More About Arch Crawford

FATE Magazine
Vol. #46 No.4 Issue 517, April, 1993, pp. 72-81.
“Arch Crawford foresees the unforeseen on Wall Street”
by Ingo Swann

Late afternoon on December 9,1992, a soft spoken and extremely unpretentious man entered the stately Princeton Club in New York city, where he unobtrusively joined a growing crowd collecting for dinner and then an unusual evening lecture. There was visibly little about him to suggest he had achieved a special place of earthquake-like proportions in economic history.

Amazing Prognosticator
Yet, after dinner, he rose as the evening’s featured speaker on behalf of the ultra-scientific Society for Investigation of Recurring Events. His lecture was entitled “Potential Marketing Turning Points for 1993—Dates to Watch.” So his listeners knew they were in the presence of an economic and financial prognosticator, of which there have been many—but most of whom, as history attests, have been little better in their foreseeing than average gamblers.

In this case, though the speaker was Arch Crawford—the possessor of a long chain of dramatically correct economic predictions (or “calls”) which, since 1977, have increasingly astonished Wall Street analysts. If all such things were equal, such a chain of successful predictions might get the amazing Arch seats on important economic boards or councils.

But there is a significant problem in his case. The soft spoken Arch Crawford uses astrology and openly states that he does. His monthly newsletter, Crawford Perspectives, is filled with astrological terms and always ends with a list of “Key Astronomic Activity” that summarizes important planetary phenomena he predicts will affect the future course of economic affairs. Thus, the large audience at the Princeton Club had gathered to seriously listen to an astrologer.

Astrology Debunkers?
The dimensions of the problem come more into focus when two conflicting facts are realized: scientists and mainstream economists have worked overtime to debunk astrology; yet Crawford, an admitted astrologer, recently has been rated the #1 long-term timer for 1992 by Timer Digest (the prestigious economic “watch dog” publication based in Greenwich, CT.) A timer is someone who predicts the date or period when specific economic phenomena will occur.

One of the regular features of Timer Digest is a monthly reporting of the current opinion of various forecasters and an analysis of how accurate their forecasts have been through each monthly and yearly period. Some 1,000 newsletters attempting to forecast economic affairs are published in the United States. The long-term-timer category is measured over a period of 104 consecutive weeks (two years), and is an excellent test for the forecasters and their predictive models. Timer Digest identifies the top 12 long-term timers based on the continuous accuracy of their calls, of which Arch Crawford has been #1 during the last two years.

Thus, Arch has tested the anti-astrology camps that gravely believe and teach that astrology is superstitional gibberish.

Horrendous 1987 Crash
His successes, naturally, have caused confusions and sarcastic interpretations. One of his most remembered predictions occurred when, in his August 8, 1987 newsletter, Crawford dramatically warned of an imminent “horrendous” stock market crash. With remarkable courage, he grimly advised his subscribers that his “long-term sell signal is set in stone” and to “be out of everything by August the 24th” indicated that unusual “geocentric planetary arrangements” would put an end to the long-enduring bull market at that time.

His forewarning was received with skepticism, specifically because it was based on “planetary arrangements.” Fifteen days before August 24th, journalist Beatrice E. Garcia (writing in The Wall Street Journal August 10, 1987) poked fun at his prediction, saying that Crawford, who “believes that the heavens dictated the start of the bull market in 1982 now is expecting some momentous happenings in the galaxy to signal an eventful close (of the bull market) in the weeks ahead.”

The same prediction was also picked up by journalist Caryl Buckstein who, in August 24,1987 issue of The National OTC Stock Journal, indicated that Crawford “sees a top for the five-year-old bull market in the stars and planets.” Similar giggles cascaded through other media outlets. The giggles faded when the top of the five-year- long bull market occurred on August 25, dropping 1000 points by October 20.

Wall Street’s Astrologer
Although economic analysts and media pundits choke on the world astrology in keeping with anti-astrology conditioning, it would be clear that if Crawford sanitizes his newsletter and advisories of all astrological terminology, he would have quickly ascended to a high place and influence in conventional economic mainstreams. Instead, the esteemed financial publication Barron’s (May 9, 1988) began referring to him not as an important economic forecaster, but as “Wall Streets best known Astrologer.” And, not knowing how else to explain this #1 rated forecaster, Timer Digest (August 24, 1992) finally wondered in print “Why is an astrologer the number one stock market timer over the last two year period?”

Why, Indeed? The answers must begin with admitting that the word astrology is seen as perjorative in the light of conventional “wisdom.” Crawford’s status as “Wall Streets best known Astrologer” is woo-woo and sensational enough to attract the interest of television’s 20/20, Good Morning America, Sightings, The Geraldo Rivera Show, The Wall Street Journal Report and the prestigious Nightly Business Report. But the clearest fact of the matter concerns not the hype that stigmatizes Crawford as “an astrologer,” but that he demonstrates that the planets do affect the course of events on Earth. The confusion arises because Crawford’s astrology-based predictive model conflicts with our culture’s anti-astrological programming that is perpetuated by conventional science and academe that are ignorant of those effects.

One of the basic things Arch Crawford has done is one which anyone can do with enough determination to achieve it: he has reclaimed himself from the socially-perpetuated anti-astrological ignorance into which he was born. And so Timer Digest’s question as to why an astrologer is the number one stock market timer is, in a roundabout way, actually asking why our society abounds in astrological ignorance.

There is very little justification for socially-engineered astrological ignorance since it is easy enough to tabulate predictable correspondences between planetary phenomena and events on earth. It has been known for centuries that the two planets Jupiter and Saturn line up (are in conjunction) about every 20 years, and that an economic phase-shift, a slumping stock market, often occurs on earth.

It has also been known for centuries that eclipses of the moon and sun “trigger” specific kinds of bad news earth-events.

Eclipses are “Ends”
In economic terms, the eclipses often correspond to the sudden ends of up-swinging currency speculations and other economic phases, political speculations and certain natural growth cycles. Throughout history until today, astrologers grimly, but knowledgeably, await eclipses and their largely predictable effects. Astrologically-ignorant societies experience the bad-news effects with out realizing that they can be predicted and guarded against.

Thus, a large part of Timer Digest’s significant questions can be answered by considering anti-astrological social programming. But, as is the case regarding any socially-installed ignorance, the stigmatizing inertia of anti-astrological programming is hard to overcome, or even admit to. When given astrologers successfully predict what any astrologically enlightened society might expect, it is the astrologer who is deemed uncanny, strange, eerie, and so forth. When all the while it is the astrological ignorance which is uncanny and eerie.

Arch Crawford has the longest record of correct predictions by astrological means. He is by no means the first efficient astro-economic prognosticator. For example, outside of astrology circles, it is not well known that the eminent financier J.P. Morgan (1837-1913) sought frequent advice from the astrologer Evangeline Adams. Morgan (arguably one of the greatest financiers of all time) is credited with saying that mere millionaires may not need an astrologer, but billionaires do.

Case for Astrologer
When eminent financiers, such as J.P. Morgan, and eminent publications such as Timer Digest, are obligated to take note of astrologers, it is not very enlightening simply to giggle because an astrologer has become involved. Rather, the question turns on what the astrologers do. If the role astrology has played throughout history was not excluded from history books, what astrologers do would have become visible long ago.

The two foundational premises (or principles) of astrology are set forth clearly by the astrological historian John Anthony West in his excellent 1991 book, The Case for Astrology, which is the best summation of the overall state of astrology as of today. The two foundational premises lead to two different kinds of astrology, are:
(1) Those correlations exist between celestial and terrestrial events. The study of correlations is often referred to as “natural” astrology.
(2) That correspondences exist between the position of the planets at birth and human personality. The study of the correspondences is referred to as “judicial” or “birth” astrology.

For clarification: in nature astrology, correlate refers to reciprocal or mutual relationships, to either of two things so related that the existence of one implies the existence of the other; in judicial astrology, correspond means to be in conformity or agreement with the “meanings” of the planets.

The premise of judicial astrology is the basis for delineating human personality-activity profiles via the birth (nativity) horoscope of an individual. Most anti-astrology skeptics ignorantly assume that judicial astrology is the whole of astrology, whose limelight status in modern times was largely inspired (about 1890) by the cleaver marketing techniques of the famous astrologer, Alan Leo (1860-1917), who first mass-produced cheap superficial horoscopes “for the millions.”

Arch Crawford’s Model
Anyone interested in Arch Crawford’s model, though, should not confuse nativity-astrology with what he does, for he deals exclusively with what has always been the first premise of natural astrology that celestial (planetary) events correlate with terrestrial events. Since the correlations can be statistically demonstrated , and are cyclic in nature, knowledge of the correlations serves as the basis for predicting what kind of events will occur and recur “in time” (so to speak) with specific planetary arrangements.

That earth events do correlate with planetary motions and positions has been rediscovered by scientists who study cycles. The most commonly acknowledged event cycles are those of growing and decline, ups or downs, or presence or absence of phenomena which repeat in some periodic kind of way. Ancient and contemporary natural astrology focus on correlating these cycle-events to planetary motions and predicting forthcoming cycle-events because of forthcoming planetary motions.

The existence of natural astrology, along with astrology proper, has prejudicially been excluded from modern history texts. Thus we do not realize that many otherwise very important historical figures were natural astrologers.

For example, Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626), the English “philosopher and statesman “ of enormous historical renown, was also a natural astrologer. As pointed out by the astrological researcher, Patrick Curry, in his careful book Prophecy and Power: Astrology in Early Modern England, Bacon advocated that it would be possible to use "celestial indicators" to produce reliable predictions of the weather, plagues, and crops, as well as of “seditions and schisms.”

Complexities Abound
It has to be stated, though, that astrology, astrocycles, and astro-economics are enormously complex subjects. It is unlikely that the average astrologer unskilled in today’s complex economic affairs, or the average economist ignorant of astrological implications, can become either Timer Digest #1 rated long-term timer or Wall Street’s most famous astrologer. Thus, Arch Crawford must be something other than an astrologer.

Born in Durham NC into a family of lawyers, he spent his childhood in nearby Oxford where the family was active in political affairs (his grandfather and uncle had been mayor). Crawford early developed a fascination with economic and market matters. When most of us would be worrying about our pubescent glandular shifts and reducing our minds to fit into local peer limitations, Crawford at the age of 12 began trading penny stocks and was successful trading in the stock market proper at age 14.

Upon entering college, the lure of the market proved to be too much to resist. At the age of 20 (in 1961), he dropped out of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and went to work for the Raleigh office of Merrill Lynch. He subsequently transferred to Merrill Lynch’s New York offices where he was quickly drafted into their research department, and became assistant to Robert Farrell, Merrill Lynch’s top-ranked technician. Crawford designed better ways to chart stocks and economic and financial trends and began drawing economic and financial trend line charts so accurate (as it turned out) that he was invited to advise industry specialists on probable market ups and downs.

Based on his knowledge of economic trends and cycles alone, in November 1961 he predicted that a stock market high would be reached during mid December (which came about on December 13), and that the biggest crash since 1929 would occur after February 1962. The crash began in April, and the biggest crash day was on May 29. This, and he was not yet an astrologer. It is fair to say that Arch Crawford was already a superior market analyst, in conventional terms, by the age of 21 when most of his peers were still preoccupied with sex, glamour and what to do with the rest of their lives.

In one of my interviews with him, I asked when and how his interest in astrology began and why he dared to undertake its study in the face of its broad damnation, especially in economic circles. He said that his interest was “tweaked” in 1963 when he was “was young and impressionable” by an article in the Wall Street Journal about Lt. Commander David Williams, a noted economist who had been predicting the market via the relative positions of the planets. Crawford “ran right out and bought some basic astrology books,” among which was Donald Bradley’s Stock Market Prediction, first published in 1948. Bradley (1925-1974) was a prominent astrological researcher who had scandalized science by proposing that (natural) astrology could be studied scientifically by conducting statistical studies of astrological correlations.

By the end of 1964, Crawford had taught himself “a great deal about statistical astrology” and had begun to prepare analysis charts to see how planetary configurations “intervened” in or “changed the patterns of normal economic trends and cycles.”

When I asked how his coworkers at Merrill Lynch view his new astrological interest, Arch gave one of his rare smiles saying, kindly to be sure, that they were “amused.” But, he went on, “I made a lot of money in the market in my early uses of astrology.”

In 1977, after a career of working in several major financial houses, Crawford formed his own market advisory business and began publishing his newsletter Crawford Perspectives. This newsletter (which was openly an astro-economic publication using astrological terms and discussing planetary positions) caused laughter among economic “pros” who held (as many continue to do) that any market judgment based on astrology must be fraudulent. Needless to say, in spite of his earlier reputation, Crawford immediately fell from grace as a “proper” economic evaluator. He was subtly shut out of many “normal” economic circles that are academically and scientifically protected against anything astrological.

Fraudulent Market Judgments or Not?
Here a leading question must be asked. Why would market judgments (or calls) based on an astrological model be fraudulent if they proved correct? And especially if their high percentage of correctness can be demonstrated over the long-terms of several years in the published Crawford Perspectives has represented since 1977? Crawford’s astro-cycles effectively and correctly call averages around 80 percent, with some grudging analysts crediting him with 87 percent.

In any event, an exceedingly competent conventional knowledge of economic affairs has, in Arch Crawford, met with an exceedingly competent understanding of natural statistical astrology. “Arch,” I asked, “can you simplify what you do in about 50 words?”

“Basically I spend a lot of time setting up and projecting conventional cycles and trends. These would develop naturally if nothing interrupted them. I then look for forthcoming planetary configurations which might disrupt them in some way, and make my calls according to how I understand what the disruption most probably will be.”

“What,” I then asked, “was the first basis for your confidence in planetary disruptions?”

DOW Ups and Downs
“ I tracked the ups and downs of the DOW from 1897 through 1970 and correlated them with planetary movements and configurations. I could see that the correlating reliability factor ran very high—far above chance expectation. The only sensible conclusion was that various planetary arrangements disrupted the normally expected drift of the DOW, sometimes very dramatically. The same is true, for example, in the copper, gold and futures markets.”

He went on to caution: “In market trading, though, nothing works all of the time, and future results can’t be guaranteed. But planetary pattern disruptions can’t be dismissed, and it makes sense to increase a refined understanding of them.” Increasing a “refined understanding of them” is fairly stated, much easier suggested then achieved. No such thing can be achieved superficially. Not only is an intimate conventional understanding demanded regarding stocks, bonds, options, futures, and of economic factors in general, but also a corresponding intimate understanding of such matters as electron bursts from the sun, the phases and tidal influences of the moon, heliocentric and geocentric astrology, and dozens of other natural astro-cycles phenomena.

Not an Astrologer?
In fact, Arch Crawford probably should not be called an “astrologer,” because, first, this is misleading according to the common and vulgar use of the word when compared to what he does, and second, because the term, “astrologer” antagonizes our endemic academic rejection of astrology.

Rather, Crawford is a leading exponent of a new (essentially unnamed) field of inquiry which, if anything, deals in identifiable natural astro-type phenomena that have been excluded from in-depth human understanding. If anything, he might better be identified (with the terms of our existing references) as an astro-cycles analyst with a pedigree in general and special economic factors which permits the integration of the former with the latter.