the Tradition

ARTICLE

Joo Ventura

Animodar Effect
ABSTRACT The Animodar is an ancient technique for the rectification of natal charts based on the syzygy, or lunation, previous to birth. Although referred to by known authors such as Claudius Ptolemy and William Lilly, among others, it appears that for some people this technique gives good results while for others it does not. By using real birth datasets, this article seeks to address the validity of this ancient technique, and it will show that, although the technique seems to work in most cases, it has possibly to do with a statistical effect the Animodar Effect. 1. INTRODUCTION The Animodar is an ancient chart rectification technique based on the syzygy, or lunation (new or full moon) previous to birth. Similar to other astrological techniques, the oldest reference to Animodar is Ptolemys in Tetrabiblos [1]. In his third book, section 2, Ptolemy states that because astronomical instruments such as solar, water and sand clocks are sometimes inaccurate due to various effects or simply mere chance, there is a possibility of error in the birth time, causing in its turn an error to the degree of the Ascendant. As a solution, Ptolemy explains very briefly what is known today as the Animodar technique, although he never uses that name. In Christian Astrology, William Lilly also makes a brief reference to the Animodar technique[2], referencing Ptolemys work, and giving an example of a case study, although stating that the Animodar technique is not as safe as rectification based on accidents and primary directions. 2. THE TECHNIQUE Although there are several interpretations of Ptolemys and Lillys work concerning this technique, the initial sequence of steps to compute the Animodar is as follows:

The

Joo Ventura is a student of Traditional Astrology from Portugal. He began to study Astrology in 2007 with Helena Avelar and Lus Ribeiro at the Academia de Estudos Astrolgicos in Lisbon. His academic background includes a Bachelors and a Masters degree in Computer Science and he is currently a Doctorate student of artificial intelligence in Portugal. Currently, he is working on the area of Automatic Knowledge Extraction where he has published some of his work. One of his current interests is to apply the computational power of modern machines to the investigation of traditional astrology techniques. Besides astrology, his interests also include music (as a player, arranger, teacher and conductor), sports (currently paragliding) and a curiosity for almost everything.

CONTACTS:
E-mail: joao_m_ventura@hotmail.com

1. Find the syzygy prior to birth; 2. If it was a New Moon, find the ruler and the Almutem of the lunation degree;

66

the Tradition
ARTICLE
3. If it was a Full Moon, there are two possible positions, so: a) If the lunation occurred during the day, find the ruler and Almutem of the Suns position; b) If the lunation occurred during the night, find the ruler and Almutem of the Moons position; 4. Finally, in the birth chart, check the degrees of the syzygys ruler and Almutem. From here, there are various possible interpretations, which will be explained in the next sub-sections. 2.1 The consensual interpretation The most consensual and usual interpretation, and the one which follows more closely the example given by William Lilly in his Christian Astrology, is that after checking the degree number of the syzygys ruler and Almutem, one must find which one is closer numerically to that of the Ascendant or MC. To understand why it required the numerical degree instead of simply degree, for instance, 17 of Taurus is 2 away from the numeric degree of 19 Taurus and also 2 from the numeric degree of 19 Pisces. In other words, 17 of Taurus is 2 distant from the numeric degree of 19 whatever the sign. After finding which of the two rulers (the natural ruler or the Almutem) is numerically closer to the degree of the Ascendant or MC, one must set that cusp the same numerical degree as the rulers position and compute the time based on that change. So the next algorithmic step is: 5. Find which ruler has its numeric degree closer to the numeric degree of the Ascendant or MC; a) If it is closer to the Ascendants numeric degree, set the Ascendants numeric degree to the same numeric degree as the rulers, disregarding the sign; b) If it is closer to the MCs numeric degree, set the MCs numeric degree to the same numeric degree as the rulers, disregarding the sign. As can be seen, finding how close a ruler is to the Ascendant or MC has nothing to do with which sign either the rulers or the cusps are in. For example, consider Figure 1. It represents the birth chart of Sebastio da Gama, a Portuguese poet born on the 10th of April 1924, at 12h30, Azeito, Portugal. In his chart, the previous lunation was a New Moon which occurred on the 4th of April 1924 at 07h17, being conjunct the Sun at 1415 of Aries above the horizon, so a New Moon.

Figure 1. Birth chart of Sebastio da Gama.

Considering the previously mentioned steps, at 1415 Aries, Mars is the sign ruler and the Sun is the Almutem of that degree. Mars in this chart is at 2134 Capricorn, and Sun is at 2022 Aries. Taking account of the Ascendant being at 0124 of Leo and the M.C. at 1822 of Aries, the following table represents the numerical distances of both planets to both angles:

67

the Tradition
ARTICLE
Table 1. Rulers distances to each house cusp.
Planet Distance to Ascendant Distance to M.C.

2.3 Variation #2 Approximation to the angular cusps Another variation due to misinterpretations tries to apply the syzygy rulers to the degree and sign of the angular house cusps, namely the Ascendant, M.C., the 4th and 7th house cusps. In that way, we should re-write the sequence of steps like this: 5. Check which of the syzygy rulers is positioned in a degree and sign closer to the cusps of the angular houses (houses I, IV, VII and X); 6. If it is closer to the Ascendant or IV house cusp, match the Ascendant cusp degree with the ruler numerical degree; 7. If it is closer to the M.C. or VII house cusp, match the M.C. cusp degree with the rulers numerical degree. Again, in the case of Sebastio da Gamas chart, as the Sun is closer to the M.C. than Mars is to the 7th house cusp, one would set the M.C. degree to the Suns numerical degree (maintaining the M.C. sign) and rectify the rest of the chart accordingly. If it was Mars, one should alter the Ascendant to 2134 possibly of Cancer because it would be a shorter distance to recede the Ascendant 950, than to progress it about 20. 3. RESULTS This section analyzes the results of the several interpretations of the Animodar technique. The results were computed using the skyPlux astrological framework while the data analysis was done using OpenOffice Calcs statistical tools and RapidMiner, a data mining tool. 3.1 The Research Project Site It was created an on-line PHP website that included a form to gather real birth information.

Sun Mars

1102 0950

0200 0312

So, according to the Animodar technique, the least distance is that of the Sun to the M.C., thus one would rectify the map giving the M.C. the numerical degree of the Sun (in this case 2022) in the sign of the M.C. (in this case, Aries). The result is that the M.C. would be placed at 2022 of Aries, and the rest of the house cusps and planetary positions would then be adjusted to agree with the corresponding time. 2.2 Variation #1 Approximation to Ascendant and M.C. cusps Because of the ambiguity of words used in Christian Astrology and other references, there are other variations of the Animodar technique. The first one tries to apply the syzygy rulers to the degree and sign of the Ascendant and M.C. cusps. Using this method, we could re-write the previous sequence of steps like this: 5. Check which of the syzygy rulers is positioned in a degree and sign close to the Ascendant or M.C. cusps; 6. If it is closer to the Ascendant cusp, match the Ascendant cusp degree with the rulers numerical degree; 7. If it is closer to the M.C. cusp, match the M.C. cusp degree with the rulers numerical degree. In the case of Sebastio da Gamas chart, as the Sun is closer to the M.C. by sign and degree, one would set the M.C. degree to the Suns numerical degree (maintaining the M.C. sign) and rectify the rest of the chart accordingly.

68

the Tradition
ARTICLE
The requested data were essentially the date/ time, location, certainty about the submitted information and other fields associated with another aspect of this work such as if the birth was premature or induced to see if it could affect the technique. A data set was gathered consisting of 276 birth records from participants in 44 different countries, from which 237 of the birth records were considered relatively accurate by the participants. from a maternity hospital located in Lisbon and spanning the 5th to 17th of January, 2009. Random datasets were also used in order to check for biased results. The following table describes the datasets used: Table 2. Datasets.

Dataset A B C D E F

Description On-line relatively accurate data, about 237 records. Maternity hospital accurate data, about 103 records. About 20,000 records worldwide, randomly generated. About 1440 records, simulating a birth per minute on day 21/03/2008 at 0 latitude. About 1440 records, simulating a birth per minute on day 21/03/2008 at 40 latitude. About 1440 records, simulating a birth per minute on day 21/12/2008 at 40 latitude.

3.3 Results Variation #1 In this subsection, we present the results of the first variation of the Animodar technique presented in sub-section 2.2. Accordingly to that variation, one must rectify a chart based on the approximation of the syzygy ruler position to the cusps of the Ascendant or M.C. (instead of the cusps angular values). The following figure shows the distribution of occurrences for dataset A (website dataset) in which a ruler or Almutem is in a certain distance range considering the application of the technique.

Figure 2. The Animodar project website .

Although we aimed to break the 1000 record barrier, we consider the gathered dataset to be statistically relevant and probably one of the biggest birth datasets with this kind of information (i.e., premature/induced birth, gestation). 3.2 Data sets Other datasets were also used in this research project. Besides the dataset gathered from the website submissions, another real birth dataset was used consisting of 103 accurate birth records

69

the Tradition
ARTICLE
might expect some errors, but the expected correct distribution for accurate results would be like a descent curve, that is, more charts where the distances were close to 1, followed by charts where the distance was close to 2, etc, and fewer charts 15 away. We must not forget that datasets A and B are relatively accurate datasets. Comparing figures 3 and 4 with the next figure, which shows the results for the randomly generated dataset (dataset C), we can see that with this variation the results appear to be random. In this case, the randomness is the uniformity of results spanning distances from 0 to 15.
1500 1450 1400 1350 1300 1250 1200 1150 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10 <11 <12 <13 <14 <15 Ruler Almutem

Figure 3. Distribution of the number of charts by distance range (Dataset A)

Interpreting Figure 3, there are about 21 charts in which the syzygy ruler is less than 1 away from the Ascendant or M.C. (in degrees, but according to the variation), and about 24 charts in which the syzygy almutem is less than 1 degree far. In the same manner, there are about 12 charts in which the syzygy ruler is less than 2 away (but more than 1) from the Ascendant or M.C. angles, and about 16 charts in which the Almutem is between 1 and 2 away, and so on. One can see that the distribution of distances is pretty uniform. Figure 4 shows the distributions of occurrences for dataset B (maternity hospital records).
12 10 8 6 4 2 0 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10 <11 <12 <13 <14 <15 Ruler Almutem

Figure 5. Distribution of the number of charts by distance range (Dataset C).

We cannot conclude that this variation is valid because we cannot verify a pattern different from randomness in the real birth datasets. 3.4 Results Variation #2 The other Animodar variation, as described in subsection 2.3, is similar to the previous one, but adds house IV and house VII cusps. Figure 6 represents the distribution of distances for the A (above) and B (below) datasets.

Figure 4. Distribution of the number of charts by distance range (Dataset B).

Despite minor changes, the distribution above is also fairly uniform, and does not appear to represent a non-random pattern. Although the datasets A and B are relatively accurate, one

70

the Tradition
ARTICLE
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10<11 <12 <13<14<15
45 40 35 30

3.5 Results Original interpretation Figure 8 represents the distribution of distances for the A (above) and B (below) datasets using the Animodar technique as described by William Lilly.

Ruler Almutem

14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10 <11 <12 <13 <14 <15
Ruler Almutem

25 20 15 10 5 0 <1
20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4

Ruler Almutem

<2

<3

<4

<5

<6

<7

<8

<9

<10 <11 <12 <13 <14 <15

Figure 6. Distribution of the number of charts by distance range (A and B Datasets).

Ruler Almutem

Again, in Figure 7, which represents the randomly generated dataset, we can see randomness, which is expected for a random dataset.
1500 1450 1400 1350 1300 1250 1200 1150 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10<11<12<13<14<15 Ruler Almutem

2 0 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10 <11 <12 <13 <14 <15

Figure 8. Distribution of the number of charts by distance range (A and B Datasets).

Figure 7. Distribution of the number of charts by distance range (Dataset C).

Again, the similarities of results between the real birth datasets and the random dataset forces us to conclude that this variation, too, does not present any statistical meaning, and, as such, does not appear to be valid as a rectification tool.

It can be verified that both distributions are more in agreement with what was expected from the original data. Because the A and B datasets are relatively accurate (despite possible time discrepancies, such as few minutes) it was expected that most distances from the syzygy rulers to the Ascendant or M.C. degrees would be less than 1, followed by distances below 2, and so on, until arriving at those few charts in which the distances are greater, corresponding to possible errors in the submitted data. Although the results from the B dataset (the one below) are not exactly what we expected, one can see the general trend of the results. Figure 9 represents the distribution of distances for C dataset, the random one with 20,000 records.

71

the Tradition
ARTICLE
3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10 <11 <12 <13 <14 <15 Ruler Almutem

Figure 9. Distribution of the number of charts by distance range (Dataset C).

Contrary to what one would expect, the random data has a behaviour almost identical to the general trend of the real birth datasets. There are more cases where the distance of the sygyzy rulers to the Ascendant or M.C. cusps are less than 1, followed by those cases where the distance is less than 2, etc. In any case, the similarities between the real data and the random data are enormous, and the random data have a trend that we had expected to belong to real birth data. To explain this effect, which we have called the Animodar effect, the rest of the datasets (D, E and F) which simulate a birth per minute in different dates and latitudes were created. Figure 10 represents the variation of distances that the syzygy ruler has from the various Ascendant degrees during the day of the 21st of March, 2008 at 0 latitude.
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Figure 10 is simple to understand. Assuming that the syzygy ruler is relatively static during a day (as almost all planets are, except the Moon), the distance of the ruler to the Ascendant degree follows the same pattern because of the Ascendant degree displacement. For instance, let us assume that at a certain point in time the Ascendant is in 15 of a certain sign and the syzygy ruler is also at 15 of another sign (or same, it does not matter). During the passing of time, eventually the Ascendant rises and reaches 16, and now the distance between the Ascendant degree and the syzygy ruler degree is 1. Next, the Ascendant rises to 17, and now the distance is 2. Eventually, the Ascendant reaches 30 (being the maximum of 15 distance between the Ascendant degree and the syzygy ruler), where it changes sign, and reaches 1. Now the distance is only 14, and will continue to drop until the Ascendant reaches again 15, and will repeat the same pattern over and over again. Obviously, the syzygy ruler also has a movement, but, aside from the Moon, it can almost be ignored for this explanation. The same chainsaw pattern can be observed with the M.C., because it also moves in the same proportion (or close) as the Ascendant. However, the Ascendant and M.C. degrees during the day are not necessarily the same. If they matched, the distances from the ruler to each of the Ascendant and M.C. would be same. Figure 11 represents, for the course of the same day, the distances from the syzygy ruler to the Ascendant and M.C. degrees. As one can see, during a normal day, the Ascendant and M.C. degrees are relatively offset from each other. However, in this example, this offset is not exaggerated because we are considering 0 latitude on a day close to the spring equinox. However, the offset exists, and, remembering that the Animodar technique searches for the axis in which the numerical angular distance is the minimum, Figure 12 represents the minimum distances that the Animodar technique would adopt during this day.

Figure 10. Distances from the syzygy ruler to the Ascendant degree during a day.

72

the Tradition
ARTICLE
16 14 12 10 8 6 Dist. Asc. Dist. M.C.

occurring than others. What is at stake here is the offset between the Ascendant and M.C. degrees. If there was no offset, the distribution of Figure 13 would be completely uniform.
200 180

4 2

160
0

140

Figure 11. Distances from the syzygy ruler to the Ascendant and M.C. degrees during a day.
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10 <11 <12 <13 <14 <15

Figure 13. Distribution of distances during the day.

Figure 12. Minimum distances from the syzygy ruler to the Ascendant and M.C. degrees during a day.

It can be verified that there are zones where irregularities can be noted. These irregularities are associated to zones where the exchange of axis takes place, for example, imagine that the ruler is at 20, the Ascendant at 10 and M.C. at 25. The minimum distance is 5 (to the M.C). As time goes by, the Ascendant reaches 11 and M.C. reaches 26, but the minimum distance is still 6 to the M.C. When the Ascendant reaches 13, the M.C. reaches 28, and now the minimum distance is to the Ascendant (7 versus 8 to the M.C.). An exchange of axis has taken place. Eventually, a new exchange will take place when the distances to the M.C. are the minimum ones again. What happens is that the minimum distances cross the 0 of distance more often than 15. Figure 13 shows the practical results of this situation when considering the distribution of distances during that same day. Figure 13 tells us that during a normal day, there are more possibilities of distances inferior to 1

The next figure represents the numerical distance of the syzygy ruler to each of the axes, the corresponding minimum values, and the distribution of distances that the Animodar technique would take during the spring equinox of 2009 for latitudes 40.
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Dist. Asc. Dist. M.C.

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

73

the Tradition
ARTICLE
200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 <1 <2 <3 <4 <5 <6 <7 <8 <9 <10 <11 <12 <13 <14 <15

Figure 14. Results for the E dataset.

So, during a day there are more probabilities that the minimum distance of a planet (being the syzygys ruler or almutem) to the Ascendant or M.C. degree is below 1 than any other. These probabilities change with the offset between the Ascendant and M.C. degrees (compare Figures 11, 12 and 13 with Figure 14). In this way, taking the C dataset (the 20,000 random records, see Figure 9), one can compute the average probabilities for the entire globe concerning the Animodar distances. Table 3 represents the probability that a certain birth, being real or fake, has of having its syzygy rulers at a certain distance from the Asc. or M.C. Table 3. Animodar distance probabilities.

By Table 3, it can be seen that there is about a 25% (one quarter) probability of a certain chart (real or fake) having the syzygy ruler or almutem less than 2 distant from the Ascendant or M.C. degrees. Also, there is a 50% chance that a chart has the syzygy ruler/almutem less than 5 degrees from the Ascendant or M.C. cusp. These probabilities are indeed very high. But it is only being considering in the previous table the generalized effect of the Animodar. The greater the latitude, the bigger the offset between Ascendant and M.C., and the greater the probability of a ruler being less than 1 from the stated cusp degrees. Finally, one point must still be considered. Empirically, some people have reported that the Animodar works well except when the ruler or almutem of the syzygy is Mercury. What happens is that sometimes a person considers the syzygy ruler and sometimes considers the syzygy almutem. This question also appears in William Lillys Christian Astrology where, in an example, he considers the almutem, Saturn, but then sees that the ruler, Venus, is more close to his intentions (as it is closer to the Ascendant degree), and discards Saturn. Simply stated, what one generally does is if the ruler is further away from the Asc. or M.C. cusps than the Almutem, then one uses the Almutem, and vice-versa. Back to Mercury: the problem with this planet is that it is the only planet that is both the ruler and almutem in his signs. Given this, no-one can apply that excellent technique of choosing between the ruler and the almutem, and so, has to face poor results sometimes.

Distance 0..1 1..2 2..3 3..4 4..5 5..6 6..7 7..8 8..9 9..10 10..12 11..12 12..13 13..14 14..15

Probability 13% 11% 10% 09% 09% 08% 07% 06% 06% 05% 05% 04% 03% 02% 01%

Accumulated Probability 13% 24% 34% 43% 52% 60% 67% 74% 80% 85% 90% 94% 97% 99% 100%

4. CONCLUSION It is now obvious that the probability that the minimum distance of a planet (being the syzygys ruler or almutem) to the Ascendant or M.C. degree being below 1 is high. This effect, as seen, can be explained by the lag between the Ascendant and

74

the Tradition
ARTICLE
M.C. degrees, and is greater the greater the latitude displacement (north or south). If this situation occurs on a daily basis, it also occurs on a weekly, monthly, annual, etc., basis. As such, there is a probabilistic effect due to natural circumstances and so, in this way, it cannot be concluded that the Animodar technique is valid as a rectification tool for the same reasons that the other variations were not considered valid: the results appear to be random results. Simply stated, although the pattern obtained from the real datasets feels right, and empirically people verify this all the time, there is at the start a probabilistic trend for the distances to be the smallest possible, independently of the veracity of the input data. 5. REFERENCES [1] Ptolomeu, Claudius, Tetrabiblos Verso Portuguesa, ISBN 972-8861-03-6, Editora Sadalsuud. [2] Lilly, William, Astrologia Crist Traduo da 1 edio inglesa, ISBN 972-8861-05-2, Editora Sadalsuud. [3] Avelar, Helena e Ribeiro, Lus, Tratado das Esferas Um guia prtico da tradio astrolgica., ISBN 978-972-711-779-6, Editora Pergaminho, 2007.

Helena Avelar & Lus Ribeiro

www.academyofastrology.org

k
k
k

75