hand pulled the values from KP Table of Houses (April 1986) or another reference that used those tables. This puts the difference between Houck and Solar Fire ayanamsa at 55 arcseconds.
I’ve been puzzling over the ayanamsa used in Solar Fire and then in the Swiss Ephemeris. But this may not be a dating mistake after all! The values agree with the undocumented table I’ve had since the 1980s (and have forwarded to AJ) which notes 22 21 50 for epoch Jan 1, 1900 with interpolations for each day of the year.

Remembering that I was a salesperson for the Indian Astral-11 astrology software program in the 1980s, I searched the documentation and found this paragraph:

“Krishnamurti’s ayanamsa has been found to be highly accurate for Vimsottari dasa calculations. If you wish to use this ayanamsa, manually subtract 5 minutes 47 seconds from the Lahiri ayanamsa (the program default)...???

This was of course prior to astrology software using the Swiss ephemeris. Testing this in a few Astral-11 printouts I still had in my files, this gives the precise values in the undocumented ayanamsa table (which AJ has labeled ‘Enhanced’ in our correspondence).

I’ve been thinking that perhaps this table was designed to be as close as possible to the Krishnamurti Reader #1 ayanamsa tables. For example if we take the January 1 1900 value of 22 21 50 as a benchmark and add 14 seconds to agree with the date of the Aries April ingress, the value is 22 22 04, only a few seconds different from Reader #1 figure of 22 22 00 (as no seconds were noted in the Reader). This is only supposition as we don't know the source of the 47 second adjustment from Lahiri.

It has been suggested that Reader #1 tables were meant to be for the date of the spring equinox in April rather than for the first of January. So this checks out by interpolating values for January 1900 in the Enhanced Krishnamurti tables: 22 21 50 plus 14" = 22 22 04

Is the object of making the ayanamsa values as close as possible to the Reader #1 table the source of the 5 min 47 second adjustment from the Lahiri ayanamsa? I don’t know, but it is very possible that the Solar Fire/Swiss Ephemeris tables used the same Indian source as Astral-11 since Rob Hand’s company, Astrolabe, was marketing Astral-11 here in America. The company no doubt had at least one Indian contact who visited Astrolabe headquarters.

I’ve also been considering that the reason K.S. Krishnamurti didn’t include seconds in his published ayanamsa table is that he may not have been sure himself of the precise second values, so chose to note only degrees and minutes for (we assume??) the April equinox. This means essentially that a precise to-the-arcsecond value of the KP ayanamsa is up for grabs and can be settled only by detailed research. Theory alone won't give us the answer.

I have two Jyotish programs which upon checking are using the Swiss Ephemeris values from the ‘Enhanced’ Krishnamurti tables:

Parashara’s Light 7.0.4 (March 2009) Geovision Software, Fairfield, Iowa, office in Jaipur, India.
True Astrology Software, Shejal Infotech, Jabalpur, India, V 5.71 (2018) (Programmed for S.P. Khullar)
Last edited by Therese Hamilton on Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

18
Therese Hamilton wrote: This was of course prior to astrology software using the Swiss ephemeris. Testing this in a few Astral-11 printouts I still had in my files, this gives the precise values in the undocumented ayanamsa table (which AJ has labeled ‘Enhanced’ in our correspondence).

I’ve been thinking that perhaps this table was designed to be as close as possible to the Krishnamurti Reader #1 ayanamsa tables. For example if we take the January 1 1900 value of 22 21 50 as a benchmark and add 14 seconds to agree with the date of the April equinox, the value is 22 22 04, only a few seconds different from Reader #1 figure of 22 22 00 (as no seconds were noted in the Reader). This is only supposition as we don't know the source of the 47 second adjustment from Lahiri.
Hi Therese:
Whoever set this table up, why not do the correct math? Just make it 22-21-46 for Jan 1, 1900 if they assumed it was exactly 22-22-00 for April 15... ???
But I think this supposition is as good an explanation as any. Without a formula for this particular ayanamsa it is hard to tell the rationale. It's just a matter of time to document this ayanamsa for clearly it has been in print and possibly additionally published in early issues of Astrology and Athrishta magazine. Once pinned down to its pub that may explain the values. It's very difficult for a western researcher at least to have ready access to this old print material and then it was mostly only of interest to students of KP Paddhati. The publisher has not answered me if they have an accessible archive or not. Covid has shut a lot of stuff down. I will try again in some months.
Therese Hamilton wrote:It has been suggested that Reader #1 tables were meant to be for the date of the spring equinox in April rather than for the first of January. So this checks out by interpolating values for January 1900 in the Enhanced Krishnamurti tables: 22 21 50 plus 14" = 22 22 04
Following the Indian tradition at that time it is believed that that Krishnamurti must have had Meesha Sankranti (ingress of sidereal Sun into Aries) in mind but KSK does not give an exact date, which leaves an uncertainty in his ayanamsa of 50???. Most ayanamsa tables that I have come across use this date, approx April 13-14 each year, often rounded to April 15th.
Therese Hamilton wrote:Is the object of making the ayanamsa values as close as possible to the Reader #1 table the source of the 5 min 47 second adjustment from the Lahiri ayanamsa? I don’t know, but it is very possible that the Solar Fire/Swiss Ephemeris tables used the same Indian source as Astral-11 since Rob Hand’s company, Astrolabe, was marketing Astral-11 here in America. The company no doubt had at least one Indian contact who visited Astrolabe headquarters.
Initial research (2022) suggests that this ayanamsa has mostly been referred to as KP Enhanced ayanamsa but I think this value should just be named KP Solar Fire or KPSF for short, to differentiate it from others. There is already too much confusion about same naming in the KP ayanamsa maelstrom. This ayanamsa has been with Solar Fire for two decades now, so right or wrong, it's part of the astrological landscape. At least in the west it has a provenance coming down through Nova software and then SolarFire. It’s really too late to change or update it, just add another version to the greater KP ayanamsa family.

It has been a 4 decade debate and earnest struggle within the KP community since KSKs death to refine his original ayanamsa and at different times since, one or the other has been the unofficial favorite. I have documented 4 and with the one you sent there is now 5! The KP Enhanced Ayanamsa may have been an early favorite until it was superseded by other proposed ayanamsa within the KP community as time went on. KP Enhanced ayanamsa is within 14" of the KP Table of Houses ayanamsa which is given for April 15th. In all other respects they are identical. My thought is that it's the same table and just one was assigned for Jan 1, the other to April 13-14th because 14" is the precessional correction for that 105 day calendar period.

In 2003 to settle the confusions, KSK's 2nd son and editor of Astrology and Athrishta magazine, which was the original magazine KSK founded, declared that the KP NEW AYANAMSA supersedes all previously published tables. A formula and tables were provided to calculate the ayanamsa for any date in K.P. & Astrology Yearbook 2003, the table is on pages 92-93. You have to be careful though with the naming conventions in KP ayanamsas, some are called by the same names especially in KP software. SJS is the same, their KP New identical to KP Straight Line Ayanamsa (KPSLA). (Note that KPSLA is 6 arcminutes too high from KP Original for epoch 1950 and also within a half arcminute to Lahiri ayanamsa).

I'm sure the argument is never going to be entirely settled.

For reference the Official KP NEW: For April 15th, 1900 the value is 22-22-30, for Jan 1, 1900 the value is 22-22-16.
Therese Hamilton wrote:I’ve also been considering that the reason K.S. Krishnamurti didn’t include seconds in his published ayanamsa table is that he may not have been sure himself of the precise second values, so chose to note only degrees and minutes for (we assume??) the April equinox. This means essentially that a precise to-the-arcsecond value of the KP ayanamsa is up for grabs and can be settled only by detailed research. Theory alone won't give us the answer.
Yes, that is essentially my conclusion as well. KSK took all those answers to his grave. His zero year of 291CE is a mystery too. Again he does not give a precise date and using Newcomb's Precessional Model it doesn't exactly jive with his table as it gives a value almost an arcminute to high compared to KP Enhanced, the one in Solar Fire.
Blessings,
~AJ

19
AJ, thanks so much for your detailed thoughts and information in response to my post. I'm printing your reply for my ayanamsa file, and hope I'll be around to read your competed KP research. In the meantime I might as well continue using my Swiss ephemeris based software as the Krishnamurti value is accurate enough to give interesting research results (in relation to the ascendant and MC) as Atlantean has been posting and which I'm finding myself for various small projects.

Many thanks again for opening a whole new area of KP research and data that I hadn't been previously aware of!

Therese
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

21
Therese Hamilton wrote:AJ, thanks so much for your detailed thoughts and information in response to my post. I'm printing your reply for my ayanamsa file, and hope I'll be around to read your competed KP research. In the meantime I might as well continue using my Swiss ephemeris based software as the Krishnamurti value is accurate enough to give interesting research results (in relation to the ascendant and MC) as Atlantean has been posting and which I'm finding myself for various small project.
You're welcome Therese, thanks to for bringing up many salient points and the references and history on origins of the Solar Fire ayanamsa.
Martin: Thanks for your contributions too.
None of my research calls into question the efficacy of KSK's ayanamsa, it is merely pointing out that rather than thinking in terms of 1 ayanamsa we have to think in terms of many Krishnamurti ayanamsas. It is up to the practitioner to make the decision of what works best for them KP Paddhati or other. In most work an arcminute two or three difference is of little consequence.

What led to this paper was a collaborative research project with another astrologer. Being from different backgrounds, my colleague in traditional western astrology, mine in Indian astrology, our primary astrological software was different. I knew initially that the Krishnamurti ayanamsa between our software varied slightly but thought this would not affect our combined results much. As the research project moved forward our ayanamsa settings needed to be much closer, that is, within arcseconds of each other. That’s when I began to research Krishnamurti’s ayanamsa between our software, which led me down a rabbit hole of sorts. It wasn’t long before inconsistencies and confusions came to light so by then I just wanted to understand how Krishnamurti’s ayanamsa came about and make this more widely known.

To be fair, it can also be said NC Lahiri changed his ayanamsa slightly over the years and the Calendar Reform Committee adopted a slightly 'imperfect' implementation of his ideal ayanamsa in the late 50s. Lahiri really intended that Chitra to be the fiducial star at 0 Libra. The Calendar Reform Committee used a more traditional approach to calculate the ayanamsa. To truly use Chitra as fiducial you have to take in account the actual proper motion the star and the small change in orientation of the ecliptic plane. This led to the development of the ChitraPaksha ayanamsa is based on the exact astronomical position of Chitra (Spica in the west) which is about an arcminute higher than the official Lahiri ayanamsa.

In the same sense there are a few different Lahiri ayanamsas to choose from but this is all very minor calculation stuff. The values adopted by the Indian Calendar Reform Committee is the standard for Lahiri ayanamsa.

This is another topic entirely and don't have time to get into at the moment. It's certainly not as convoluted as the KP ayanamsa history. It's all pretty well documented whereas KSK left us with a true dark cloud of unknowing around his.

Therese: Since you couldn't find one I constructed a table of Lahiri ayanamsa for the 20th century for your research that you were looking for. Any Forum members that would like a copy can PM me unless you are a jazz musician, please include your email address.

Blessings,
~AJ

22
AJ wrote:
Therese: Since you couldn't find one I constructed a table of Lahiri ayanamsa for the 20th century for your research that you were looking for. Any Forum members that would like a copy can PM me...

Thank you, AJ. This table has been very helpful in comparing the Lahiri and KP ayanamsas which influenced the thoughts in my next post, (or added to this post if there are no new messages in this thread). The figures in your table are one or two arcseconds higher than values given by the AstroSage calculator. This doesn't seem to be significant unless I'm adjusting for the KP ayanamsa for to-the-arcsecond precision. The AstroSage calculator is noted as "Beta" which I presume means that it hasn't been methodically checked for precision or to-the-arcsecond accuracy.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

23
Therese Hamilton wrote:The figures in your table are one or two arcseconds higher than values given by the AstroSage calculator. This doesn't seem to be significant unless I'm adjusting for the KP ayanamsa for to-the-arcsecond precision. The AstroSage calculator is noted as "Beta" which I presume means that it hasn't been methodically checked for precision or to-the-arcsecond accuracy.
Who knows what AstroSage is using for their algorithm, or epoch value; as mentioned before some of their other calculated ayanamsas differ slightly too. If you really look under the hood of Lahiri ayanamsa there are a few slightly different ways to calculate it all giving much the same values within a few seconds. I do know the ayanamsa values and explanations given in the Indian Astronomical Ephemeris are confusing and they have slightly tweaked how Lahiri ayanamsa is calculated over the years.

The values in that table are directly from Swiss Ephemeris' standard Lahiri ayanamsa according to Indian Astronomical Ephemeris (IAE) 1985.
I don't think you can get any better than the Swiss Ephemeris developers.

These are exactly the same/match as published in their online Lahiri sidereal ephemeris.
Any software that uses Swiss Ephemeris and implements their standard Lahiri ayanamsa the values should be the same.

24
Therese Hamilton wrote:The AstroSage calculator is noted as "Beta" which I presume means that it hasn't been methodically checked for precision or to-the-arcsecond accuracy.
Hi Therese: I went to the AstroSage ayanamsa calculator and spent a little time there. Here are some thoughts. It consistently (as you point out) gives Lahiri ayanamsa values an arcsecond or two to low compared to Swiss Ephemeris. This does not appear to be a rounding error to me. I can only speculate it is the formula they are using.

The KP NEW in their calculator also gives results that are a arcsecond to low compared to the tables in K.P. & Astrology Yearbook 2003, P. 92-93.

As for what they are using for KP Old is a little unusual. It doesn't match up well to any KP ayanamsa values I have. It comes closest to KP Enhanced (-11 arcseconds). That of course does not mean it is not based on an existing Krishnamurti ayanamsa value. What is a bit puzzling is that it is generally assumed that KSK's original ayanamsa of 22-22 is 22-22-00 for April 15th, 1900. AstroSage has 22-22-15 for this date, it seems they assume KSK's value is for January 1st, 1900 due to the 14" precessional correction between these dates.

Anyway just thought this might interest you.

26
A corrected KP zero ayanamsa year?

Since back in the 1980s in the days of DOS (before Microsoft Windows) I have been very satisfied with the Krishnamurti (KP) ayanamsa as calculated with Swiss Ephemeris (SE) paremeters. I’ve found this ayanamsa accurate for timing solar ingress charts, various events and the placement of planets in signs and India’s divisional charts. I began with Rob Hand’s Nova software and am still using Nova’s off-spring, Solar Fire.

This ayanamsa followed me into two later Indian astrology programs: Parshara’s Light (DOS, Windows) and True Astrology Software (programmed for S.P. Khullar). I’ve been blissfully unaware of the controversy surrounding the KP (Krishnamurti Padhdhati) ayansmsa until AJ posted related notes here on Skyscript. So as an astrologer unschooled in precession theory I took a more basic approach to my question: “How do I know if the ayanamsa I’ve been relying on for more than 50 years is valid????

K. S. Krishnamurti (KSK) left two pieces of information for his followers:

(1) ayanamsa tables calculated only to the arcminute published in KP (Krishnamurti Paddhdhati) Reader #1 (no arcseconds).

(2) a statement that the zero KP ayanamsa year is 291

We know that KSK himself used the arcminutes from this table for his personal work as examples are given in his books were he specifically notes the date and degree and minute of the ayanamsa he is using.

Step 1
In order to give a sense of structure to the KP arcminute values, the arcminutes can be deducted from Lahiri ayanamsa values which we know are correctly calculated to the arcsecond. The offset from the Lahiri ayanamsa represents the accumulated precession from the zero Lahiri ayanamsa year of 285 to the zero KP ayanamsa year. The figures of the 1960s especially represent a decade when Krishnamurti was actively testing and using his ayanamsa and teaching students.

Below is a selection of arcminute differences between Lahiri (SE, 1 January) and the KP Reader #1 ayanamsa table. We can use the Lahiri arcseconds since there are no seconds in the Reader #1 table, but there obviously are arcseconds between the annual figures in the table.

1900: KP 22' Lahiri 27' 38" Difference 5' 38"
1966: KP 17' Lahiri 22' 56" Difference 5' 56"
1967: KP 18' Lahiri 23' 46" Difference 5' 46"
1980: KP 29' Lahiri 34' 40" Difference 5' 40"
1990: KP 37' Lahiri 43' 03" Difference 6' 03"

Figure differences from Lahiri in KP Reader #1 fall in the 5 to 6 arcminute range except for a few figures in the low 6 arcminute range such as the 1990 figure of 6' 03 above. There are no differences below 5 arcminutes. These difference figures are the key to the KP ayanamsa zero year since they represent accumulated precession from the Lahiri zero year of 285.

Step 2
The next step is to find the year when Lahiri ayanamsa values fall between 5 and 6 arcminutes. Values below are from the Swiss Ephemeris (SE). (Figures in parenthesis are from the online AstroSage calculator, calculation parameters unknown.)

Year 291: March 4' 34" April 4' 38" (4'55")
Year 292: March 5' 24" April 5'28" (5'45")
Year 293: March 6' 14" April 6'18" (6'35")

It is obvious from these figures that Year 292 matches the published KP table rather than 291. Year 291 values are too low, less than 5 arcminutes, and year 293 figures are too high, over 6 arcminutes. The actual KP/Lahiri difference in Swiss Ephemeris calculations is 5' 48", so conforms to the 292 figures. Based on his own table, Krishnamurti seems to have been a year off in his zero ayanamsa date. This is perhaps not surprising in the pre-computer days of manual calculation. The 292 date suggests that any effort to synchronize 291 with the KP table values is an exercise in futility.

With its current algorithm, The Swiss Ephemeris verifies 292 as the zero KP year with these Krishnamurti ayanamsa figures:

Year 292: March 00'25" April 00'20" September 00'01"

We don’t know how the AstroSage 15 April 292 figure of 5'45" was computed, but it’s interesting that 5'45" is only three arcseconds from the current Swiss Ephemeris value of 5'48", the difference between the Lahiri and Krishnamurti ayanamsas.

It’s also very interesting that the 1980s Astral11 Indian astrology program manual instructed users to add 5'47" to Lahiri to obtain the Krishnamurti ayanamsa.

5'48" is also the value difference for the year 1900 between the Lahiri ayanamsa and the unsourced ‘Enhanced’ 1980s Krishnamurti table. It is possible (even probable?) that there is a link between this table and the Krishnamurti value that made its way into Nova and Solar Fire software and then into the Swiss Ephemeris. The SE documentation lists the original source and calculation parameters for this ayanamsa as ‘unknown’.

Taking all this data together, and based on many years experience in using the KP Swiss Ephemeris ayanamsa values in my work, for me the SE ayanamsa is the perfect candidate for the 'true' KP ayanamsa, and 292 is the corrected year for the KP zero ayanamsa.

According to AstroSage, 291 is the zero ayanamsa year (02" arcseconds on 15 April) for the latest accepted KP standard ayanamsa in the KP community, ‘KP New’, but this value cannot match Krishnamurti’s published ayanamsa table in Reader #1. (AJ will know how this KP New ayanamsa was computed.) Many thanks to AJ for providing Swiss Ephemeris ayanamsa tables which made this study possible!

After all this work, I wait to see if AJ points out some glaring error in my thinking and calculations that I somehow overlooked in this analysis!
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

27
Hi Therese: Here are some thoughts below and some running commentary too. Some will be stuff we already went over but a good refresher at certain points.
Therese Hamilton wrote: K. S. Krishnamurti (KSK) left two pieces of information for his followers:
(1) ayanamsa tables calculated only to the arcminute published in KP (Krishnamurti Paddhdhati) Reader #1 (no arcseconds).
(2) a statement that the zero KP ayanamsa year is 291
We know that KSK himself used the arcminutes from this table for his personal work as examples are given in his books were he specifically notes the date and degree and minute of the ayanamsa he is using.

KSK does not give an exact date for his table which leaves an uncertainty of 50 arcseconds in his in ayanamsa. His ayanamsa table was not constructed by using, or correctly applying Newcomb's Precessional theory with 291 as zero year for the coincidence of the tropical and sidereal zodiac.
Or, using the precession rate of value 50.2388475" presented by himself on Reader No.1. Too complicated to go into here but that is incorrect per Newcomb's theory too.
Therese Hamilton wrote:The 292 date suggests that any effort to synchronize 291 with the KP table values is an exercise in futility. ...

With its current algorithm, The Swiss Ephemeris verifies 292 as the zero KP year with these Krishnamurti ayanamsa figures:...
This is confirmed using Newcomb's precessional theory (the only one available to KSK in his day) using the 291 zero year, as the values by the time you reach 1900 are about an arc minute too high. If you use a modern precessional model it's even worse.
KP Paddhati society keeps trying to keep KSKs original zero year though! I know they see it as given by 'Guruji' so it must have been divinely inspired, but facts are facts.
Therese Hamilton wrote:It’s also very interesting that the 1980s Astral11 Indian astrology program manual instructed users to add 5'47" to Lahiri to obtain the Krishnamurti ayanamsa.
The use of offsets to obtain values for your own ayanamsa against a rigorously calculated ayanamsa makes the best sense (and easiest) in the whirling confusion of the many Krishnamurti ayanamsas. It was known pretty early I think after KSKs death and even while he was alive that 291 just didn't work though there were before and since KSKs time complex arguments based on the Surya Siddhanta and other ancient texts what was the zero year. KSK perhaps picked up on one of these arguments for his assigning 291 as the zero.
Therese Hamilton wrote:Taking all this data together, and based on many years experience in using the KP Swiss Ephemeris ayanamsa values in my work, for me the SE ayanamsa is the perfect candidate for the 'true' KP ayanamsa, and 292 is the corrected year for the KP zero ayanamsa.
There are 5 or more KP ayanamsas that are currently available in some form either through software, online calculators, tables etc. and each KP user or other researcher is forced to use one based on their own conviction or faith even if it is the right one. I'll say again that none of them are correct per Newcomb's precessional theory. They all differ from a few seconds to 4 to 5 minutes of each other. In KP society there is no getting around KSKs zero year (291).
Which is the correct ayanamsa? This is beyond my original research. My goal was to bring awareness that the KP ayanamsa is not a settled 'given'.

I am glad that you have been able to come to a firm conclusion in this regard. The discussion will always be with us, that is, which is the right ayanamsa? Personally, as I have mentioned in our personal correspondence, I think SE or Solar Fire Krishnamurti ayanamsa, Lahiri and Chitrapaksha are pretty close. This is based on using sign ingresses (including Panoti Yoga), Vimshottari dasha, and vargas over many many years.

Note though, that KSK writes in his Reader No.1, the difference between CG Rajan’s and Lahiri’s ayanamsa to his own is ‘negligible’ (p. 57). Yet in the same paragraph extols his own ayanamsa as "...very correct..."

Here again is another juxtaposition by KSK that is a mystery throughout his works. He's writing this knowing that his table was only accurate to an arcminute, the other two were calculated to the arcsecond. On the one hand he seems unconcerned with the 'negligible' difference and then declares his is 'very correct'. Which is it? Is the accuracy of an ayanamsa okay within 5-6 minutes or not?
Since KSK didn't share any information with us we will never know. Perhaps when he wrote this he was overconfident that he would eventually settle the issue down to the second, who knows?
Maybe at the end of the day the accuracy issue wasn't that important. Martin presented some great ideas on this. See the previous threads.

Can we do astrology better than let's say Thrasyllus? who worked with what a degree of accuracy in the first century? Raman is said to have based his ayanamsa on a statement by the medieval astronomer Bhaskara and the accuracy of the information he started with was 11° in the year 1183.

What I think is important is KSKs students and devotees have spent over 4 decades trying to 'cut the mustard' to rigidly define the KP ayanamsa.
Therese Hamilton wrote:According to AstroSage, 291 is the zero ayanamsa year (02" arcseconds on 15 April) for the latest accepted KP standard ayanamsa in the KP community, ‘KP New’, but this value cannot match Krishnamurti’s published ayanamsa table in Reader #1. (AJ will know how this KP New ayanamsa was computed.)
There are still KP practitioners using others and even derivative systems that have their own ayanamsa too. Yes you are right KP New cannot really match 291, none of them can, it salvages the zero year of 291 by applying an offset to make it 'jive' exactly with the 291 year given by KSK. Yes, a 'fudge factor' if you will.

Well how close it is to KSKs Original ayanamsa (KPO) is hard to say. KPNew is 22-22-30 for 4/15/1900, and all we know is that KPO is 22-22. though it is very likely that KSK meant 4/15 when the sidereal Sun entered Misha. This is assuming a lot though, which years in KSKs table were on the whole minute for that year, maybe everyone taking the round figure of 1900 is one of the worst years? What if it was 22-21-31??? It all gets back to KSKs cloud of unknowing he left surrounding a lot of things.

Blessings.
~AJ