For many years, like many astrologers, we have utilised astrology to analyse sport. Rather than employing the modern concepts of analysing a particular planet via midpoints, harmonic and the like, Brady has taken the more algorithmic approach of medieval astrology, while Lehman has been studying the work of the Renaissance astrologer William Ramesey. For example, modern astrological research style is to take a set of charts and examine them for, let us say, an angular Mars or Mars on a key midpoint to see if it fits a particular expression or characteristic. The medieval approach to research, however, is to use a series of steps to find the key planet and then to look at that planet's relationship to other planets and houses in that particular chart. Thus the signifying planet may well vary from one chart to the next.

This paper is a small part of this research and is the result of applying Guido Bonatti's methods for determining the outcome of castle besiegement to the arena of Test Cricket, and specifically the contest between Australia and England known as The Ashes. To test the validity of these results, Brady shared these techniques with Lehman, who has not only helped to improve them but has been able to successfully apply the same astrological method to the American football series known as The Super Bowl. Lehman has also performed the statistical analysis of the results.
 

Castle Besiegement is one of the two main styles of medieval warfare as presented by Bonatti. The other form is open field warfare and we call this type of conflict a "battle chart" and will be the subject of another article from us later in the year.

Castle besiegement may be suspected for any sport where one team holds a trophy or a title and must be beaten in order to lose that title, and where a draw means the title or trophy stays with the holder. When besiegement applies, the holder has an intrinsic advantage over the challenger. The challenger must clearly defeat the holder in order to win the title. The winner is then the champion and holds that title until retirement or loss to a new challenger.
 

These are quite different from "battle chart" sporting conflicts, in which a group of teams compete over a season and the top teams play off for the trophy. In that type of contest, the winner of the trophy in any one year does not have any special claim or privileges to the trophy in the next year.

The Ashes is clearly a candidate for the castle besiegement type of conflict: the country who won the last series of Tests holds The Ashes. The teams meet in alternate countries countries regardless of who holds The Ashes and the country which challenges for The Ashes has to win the series. A series consists of four, five, sometimes six Test matches, with each Test match, in the modern game, lasting five days. A drawn series means The Ashes are retained by the Holder.

The Ashes was born after the series of Tests in 1882 when Australia beat England on English soil. Prior to that, clashes between the two countries were not "castle besiegement" because there was no property over which the game was being fought. After the series of 1882, however, either England or Australia was deemed to be holding The Ashes, although the physical urn (the actual trophy) is always held at Lord's regardless of which country holds The Ashes.

The Holder also has the right not to put The Ashes up for challenge. This right has been exercised a few times in the history of the game when, for various reasons, it was considered by the Holder that there were not sufficient Tests being played in the series. England did not offer The Ashes for challenge when the two countries played the single Test to celebrate the century of The Ashes in 1977. Nor did England offer The Ashes for challenge in the three Tests played in Australia in 1979/80. These Tests are therefore not "castle besiegement" Tests but rather normal battle charts.

In addition when working with Test Cricket, unlike most other sports, there are three possible outcomes: a win for the Holder of The Ashes; a win for the Challenger; or a Drawn Test. Thus any astrological model used to determine the outcome of the Test must allow for these three possible results.

The situation with the American Super Bowl is somewhat different. US football is organised into two conferences, the National (NFC) and American (AFC). Historically, these used to be two leagues, but they merged in 1970. Each conference has divisions. The top team in each division, plus one or more wild card teams (the team(s) with the best record that did not win a division) play in a series of playoffs, until a champion in each Conference is determined. These two Conference champions play for the Super Bowl. There are several important points. Up to the Super Bowl, all playoff games are played on the home field of the team that had the better record for the year. The Super Bowl is played on neutral territory and the winning Conference holds the Vince Lombardi Trophy. Furthermore, because of this style of sudden death elimination (i.e. one game determines the team's fate at each cut), combined with questions about conference parity, there is no assurance that the two best teams are playing for the Super Bowl.

Cast a chart for the commencement of the siege. The Castle is the Fourth house of the chart and the attacker is the First house of the chart. Measure the respective rulers for strength and zodiacal condition and compare the condition of the First and the Fourth. In addition, consider the aspects made by the two significators. After taking all of these relationship points into account, deem the house ruler and/or house which is the stronger to be the victory in the siege.

The beauty of medieval methods is that, although they may appear complex, the planets, houses and aspects can simply be reduced to a series of pluses or minuses. For example, Bonatti tells us that if a malefic or Cauda Draconis is in the Fourth house, it signifies "loss and evacuation" but if a benefic or Caput Draconis is in there, it "..signifies that the city or castle will not be taken…." (See Tractatus Sextus [TS], Chapter XXIX, page 17)

The rules of planetary and/or house strength can therefore be allocated different point scores reflecting the positive or negative nature of a particular event, allowing consistency in judging the outcome of the conflict. The difficulty is that once one has compiled the list of rules, one then has to determine how many points any particular rule adds or subtracts from the score, as well as the need to clearly define such grey areas as orb, and so on. However, once one has a clear set of scores and rules, then it is simply a matter of setting up a data base and "scoring" each game and looking at the end results to determine the validity of the astrological model. This article is the result of such a process.
 

The Combatants:- The Trophy Holder is called the Holder and the challenger is called the Challenger.

The Time:- The time used is the scheduled time for the start of the first day of the Test Match. Test Cricket is a game where delays caused by rain are a part of the game. A five day Test may start a day late due to weather but it is still a five day Test, with the scores at the beginning of the second day being zero runs for zero wickets. The captains then have to change their tactics to allow for this shortened playing time, since another day is not added at the end. In other words, the Test starts when it is scheduled to start, not when the players take to the field. Brady examined both the actual start times and the scheduled times in a subset of the data, and it became clear that the scheduled time gave better results. Lehman could not replicate this with the Super Bowl data, because there was too little difference between scheduled and actual time to produce a meaningful result. Scheduled time is clearly advantageous for astrological reasons, not to mention betting purposes, because it allows us to predict the result in advance, without having to worry about delay. However, we recommend that other researchers monitor this factor, because delayed start may prove more significant in those games with designated time periods, because here, delay is not so intrinsic to the ultimate strategy of the game as it is with cricket.

The Data:- The scheduled start times of the Tests were supplied from the following sources:

Cricket:

From 1892 to 1994 inclusive: Ross Dundas of Ross Dundas Cricket Statistics Pty Ltd, Melbourne, who accessed the original scorebooks for the information. Data given directly to Brady.

1921 to 1964 inclusive: Glennys Williams, assistant Curator of Marylebone Cricket Club, Lord's Ground, London. 1968 to 1981 inclusive: Bill Frindall of Wiltshire UK, the Scorer of Tests in England since 1966. 1983 to 1993 inclusive: Ross Dundas. Data given directly to Brady. 1884 to 1905 inclusive: Peter Wynne-Thomas, Hon. Secretary Cricket Statisticians Association, UK. The actual start times as reported in the local papers of the day. Data given directly to Brady.

In the 1880's, Test Cricket started at 1 pm but by 1921, in England, the Test tended to start at 11.30 am. However, individual Tests varied in their start time depending on whether they were going to include a Sunday or not. For example, for a while in the late 1970's, Tests in England that had Sunday play started earlier, so that on Sunday they could start late in order for the players and spectators to go to church. Thus one cannot assume that a particular Test has a certain start time just because that was the playing condition of the day. If a Test's scheduled start time was not confirmed, then it was not used.

The times are taken from The New York Times.

As stated, the astrological model is based on Bonatti's castle besiegement techniques and therefore the Test must involve the potential for the castle to fall. In Test Cricket scheduled Tests are played regardless of whether the series has been won. Thus with The Ashes there is usually one Test, sometimes two, at the end of a series which are played for "the game" and "the honour" but not for the "castle". These Tests no longer fall into the category of "castle besiegement" and therefore have not been used in the astrological model.

Given all of the above points, of the 270 Ashes Tests collected, 203 were castle besiegements and have been scored using the method described below.

The results can be summarised in the following table:

Ashes Actual Correctly Predicted

Holder Wins 81 53

Challenger Wins 64 48

Draw 58 36

Total Tests 203 137

This represents a success rate of 67% when a success rate by chance would have given only about 33%. We present the full statistical analysis later in this article.

Super Bowl Actual Correctly Predicted

Holder Wins 23 20

Challenger Wins 7 3

Total Games 30 23

This represents a success rate of 77%, with a chance expectation of 50%. Again, we present the statistical results later.
 

A chart is erected for the scheduled start of play using Placidus houses, since Alcabitius, Bonatti's house system, was not an option we had easily at our disposal. Only the planets from Saturn inwards are used, as well as the diurnal Part of Fortune (we have not had the opportunity to test the day-night reversal, as Test Cricket and Super Bowls do not have nocturnal start times). Aspecting is Ptolemeic.

The first consideration of any Ashes chart is the potential for a draw. If, and only if, that potential is not present in the chart, then the rest of the astrological model can be used to find the victor of the Test. This step was omitted in the US football model, since a draw is not a possible outcome.

A Drawn Match in Test cricket will occur for the following reasons:

(a) Both teams want to win but neither can bowl the other out or score enough runs to win. (This is generally caused by the state of the wicket. If it favours the batsman too strongly, a Test will tend to end in a draw).

(b) Rain causes loss of playing time, making it impossible for 40 wickets to fall.

(c) One team will often play for a draw when in reality it means a victory for them (ie if a team is one Test up in the series, a draw in the final Test will mean that they have won the series and hence The Ashes. )

This final point, although a victory for a particular team, is still a draw and if the astrological model did not pick the draw, even if it correctly predicted the winning team as the team favoured by the draw, it was still considered an incorrect result.

The potential of a draw is dependent upon the condition of the Moon. If the Moon is in bad condition, then an outcome will not achieved and the Test will tend to end as a draw. However, the condition of the Moon has little say over the traditional condition of a particular wicket. The wickets (the playing surfaces) in England are very different to those in Australia and as a result, the ratio of draws varies considerably depending on the country in which The Ashes are being played. In England about 45% of all Ashes Tests played result in a draw. However, in Australia only about 18% are draws.

Translating this information into astrological terms implies that the Moon has to be in reasonably bad condition for a draw to occur in Australian Tests. However, for an English Test, the Moon is far more sensitive to depletion.

If the dispositor of the Moon (i.e., the planet ruling the Moon; old rulerships only) is a benefic or an inferior planet and it is in detriment or fall OR if it is a malefic planet in rulership or exaltation, then consider the following:

a) Is the Moon in detriment or fall?

b) Is the Moon applying to a malefic?

c) Is the Moon combust?

d) Is the Moon applying to or separating from a conjunction of the South node?

e) Is the dispositor combust?

f) Is the dispositor applying to or separating from a conjunction of the South node?

g) Is the dispositor retrograde?

This list is supported by Bonatti's Anima Astrologiae, Consideration 5, on the ways that the Moon can be depleted. If any of the above points of a) to g) are fulfilled, then the Test is judged to be a Draw.

All of the points for Australia are used and regardless of the zodiacal condition of the Moon's dispositor the following, can also imply a draw in England :

a) The Moon applying to or separating from a conjunction of the Nodal axis and NOT helped by a strong dispositor or an aspect from a benefic planet;

b) A combust Moon, regardless of the condition of the dispositor;

c) The Moon applying (6x orb) to a square to the Nodal axis and the Moon in bad zodiacal condition or not receiving an aspect from a benefic;

d) The Moon in the same sign as the South Node but an earlier degree.

If any of the above four points, in addition to the points listed for Australian Tests, were present in a chart for an English Test, then it was judged to be a draw.

There was a 5 Test series played in England in 1926 where the first four Tests resulted in draws. These Tests were spaced a fortnight apart. The first Test, on 12 June, had the Moon in Cancer conjunct the North Node applying to a trine to Saturn, hence judged as a draw and resulting in a draw. The next Test held 14 days later saw the Moon in Capricorn forming an applying conjunction to the South node, hence another drawn Test. The third Test, held 14 days later, once again saw the Moon in Cancer conjunct the North Node, but now involved in a solar eclipse, thus another drawn Test. The fourth Test, held 14 days later, once again saw the Moon in Capricorn conjunct the South Node, resulting in the fourth drawn Test. The fifth and last Test of the series was played 21 days later and had the Moon in good condition. Thus, having broken the pattern of Moon conjunct the nodal axis, a result was achieved.

When Tests are scheduled a fortnight, the Moon simply moves back and forth into opposite positions in the zodiac. If the matches are in England and align with a conjunction or square to the nodal axis, then a series of draws will result.
 

If it was judged that the Test was not going to be a draw, then the following scoring method was applied to the chart to determine the winner of the Test.
 

Take the ruler of the Ascendant for the Challenger and the ruler of the Fourth house as the Holder.

Only use old rulerships, that is to say: Saturn ruling both Capricorn and Aquarius; Mars ruling both Scorpio and Aries; Jupiter ruling both Sagittarius and Pisces.

If the Ascendant is 3º 30' or less of a sign, then take the ruler of the previous sign as the First House ruler. This does not change the degree of the MC/IC axis.

Superior planets, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn are stronger in battle than the inferior planets of Venus and Mercury and the luminaries of the Sun and the Moon.

For both 1st and 4th house, rulers score the following:

Saturn +1

Jupiter +1

Mars +1

Venus 0

Mercury* 0

Moon 0

Sun 0

* Mercury scores points for its translation which is discussed later.
 

A planet was considered to be in a particular house if :

Angular: A planet is said to be in an angular house if it is 7º from its cusp in the same sign or 4º from the cusp if in a different sign, ie. a planet in the 6th house 3º below the Descendant is considered to be Angular.

Succedent: A planet is said to be in an succedent house if it is 4º from its cusp in the same sign or 2º from the cusp if in a different sign, ie. a planet in the 7th house 2º from the 8th house cusp is considered succedent.

Cadent: A planet is said to be in an cadent house if it is 2º from its cusp in the same sign, ie. a planet in the 8th house 2º from the 9th house cusp is considered cadent.

This is a standard placement in the Medieval style: this rule is simplified in Renaissance writings as the 5º rule as used by William Lilly and other later writers.
 
 

For the Ruler of the Ascendant if in the:

1st House 0

2nd House 0

3rd House 0

4th House +2

(In the Castle)

5th House 0

6th House 0

7th House -2

(In the hands of the enemy)

8th House 0

9th House 0

10th House 0

11th House 0

12th House 0
 

For the ruler of the 4th House in the:

1st House -1

(In the hands of the enemy)

2nd House 0

3rd House 0

4th House +2

(In the Castle)

5th House 0

6th House 0

7th House +2

(In their own place)

8th House 0

9th House 0

10th House 0

11th House 0

12th House 0

Planet Rulership Exaltation Detriment Fall

Saturn -2 -2 +2 +2

Jupiter +2 +2 -2 -2

Mars -2 -2 +2 +2

Venus +1.5 +1.5 -1.5 -1.5

Mercury +1.5 +1.5 -1.5 -1.5

Moon +1.5 +1.5 -1.5 -1.5

Sun +1.5 +1.5 -1.5 -1.5

 

Comments on Zodiacal Condition scoring

The malefics of Saturn and Mars are stronger in their action when they are in Rulership or Exaltation. The ability of Saturn or Mars to block or deny success is strengthened by being in good zodiacal condition. However, when the planet's ability to block or deny is weakened, then the chance of victory is increased. Thus Saturn in Detriment or Fall scores points for the team it signifies, but a malefic in Rulership or Exaltation blocks the team from success.

This is not supported in the writings of Bonatti, but it is strongly supported by the results of the Tests and all other sporting models with which we have worked.

Note: A zodiacal sign is considered to be from 1º to 30º. Thus a planet is not in a particular zodiac sign until it has reached 1º 00' 00" of that sign. Thus Jupiter at 0º 15' of Capricorn would be considered as 30º 15' Sagittarius and thereby still in rulership.
 

For Both Rulers:

Combust: -2.5 points if within 8º applying to the Sun; 7º separating.

Note: Out-of-sign combustions are allowed, since the definition is based on a question of visibility, which is sign independent.

Retrograde: -1.5 points - no consideration is given to what stage of its retrograde cycle the planet is currently at. Bonatti in Animae Astrologiae Consideration 18 makes a distinction between planets at different phases of their retrograde cycle. For simplicity's sake, we have ignored this distinction at this time.

Detriment: See Step 4

Fall: See Step 4

Besiegement: At this stage there are no examples of this type of contest where either ruler is besieged (the 1st or 4th house ruler lying between two malefics). However, there is strong evidence of the effect of besiegement in other forms of contest.

Definition: Seeking an Aspect

A planet is said to be seeking an aspect if it is applying, via a Ptolemeic aspect, to another planet. Such a planet may not be successful in making that aspect, as the second planet may change sign or a third, faster-moving planet may come in and form an aspect to the second planet before the first planet can complete the aspect. Rob Hand gives an excellent discussion of this concept in the introduction to his Bonatti translation, cited below.

A planet can only form one aspect at a time.

Hence in this method, a planet is only "seeking" another if:

a) it is applying in a Ptolemeic aspect.

b) it is within 2º of being exact.
(This closeness of orb tends to disallow any aspect "grabbing" by another planet and is an attempt to standardise the model being examined. Technically much wider orbs could be used, with each chart's planetary configurations being considered in their own right.)

c) A planet can only seek an aspect to a slower-moving planet.

Once a planet is found to be seeking an aspect the matter of reception must be considered before a score can be allocated.

Reception

A planet receives another if the applying planet is in a zodiacal position that has dignity for the first planet. For example, if Mars in Libra is seeking an aspect to Saturn, Saturn is said to "receive" the Mars because Mars is in a place of Saturn's honour. If at the same time the Saturn was in Aries, then we have the concept of Mutual Reception. However, being received is not always a positive thing and if the planet which is receiving is cadent, then it is unable to benefit from reception. So in the above example, if Saturn was in a cadent house, then the reception of Mars does not help Mars or Saturn.
 

Condition of Receiving Planet Score

Benefic or Malefic: in rulership or exaltation with reception provided it is not cadent +3

Benefic or Malefic: angular or succedent in rulership, exaltation or no dignity +2

Benefic: angular or succedent in detriment or fall +1

Benefic or Malefic: cadent regardless of any zodiacal dignity 0

Malefic: angular or succedent in detriment or fall -1

Benefic: angular or succedent in detriment or fall and retrograde -1

Malefic: angular or succedent in detriment or fall and retrograde -1

 

A ruler is considered to be aspecting either Angle if:

a) It is applying or separating.

b) The aspect is a Ptolemaic aspect.

c) It is within normal orbs (8º for squares, conjunctions, trines; 4º for sextiles. Oppositions are, of course, conjunctions to the opposite angle).

d) That the forming of the aspect does not involve a sign change. (For example, Mars at 27º of Taurus does not form a conjunction to an Ascendant at 2º Gemini because such a conjunction would involve a sign change).

Score for aspect to angle = +2

Note: Planets that aspect both angles still score only 2 points.
 

Step 8-1

If planets are in the 4th house, they aid the Holder of the Trophy in the following way (see TS, Chapter XXIX, page 17):

Planet and condition Score

Moon, in any condition +2

North Node +1

South Node -1

A Benefic, superior or inferior +2

A Benefic, which is depleted

by sign or retrogradation -1

A Malefic -1

A Malefic, which is depleted

by sign or retrogradation +1

Note: Multiple planets in the 4th are evaluated separately and their results are summed. Because no match start times are around midnight, we have no examples of a benefic or a malefic in the fourth house also being combust; thus, this is not listed as one of the ways for the planet to be depleted.

Step 8-2

The ruler of the 7th house represents the army contained within the Castle.

(TS Chapter XXIX page 17)

The condition of the ruler of the 7th adds or subtracts to the score of the Holder in the following way:
 

In good zodiac condition in any house

except the 6th or the 8th (see step 4) +1.5

In an angular house +1.0

Succedent house +0.5

In the 8th or the 6th 0

In bad zodiacal condition,

angular (see step 4) -1.0

In bad zodiacal condition

but succedent (see step 4) -0.5

In the 8th or the 6th and receiving

a conjunction, square or opposition

from a malefic then -0.5

If the planet is retrograde then score is adjusted by -0.5

If the ruler of the Ascendant has any dignity in the degree of the 4th house, this aids the challenger. See TS, Chapter XXIX, page 17.
 

Type of Dignity in the 4th House cusp/Score

Peregrine - no dignity 0

Ruler +2

Exalted ruler +2

Term ruler - Egyptian +1

Triplicity ruler - any one

of the three triplicity rulers +0.5

(The triplicity table used is that of Dorotheus, Schoener and Dariot: the standard Medieval system of three triplicity rulers per sign. Sect has not been taken into account.)

Triplicity and Term ruler +3

Face ruler 0

Term and Face 0

Note: The empirical evidence is that Face is a form of dignity which does not aid the planet.

Note: It can happen at times that the 1st and 4th are ruled by the same planet. This has occurred in some Superbowl charts and two Ashes matches. Bonatti does discuss this possibility, (TS Chapter XXIX page 19) suggesting that the castle will only fall if the planet which is the duel ruler is in bad condition. This occurred in the Ashes series of 1885 in Australia for the 4th and 5th test. In the 4th test Mercury the duel ruler was in Pisces and the Holder lost the match and in the 5th Test Mercury was in Aries and the Holder won the match.

It would have been noted that under Step 1, Mercury was allocated a score of zero. However, Mercury has the ability to translate and can gain an additional score by a good translation.

The planets involved in the translation by Mercury

Score

From an Inferior to an Inferior 0

From a Superior to an Inferior +1

From an Inferior to a Superior +1

From a Superior to a Superior +2
 
 

Comments on the Translation of Mercury

The following is important when scoring a translation of Mercury :

a) All translations must be via Ptolemeic aspects;

b) All translations must be between old planets only;

c) Mercury is able to carry a translation through a sign change. You may have to look into a previous sign to find what it is translating from and you may have to look into the next sign to find what it is translating to.

If the team which is the Holder is also playing in their own country, then they gain a +1 point advantage. This rule does not apply to the American football example, and its applicability to other sports will need to be examined on a case-by-case basis.

Add up the scores for both rulers and the ruler that has the greatest score will be deemed the victor. If the teams are level, then the Holder is selected as the winner of the Match.

The model yields a success rate of 67%, so for any particular test with its three possible outcomes there is a 67% chance of correctly predicting the Test. In some series the model will correctly pick all the Test matches; in others it may get them all wrong. With the last Ashes series played in Australia in 1994, of the three Tests that were castle besiegement matches, the model predicted all three Tests incorrectly. A model of this sort is not an absolute predictor of the result of any particular game.

This year The Ashes will be contested again in England over six scheduled Test matches. Australia currently holds The Ashes. The Tests and their scheduled start times are:
 
 

First Test

5th June at Edgbaston, Birmingham 11 am

Second Test

19th June at Lord's, London 11 am

Third Test

3rd July at Old Trafford, Manchester 11 am

Fourth Test

24th July at Headingley, Leeds 11 am

Fifth Test

7th August, Trent Bridge, Nottingham 11 am

Sixth Test

21st August at The Oval, London 11 am

For Australia to lose The Ashes, they must lose the majority of these Tests. Given that there are six Tests, if Australia wins the first three, they retain The Ashes and only the first three Tests are castle besiegement conflicts. Given the nature of the game of cricket, this is unlikely. Therefore there is a very good chance that the first four Tests should be castle besiegement charts. After the fourth Test The Ashes may be decided, in which case the 5th and 6th Tests may or may not be castle besiegement charts.

England is the Challenger and therefore the Ascendant ruled by the Sun in Gemini in the 10th house. Australia is the Holder and thus the 4th house: ruled by Mars in Virgo in the 2nd house. First, we determine whether this Test is a possible Draw. The Moon is combust, and in the English Ashes Tests, there has never been a Test that has had a results when the Moon is combust.

There have been seven other Test matches which commenced on a New Moon. These were; Third Test on 3rd July 1905; First Test on 10th July 1926; First Test on 25th July 1930; First Test on 11th June 1953; First Test on 7th June 1956 series; Fourth Test on 25th July 1968 series; First Test on 16th June 1977. All of these Test matches ended in a draw.
 

The Moon is in Sagittarius, too wide to form a square to the nodal axis and Jupiter, the dispositor, although not strong in the chart, is not in detriment or fall. The Test should have a result. England is the challenger and therefore the Ascendant is ruled by Mercury in Gemini in the 10th House, combust the Sun. Score for Mercury: Inferior in rulership = +1.5. Combust -2.5. Translation of Mercury is from Saturn (a sextile) to Jupiter (a trine) thus +2. Mercury seeks Jupiter but Jupiter is cadent, so no score. Mercury does not aspect either the Ascendant or the IC and has no dignity in the degree of the IC. Total score for Mercury = 1.

Australia is the 4th house and its ruler Mars in Libra in the 2nd house.

Scores for Mars: Mars is a superior planet and scores +1. Mars is NOT in Libra but at 30º 02' Virgo, so it scores no points for its zodiac sign. Mars does not seek any aspects. However, Mars at 30º 02' Virgo sextiles the IC and thus scores +2. The Moon in the house of the Holder scores +2. The 7th house ruler is Jupiter which is in the 6th and retrograde -0.5, Total score for Mars = 4.5

Note: The level of the victory is not connected to the difference in the scores. Just because Australia is 4.5 and England is only 1 the possible victory to Australia may only be by a very small margin.

The Moon is in Gemini just past the square to the Nodal axis. Its dispositor is Mercury in Cancer, just wide of being combust. This chart is just "wide" of a draw.

England is the Challenger and thus the Ascendant ruled by Mercury in Cancer in the 11th house. Score for Mercury: no points for zodiac sign; its translation is from Saturn (a square) to Venus (a conjunction) thus it scores +1; it does not aspect the Ascendant (the sextile is too wide) or the IC; it has no dignity in the degree of the IC. Total score for Mercury = 1.

Australia is the Holder and the 4th house is ruled by Jupiter in Aquarius, retrograde in the 6th house. Score for Jupiter: Jupiter is a superior planet so +1; it scores no points for its zodiacal position (dignity by mixed Triplicity); it is seeking (retrograde) the sextile to a succedent Saturn in Fall, thus it scores +2 ; it is retrograde, so -1.5; It does not form an aspect to either the Ascendant or the IC; there are no planets in the 4th house. Jupiter is also the 7th house ruler, the army. It is cadent and retrograde -0.5. Total score for Jupiter = 1.

Both teams are equal. When both teams are equal the Holder is chosen to win.

This is a doubtful Test as it is nearly a draw and the results hangs on the ability of the cadent Jupiter to receive the aspect from Saturn. A draw will also favour Australia, as they are not only the Holder but should, by this time, be one Test up in the series. Therefore if they are in that position, given this chart, they may well play for the Draw.

Note: This is not a match that one would bet on.

Astrologically this is very similar to the Second Test of the 1985 series (27th June at 11am London), when Jupiter was last in Aquarius. It was ruling the 4th, retrograde and in the 6th in Aquarius with Mercury and the Ascendant ruler was once again in Cancer. Neither planet was aspecting an angle but Jupiter was not receiving an aspect. In that case the Challenger won the Test. In the Second Test of the 1961 series (22nd June at 11.30 am, London), once again Jupiter, ruler of the IC, was retrograde in Aquarius. Mercury, ruler of the Ascendant, was in Cancer. In this Test Jupiter formed a sextile to the IC, thus enabling the Holder to win the Test. The Second Test of the 1926 series (26th June, 11.30am, London), was also a similar chart. But in this case, although the Jupiter was not forming an aspect to the angles, the Moon's position indicated a draw which indeed was the result. So this third Test of the 1997 series will be an interesting test case for the ability of the cadent Jupiter to seek the sextile from Saturn. This is an example of the style of research which has led to the formation of the model.
 
 

The Moon is in reasonable condition so it should not be a draw. England is the Challenger and thus the Ascendant. The Ascendant is considered to be Virgo as any Ascendant which is less then 3º 30'into a sign is considered to be in the previous sign. However, this does not alter the degree of the IC. England is therefore Mercury in Leo in the 11th house.

Score for Mercury: No points for zodiacal position; translation is from Saturn (trine) to Venus (conjunction) thus it scores +1; Mercury seeks no aspects; it makes no aspects to the ascendant or the IC; it is the term ruler of the degree of the IC scores +1. Total score for Mercury = +2.

Australia is Saturn in Aries in the 8th house (it is only 3º from the 8th house cusp in the same sign and is therefore considered in the 8th house). Score for Saturn: Saturn is a superior planet and thus scores +1; Saturn is a malefic in Fall and thus scores +2; Saturn cannot seek an aspect as it is the slowest-moving planet; it forms no aspects to either the Ascendant or the IC; there are no planets in the 4th house. The 7th house ruler is Jupiter which is succedent but retrograde 0; Total score for Saturn = +3.

If this is the case and the Tests go as implied by the model, then Australia retains The Ashes. It should be noted that if Australia are two up in the series going into the Fourth Test, then a draw is as good as a win, as either way Australia retains The Ashes.
 
 

This may or may not be a castle besiegement Test, but if The Ashes are still in the balance, then this Test just misses out on being classified as a draw (the Moon is just wide of a conjunction to the nodal axis) and with Saturn even stronger in the chart, in the 7th house and squaring the IC, the Holder of The Ashes should win the Test. Indeed this chart is so strongly in favour of the Holder that this may be the Test where they are decided, and thus the Holder will retain The Ashes.

Saturn scores 7 (+1 for superior; +2 for Fall; +2 for 7th house; +2 for square to IC; -1.5 for retrograde. 7th house ruler is Mars, good condition and angular +1.5) and Venus the ruler of the Ascendant scores only 0.5, for being a triplicity ruler of the IC.
 
 

This Test is very unlikely to be a castle besiegement type of conflict. However, if that is the case, clearly the ruler of the 4th is stronger than the ruler of the Ascendant. Venus scores 3 points (1.5 for triplicity ruler and 1.5 for being in rulership) and Saturn scores 4.5 the only difference being that the army, 7th house ruler, is Mars which is now in Scorpio thus considered to be in bad condition -1;

Prediction:-It would seem that in the 1997 series, the astrology favours a draw for the first test and then Australian victories for the other five, however the 3rd test is very much a "wait and see" situation.

It would be unlikely for the model to be correct on all Tests, as this has only happened in 1890, 1892, 1898, 1908, 1920, 1926, 1930, 1938, 1948, 1956, 1959, 1983 and the 1994 series, 13 Series only out of a total of the 55 series examined. However, every Test this English summer will be an astrological lesson in Guido Bonatti's 12th century Castle Besiegement techniques.

The Super Bowl series is a much smaller data set than The Ashes series. Not only is there only one game in the series, but there have only been 31 Super Bowls to date. Obviously, since the first game cannot be a castle besiegement (there's no trophy to defend yet), that means that only thirty count as far as this model is concerned.

Beyond the difference in the nature of the two games, one of the profound differences between these two games is the effect of professionalism and the media on the nature of the game in the USA. US football players are very highly paid. Sports is viewed as big money from a marketing standpoint, so, since 1980, the time of the game has been set at around 6:00 pm EST in order to maximize the national television viewership. The date of the Super Bowl has now been fixed as the 4th Sunday in January, although in the Sixties and Seventies, the date was as early as January 9th.
 
 
 

These artificial manipulations can be seen by examining the sign of the Ascendant for the various Super Bowls:
 

ASCENDANT Up to 1979 Since 1980

TAURUS 4 0

GEMINI 7 0

CANCER 2 12

LEO 0 6

The cricket data, by contrast, is not so tightly grouped by the calendar. First, the games occur in the Summer, but, given the hemisphere difference of England and Australia, that's really two completely different sets of months. Secondly, the Test series typically takes two to three months to complete. This gives a much bigger range of Ascendants.

There are several significant consequences of these observations in terms of our proposed model. First, the Ascendant ruler is always an inferior planet, which has fewer scoring opportunities than a superior one. With Leo Rising, Mars, a superior planet, can rule the 4th House. Also, the Sun is generally in the 7th House at the time allocated, thus giving it a score of -2: without bothering with any other consideration. Secondly, Mercury and Venus, of all the planets, have the greatest probability of being combust. These two factors together weight the astrological model in favor of the holder. If we compare the actual results between Ashes and Super Bowl set, the holder of The Ashes won 56% of the time, while the Conference holder of the Lombardi Trophy won 73% of the time. That this skewing of result is at least in part astrological is further supported by one other observation. Before the time was fixed for maximum television viewing, the holder won only 7/12, or 58% of the time. Since the change in time, the holder has won 15/18, or 83% of the time. The effect has become so obvious, that conventional football wisdom blames a lack of "Conference parity" in player quality. Yet the AFC, which has been so hapless at winning the Super Bowl, regularly trounces the NFC at the Pro Bowl (the all-star game) just a week or two after the Super Bowl.

The analysis of The Ashes is actually a two-step process, the first stage being the determination of whether the match will be a draw. The second, which is the only analysis for the Super Bowl data, is whether the Holder or the Challenger wins.

The statistical analysis of this data is a bit different for most astrological studies, because the purpose of the analysis is so different. Normally, statistics are used to determine whether a sample population conforms to a given control: in other words, the analysis is used to estimate the probability that the experimental group is really different. For example, the Gauquelins used Chi Square to determine the probability that sports champions really do have a different Mars placement than a general population.

Here the purpose is to study whether our predicted results match up with the actual results: in other words, we are looking to see what the probability is that we could achieve the success rates we have gotten by chance alone. We are in an analogous situation to a gambler who wants to know the probability of throwing double sixes four times in six throws.

Because we have two two-state systems with the cricket data (draw or not, then win or lose), and one two-state system for the Super Bowl data (win or lose), we analyzed the results using the Binomial Distribution, with an estimated probability of getting a correct answer being 50%.
 
 

The results are shown in the following tables:

Ashes Data: Draws

                        Actual  Predicted Probability

                                            of Predicted result

Aust - Draws            18      9           0.1855

Eng - Draws             40      27          0.0109

Match drawn             58      36

Match decided   147     169



% Correct               62.07

Ashes Data: Holder Winning

                        Actual  Predicted       Probability

                                                of Predicted result

Aust - Holder           45      25              0.0901

England - Holder        36      28              0.0006

Totals                  81      53



% correct               65.43

Ashes Data: Challenger Winning

                        Actual  Predicted       Probability

                                                of Predicted result

Aust - Challenger       45      38              0.0000

Eng - Challenger        19      10              0.1762

Totals                  64                      48 



% correct               69.66

Super Bowl  Data

                        Actual  Predicted       Probability

                                                of Predicted result

Holder wins             22      18              0.1762

Challenger wins         8       4               0.2734



% correct                       73.33

These distributions for The Ashes data are impressive, (any results of p< 0.05 could be considered significant ). It is surprising that any result is obtained for a sample size as small as the Super Bowls. The difference in binomial distributions for the various break-outs shows that the model does not work as well for all cases: it works better for English draws and English holder winning than for Australian draws. With the Super Bowl, the model works better for the times when the holder wins.

As complete data sets (i.e., all Ashes matches prior to trophy winning, and all Super Bowls), the usual considerations of whether the sample obtained is representative of the population at large do not apply. The only question is whether the models will continue to hold up over time. This is especially of concern with the Super Bowls: being a smaller set, it is less clear whether the results are as significant. Fewer combinations of possibilities have occurred. Barely one Saturn cycle has been studied. The Ashes data, covering over a century, is much less likely to be impacted by the first example of a particular configuration.

In this study we have attempted to characterise these game sets using a completely reproducible fashion, using a model based solely on numerical considerations. We have coded this system into the Access database because we did not want this test to involve any judgement calls, except what choices we made in determining which factors to include in the model, and how many points to assign to them.

In examining other sports, we have found that variants of this kind of medieval model consistently produce results in this range. Thus, we are able to assert that, with a certain amount of variation from sport to sport, we can expect to achieve accuracy rates of 60-75%, in a field where a rate of even 55-56% would produce a successful long-term betting strategy.

Indeed this research has not just been a theoretical exercise. Brady has been field testing this model for several years by predicting and betting on the outcomes of contests with good results (The Test cricket played between the West Indies and Australia is also a Castle Besiegement type of contest as, since 1966, there has been a trophy involved), as well as the models developed for "battle-chart" sports like football. And the results have been so encouraging that Jigsaw Version 2.0 (designed by Brady and Graham Dawson) will contain a medieval research module.

What of the other 25-40% of the time when the model is "wrong?" First of all, we would hardly contend that the Astrology of Game Day is the only factor in determining the outcome of a game. This model has not taken into account such obvious factors as the quality of the players, the field conditions, or how the aspects of Game Day affect the individual natal charts of key players or the teams themselves. There is, of course, also the matter of so-called free will!

There is one other point. We have explored in this model the Technique of astrology, not the Art. We have dealt only with objective factors, not subjective ones. These elements of Art also lie in that zone. Thus, we are brought to the rather satisfying conclusion that we can demonstrate that there is room for both objective and subjective considerations. However, when it comes to the objective side, these results strongly suggest that the medieval techniques may prove to a far better approach to this type of research than the more modern systems. The Astrology of the Art of War was once studied earnestly and applied. We should not ignore these previous experiments when we in turn wish to characterize the rules of conflict.

Bonatti, Guido. Tractatus Sextus. Translated by Robert Zoller in successive issues of Astrology Quarterly 62(3): 33-38, 63(1): 15-25, 63(2): 35-45, 63(3): 16-22 (1992-1993).

Bonatti, Guido. Liber Astronomiae Part III. Translated by Rob Hand. The Golden Hind Press: Berkeley Springs, WV.

Bonatus, Guido. 1676. The Astrologer's Guide. Translated by Henry Coley. Facsimile printing of the 1886 edition in 1986 by Regulus Publishing Co., Ltd.: London.

Gauquelin, Michel and Francoise. 1978. The Planetary Factors in Personality. Laboratoire d'Etude des relations entre rythmes cosmiques et psychophysiologiques: Paris.

Lilly, William. 1647. Christian Astrology. Reprinted in 1985 by Regulus: London.

Ramesey, William. 1653. Astrologia Restaurata; or Astrology Restored: being an Introduction to the General and Chief part of the Language of the Stars. Printed for Robert White: London. Available from Ballantrae.

Triple Virgo J. Lee Lehman holds M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Rutgers University in Botany. She has published four books to date: The Ultimate Asteroid Book (1988), Essential Dignities (1989), The Book of Rulerships (1992), and Classical Astrology for Modern Living(1996), [Editorial note:- This was reviewed in the last Journal]. All published by Whitford Press plus a translation of Papus' Astrology for Initiates with Weiser. She has founded four correspondence courses: Classical Studies in Horary, Introductory Classical Astrology (natal), Classical Studies in Electiona, and Classical Studies in Medical Astrology. She was the recipient of the 1995 Marc Edmund Jones Award, the first horary astrologer so honored.

For most of her astrological career, she has been an activist. She has been Research Director of the National Council for Geocosmic Research, and has been involved with the internationally acclaimed United Astrology Congress, on which she serves as Program Chair as well as Corporate Treasurer for UAC'98 and the UAC, Inc.

Bernadette Brady is a leading astrological light in Australia. Widely published in the astrological press, she is the author of The Eagle and the Lark. She will be speaking at the AA Conference in September on ': Ancient Techniques and Modern Meanings'. Bernadette was a deviser of the revolutionary Jig Saw computer software. She lives in Australia.