One of the casualties of hurricane Sandy was HMS Bounty, built in 1960 as a replica of the original H.M.S. Bounty for the film "Mutiny on the Bounty". On Thursday 25th October as hurricane Sandy approached the Eastern Seaboard of the United States, the Bounty was in the port of New London in Connecticut. However her master, Captain Robin Walbridge, was convinced that it would be safer to take his ship out into the open ocean where he could negotiate with the storm on more equal terms, rather than face the real risk of his ship being smashed to matchwood if he stayed in port. So, the Bounty left port and headed out to sea in an attempt to skirt the relatively calm South Western edge of the storm on her way down to Florida.

Three days later, the engines failed in heavy seas. She started taking on a lot of water which overwhelmed the pumps. With the ship obviously doomed, the order to abandon ship was given and the crew took to life rafts and dinghies. Of the crew of sixteen, Coast Guard helicopters rescued fifteen, of whom one died later in hospital. The Captain was never found and is missing, presumed dead. On the morning of the 29th of October, the masts of the Bounty were still visible above the water, but by the end of the day her journey to the sea floor some 13,000 feet below was over.

The time at which the Bounty left port is difficult to ascertain. There was a blog on Facebook, and on the Bounty website, where the decisions of whether or not to head to sea were openly discussed in real time, and from which the timings of her movements could be taken. But these blogs ? and any other 'evidential' information that had been posted on the Internet ? have been taken down. However, lacking any further information, it is reasonable to assume that the Bounty left port at or around the high tide ? as is the custom - which occurred at 7:06 pm on the evening of 25th October (according the Connecticut Ports Authority website).

Accordingly, the chart below is set for New London, Connecticut, at a time of 7:06 pm on the 25th of October 2012.

I will follow here the method outlined in William Thrasher's 'Jubar Astrologicum' printed in 1671. Thrasher (or Thresher, it is confusingly spelt both ways in the book) practiced in "The Minories", an area of London near the Tower and he was famed for his patent medicines. But it evident from the book that Thrasher was very well travelled and spent much of his life employed in some capacity at sea. What that capacity was, we do not learn. Possibly it was as a ship's surgeon, but his evident facility with spherical geometry, as is well demonstrated in the book, suggests that would also have been proficient in celestial navigation, so he might even have been a master's mate. However that may be, it is obvious that Thrasher had a lot of practice in setting charts with regard to the fortune of ships at sea and had developed methods which he said worked very well for him. The methods are, of course, very similar to those outlined by Lilly and those who wrote after him, but there are a few innovations which seem to be original to Thrasher. The book is also of wider interest as it gives a number of his own actual horary and election charts as examples, rather than a generic one-serves-all chart which most 17th century authors used by way of illustration, and so gives a useful insight on how the 17th century astrologer went about delineating a horary chart.

The ascendant in Gemini then, is for the ship, as is the Moon on the cusp of the 11th house in Pisces. Mercury, ruler of the ascendant is for the crew. Gemini (ascendant) and Pisces (the Moon) are both common signs, signifying that the ship is not a good sailor and would struggle to keep her course.

Immediately evident is Jupiter on the ascendant, which looks at first sight like a good omen! But Jupiter is peregrine, in her detriment, and moreover retrograde, so not applying to the ascendant out of the 12th, but rather moving away from it and back into the 12th house. This may indicate that the ship's seaworthiness was suspect. The ship was, after all, now fifty years old ? even though it had at various stages been rebuilt from the water line down, and later on from the water line up.

Thrasher writes, "If evil planets be in the ascendant, or in quartile or opposition to the ascendant, and the lord of the ascendant in quartile or opposition to the lord of the 8th, 4th, or 12th, denotes shipwreck, or ruin of the ship and seamen. But if only the ascendant and the moon be afflicted, and not the lord of the ascendant, the ship may be wrecked or come by some other casualty, according to the nature of the planet and sign, (but not the men.)"

So it is that we see Mars applying to the ascendant in opposition, signifying the danger into which the ship is sailing. This is reinforced by the Moon also moving to an opposition with Venus, ruler of the 12th. For timing, Mars is 4 degrees away from perfecting its opposition to the ascendant and the Moon six degrees away from its opposition to Venus. The ship sank four days after leaving New London.

Thrasher also gives rules indicating how the ship might meet its end. "Airy signs signify blowing up, or some mischief, by extraordinary gales of wind. Fiery signs denote burning. Watery signs, sinking at sea. Earthy signs, running ashore or bilging the ship." We see the ascendant in an air sign, the Moon is in a water sign, so sinking at sea during a great blow. As for the malifics, "Mars generally signifies pirates, blowing up or burning the ship. Mercury, destruction by tempests or shipwreck. Saturn, by leakage, foundering, sinking in the sea." The principal malific in this chart is Mars, assailing the ascendant ? but the destruction of the Bounty was in the manner of Saturn, not Mars.

The crew are shown by Mercury, in Scorpio, disposed by the malific Mars which is casting its evil beams on the ship. However, Mercury is conjunct the North Node, sextile the Part of Fortune and sextile Venus (in benefic aspect this time), showing that they will be saved ? but note that Mercury is in the 6th house, indicating that they will not entirely escape the violence of the storms.

The Captain here is Saturn, ruler of the 10th house. We see Saturn is combust about to perfect a conjunction with the Sun, and square the Part of Fortune. The Captain will be lost.

There has been a lot of speculation on whether Captain Walbridge did the correct thing in taking his ship out into the teeth of a hurricane. Could he not have taken the Bounty into any of a number of nearby sheltered ports known as 'hurricane holes' which have historically proven to be safe havens when hurricanes blow? Should he have risked the lives of his crew and himself at all? Actually, taking the ship across to the East side of the river, where the hills on the Groton side sheltered that shore from the worst of the winds, would have left the ship quite safe. It seems the predictions about the course and strength of the winds turned out exactly as predicted by the National Hurricane Centre and Captain Walbridge would (or should) have had full access to the NHC storm reports.

In this respect, it is interesting to see Saturn and the Sun trine Neptune in the 10th house. Did the Captain show poor judgment in setting out into the eye of a hurricane in a sailing ship designed over 300 years ago and past her prime structurally? Did he base his judgments on poor information? There will no doubt be an enquiry when these matters will be laid bare. From the easy aspect, I would say poor information rather than poor judgment.

Geoffrey

Absolutely fascinating delineation!!!
thank you Geoffrey,
SG

Hello Geoffrey

really a very coherent and comprehendible judgement! (Very interesting also in context of the discussion about questions concerning ships in the other threads.)

A technical fact without any concern for your judgement is that other than your writing

Geoffrey wrote:We see Saturn is combust about to perfect a conjunction with the Sun, [...]

the (faster) Sun is already separating from his conjunction with Saturn.


But I see a more fundamental problem with your judgement.

Geoffrey wrote:The time at which the Bounty left port is difficult to ascertain. [...]However, lacking any further information, it is reasonable to assume that the Bounty left port at or around the high tide ? as is the custom - which occurred at 7:06 pm on the evening of 25th October (according the Connecticut Ports Authority website).

Accordingly, the chart below is set for New London, Connecticut, at a time of 7:06 pm on the 25th of October 2012.
[...]
I will follow here the method outlined in William Thrasher's 'Jubar Astrologicum' printed in 1671.

Your assumption a ship's saling at or around high tide as the custom is surely right, but in the context of mundane astrology and if you really want to follow Thrasher who is so peculiar with the beginning of a ship's voyage, I doubt your taking the time of Bounty's sailing is acceptable really.

Johannes

johannes susato wrote:Your assumption a ship's saling at or around high tide as the custom is surely right, but in the context of mundane astrology and if you really want to follow Thrasher who is so peculiar with the beginning of a ship's voyage, I doubt your taking the time of Bounty's sailing is acceptable really.

You are quite right Johannes. However, the chart told such a nice story that I thought I would push the point and publish anyway.

For general information, Thrasher actually says that the ship only starts it voyage once it has cleared the harbour and heads out into the open sea and this is the time to take for the election chart. The chart is therefore not to be set for the time of casting off from the dockside, as might be naively expected.

On the combust matter, Frawley comments that a planet being combust means it is invisible and one way to interpret this is that it is "blind to reason". In the circumstances, I thought this was very apt.

Geoffrey

Geoffrey wrote:

johannes susato wrote:Your assumption a ship's saling at or around high tide as the custom is surely right, but in the context of mundane astrology and if you really want to follow Thrasher who is so peculiar with the beginning of a ship's voyage, I doubt your taking the time of Bounty's sailing is acceptable really.

You are quite right Johannes. However, the chart told such a nice story that I thought I would push the point and publish anyway.

Most nicely put, Geoffrey, really!

Johannes

In the meantime I had found - and lost actually - the link to a discussion forum where the time of 16:37 h as the time the captain's decision to sail from New London was published. This was told by some members of the said forum. It seems to me this time could be quoted from the exhausted internet forum you mentioned above.

IF this time is right then 'your' sailing time is to be doubted again in my opinion. The decision once made it is very probably they made haste to sail to make miles intending to round the storm, not waiting for the high tide any longer and this the more as tide range in New London does not seem to be very great: an average of about 2 feet, if my reading the tide table is right.

Johannes

I have now been given a list of timed waypoints for the Bounty as she left New London.

From this, it would appear that the Bounty pulled her hook at around 16:30 hrs EST or a little later, and made her way down the Thames river. By around 19:00 hrs EST the Bounty was rounding the Hamptons at the Eastern end of Long Island, leaving Long Island Sound and heading out into the open ocean.

I refer to my posting above with regard to Thrasher's timing of this sort of chart - and submit that my chart swims yet!

Geoffrey

Good evening,

Thanks to Mr Geoffrey for the well documented, actual and interesting case. An enigma remains in the delineation: Mars and / or Saturn. Mr Geoffrey has given a possible key. Might the cause of the event be the Captain's recklessness (Mars) in 'facing the storm' rather than seeking a safe harbour?

(BTW Jupiter in Renaissance astrology is still, methinks, considered an active [masculine] planet.)

Is Mr William Thrasher's book in print?

Best regards,

lihin

The Bounty left New London about 5 p.m. on Thursday, Oct. 25

This departure time of tall ship Bounty, given by Herald News, is probably the best available at the moment and it is confirmed by the following link found by my girlfriend:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/world/1612 ... o-set-sail

Johannes

Good morning,

Mr Susato, if you are convinced the alternate time is more accurate than that used by Mr Geoffrey, could you kindly post the chart and analyse it?

Best regards,

lihin

Hello Geoffrey,

it seems to be clear now that the Bounty did not sail with the high tide, but more than two hours earlier.
My information that the decision to sail was made public at 16:37 h and your list featuring Bonty's way points and my information again of her sailing at "about 5 PM" suggest she sailed not long (if at all) before 16:37 and not after 5:00 PM, rather earlier than 5.

Please forgive me that I doubt your exegesis of Thrasher's writings. I have to confess that I only browsed the book over up to page 99 about. Obviously the pages you take as your judgement's basis are to come. But my understanding as yet is, that he only stresses the ship to float free, being able to turn in each direction to state her departure. But there is still a lot for me to read in Thrasher's book . . .

Following your wtriting

Geoffrey wrote:From this, it would appear that the Bounty pulled her hook at around 16:30 hrs EST or a little later, and made her way down the Thames river. By around 19:00 hrs EST the Bounty was rounding the Hamptons at the Eastern end of Long Island, leaving Long Island Sound and heading out into the open ocean.

I wonder if at all in the era of Thrasher's they could have made an election or mundane chart like Bounty's sailing, when its time was to be taken
the ship being already at the horizon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . hopefully still floating!

Could you please proof the chart you made? Perhaps I am mistaken but it seems to want the day light saving time which to the best of my knowledge in the USA is not changing before the first weekend in November Jupiter then would be in the first house.

Even though your judgement seems now to be a little misleading, I like it a lot, and it will float along catching the eye for Thrasher. As soon as possible I?ll read his book through.

Let?s hope for the official report with all the facts for precise mundane astrology.


Johannes

lihin wrote:Good morning,

Mr Susato, if you are convinced the alternate time is more accurate than that used by Mr Geoffrey, could you kindly post the chart and analyse it?

Best regards,

lihin

thanks for your interest, lihin. Of course I am "convinced that the other time" is "more accurate" and as we see, this is approved.but for its consequences for the judgment as Geoffrey claims.

But to what purpose should we make another chart before wer are sure as to still more precise time? On the other hand I must confess that the reason that this question is perhaps a little bit overcritical, finds it cause in the fact, that I do not really know, how to post a chart here. If you like and, as you seem to be really interested to see an alternative chart in the forum for the by and by known sailing time, perhaps you could add one to the thread.

Of course it would be a pleasure to have another, and surely more accurtate, view upon the event of the sailing.

Johannes