Both Jupiter/Saturn (3rd WSH) are inthe 10th place fromthe Lot of Fortune. A very powerful placement for both planets. Ahh astrological hindsight is so easy!Mark[/quote]

But in this casethe hindsight is based on astrologicaltheory,as tradition says exactly that, not simply an opinion Astrologers are human,they forget things

Since Fortune as AC represents things on earth, why do they only mention planets in 10th or 11th from Fortune to be important. What about the lord of F in IC or DEsc.?

Damon wrote:

Since Fortune as AC represents things on earth, why do they only mention planets in 10th or 11th from Fortune to be important. What about the lord of F in IC or DEsc.?

They dont. Any angular place from the Lot of Fortune is strong as in houses derived from the ASC. The 5th and 11th are also good. However, of all places the place of the lot (1st) or 10th from the Lot of Fortune is the most powerful (see the recent overcoming thread for latter)

Mark

So planets in 7 from fortune would affect marriage?
Do we compare positions? Eg: if natal chart hasSun in 9th or 10th butthe same planet falls in 7 or 4th fro m Fortune, should we connect those houses somehow eg:Sun in 9 from ASCSun in 7 from Fortune Could this mean marriage to a foreigner, or having a job as Lawyer? thanks

Mark wrote:Morning Sun wrote:

As the birth time is A, I still suspect the Sun to be Angular

I disagree this has to be so at all. But ultimately, without AA data we can both cling to our conflicting views without any resolution. Thats why I dont think we should be using anything other than AA data for these exercises.

I think Mark meant Jupiter was in the 3rd.

Clearly yes! Interesting Jupiter is the dispositor of Mars and Mercury while Saturn is bound ruler of the MC and also located in the 3rd.

Both Jupiter/Saturn (3rd WSH) are in the 10th place from the Lot of Fortune. A very powerful placement for both planets.

Ahh astrological hindsight is so easy!

Mark

Hello Mark,

It is the difference of 7:02 or 8:02 pm, typo, time changes, etc. I am not trying to convince anyone, just sharing my take on the chart, but that is just what I strongly intuitively feel that his Sun IS Angular. I did not spend any time on the chart at all, I went with my the combination of experience, knowledge gained from a a wealth of astrological books, and intuition, IN THIS CASE. I don't usually do that.


James,
I also noted the square of Saturn to the Sun / Strong Saturn in Domicile and had the thought that his youth was rather austere, and disciplined, but then the immediate following thought was, strong foundation, IT GAVE HIM A VERY STABLE AND LONG CAREER. I didn't think of the 3rd being teh 10th from the POF, but as Mark said, it does make sense in hindsight! And its rather odd, as a square from a strong Saturn in the 3rd to the Sun, you would think would cause difficulties in speech, communications, etc. This was a very good example chart for seeing that combination and realizing it was not detrimental to his life!! Good to remember for future charts. That is a bit of a gem of knowledge there!

To find out his father was in the military, confirmed my initial thought of his youth, and seeing the remote places he lived Yukon.

Damon wrote:

So planets in 7 from fortune would affect marriage?
Do we compare positions? Eg: if natal chart hasSun in 9th or 10th butthe same planet falls in 7 or 4th fro m Fortune, should we connect those houses somehow eg:Sun in 9 from ASCSun in 7 from Fortune Could this mean marriage to a foreigner, or having a job as Lawyer? thanks

Hello Damon

I wouldn't go that far myself but Valens does come fairly close to that. Frankly, I am still testing this out for myself.

Here is a quote from Vettius Valens from Book II of his Anthology:

The Lot of Fortune as the Ascendant.

Having explained the trine arrangements, I will move on to the Lot of Fortune. First of all it is necessary to determine the Lot of Fortune and to see in what part of the cosmos it is located: at an angle, just following an angle, or just preceding an angle. Likewise look for the ruler of the Lot. If it is in the Ascendant during the day or is in some other operative place, with the sun, the moon, or benefics in aspect, it will make the native noble, distinguished, and fortunate. Its effects are more moderate when it is found at the other angles or just following an angle. When it precedes an angle, assume <the> stillborn or abandoned?these are the disagreeable places which bring crises and ruin. In addition, after finding the Place which has been assigned to Fortune, examine the points square with it and the other aspects, just as with the angles in the natal chart. The Lot itself will be equivalent to the Ascendant and will mean ?Life;? the tenth place from it will be equivalent to MC and will mean ?Rank;? the seventh will be the Descendant; the fourth IC. The other places will have the same effects as the XII Places. Some astrologers have mystically hypothesized that the astronomical Ascendant and the points square with it are the Cosmic Angles, while the Lot and the points square with it are the
Natal Angles, and they have revealed this in their treatises as follows:

?When assigning the influence of the Lot among all the multifarious configurations of the angles? neither the tropic nor the solid nor the
bicorporeal signs will have the same overall effects. It is therefore necessary to examine the aspects or the conjunctions of the stars relative to the Lot: for example, a benefic in conjunction or in aspect with the Lot
will be a sign of good and a giver of property. A destructive star in conjunction or in aspect> will be responsible for loss of goods and sickness of the body.

Valens suggests we look to see if the lot or its dispositor are angular in the radical chart. However, he then goes on to discuss the places from the Lot like the houses derived from the ASC. So even if a planet looks weak in the ASC based chart it can still be effective due to its derived place from the Lot. For example, in the chart we looked at the Sun was in the 1st place from the lot and conjunct it.

So its a question of looking at the chart from all angles (no pun intended!). Valens certainly does seem to suggest that the places from the lot can operate like the topics in the ASC chart.

Mark

ThanksMark When he says in an angle does he mean MC cusp or 90 degrees from Lot?He doesnt tell whether squares or oppositions to F are good or bad. Or does it depend onthe planet(benefic or malefic) which makesthe aspect? Has anyone ever tested whetherthe Lot as ASC might bethe chart that best describesthe native or his destiny andthe natal chart to be more general,like some sort ofSun sign?

I for ex have Sun Venus and Mars in Capricorn in 8th house opposite Fortune in 2nd,hence in a evil weak house.But from the lot they are strong in 7.
thanks

Mark wrote:without AA data we can both cling to our conflicting views without any resolution. Thats why I dont think we should be using anything other than AA data for these exercises.

i used to think nothing could be properly done without AA data, but as others like martin g have pointed out and to which i agree - a lot of the birth records from certain countries are rounded off as well.. this graph highlights something of what i mean -
http://www.nukkin.com.au/ADB1900_to_194 ... A_data.gif

i have come to the conclusion that most astrologers have to work with data that they need to be clear on it possibly being out some.. it presents a problem unless you know the person well, or even better - have done some rectification work on the chart.. that said, i view rectification work as a quagmire for even the most knowledgeable.. bottom line - i think we need to be fluid with data and recognize room for some error regardless of the rating (A, or AA) that is being given for a chart..

MorningSun wrote:
James,
I also noted the square of Saturn to the Sun / Strong Saturn in Domicile and had the thought that his youth was rather austere, and disciplined, but then the immediate following thought was, strong foundation, IT GAVE HIM A VERY STABLE AND LONG CAREER. I didn't think of the 3rd being the 10th from the POF, but as Mark said, it does make sense in hindsight! And its rather odd, as a square from a strong Saturn in the 3rd to the Sun, you would think would cause difficulties in speech, communications, etc.

as mark and damon discuss - the pof is treated like an alternative ascendant according to my understanding of traditional astrology.. the same for the part of spirit and all the other parts!!! i believe this is one reason, perhaps there are more) that ptolemy and others wanted to leave out much of any information on the parts, or lots. at any rate in macleans chart the pof is conjunct the sun in aries - not the sect light.. the book of nativities by abu 'ali discussed the pof conjunct the sun in different signs.. as i recall - since i also have pof conjunct sun in aries - it is not such a great thing and is better in leo and perhaps best when the sun is in a trine or sextile to the pof.. this is a whole other conversation!

it was morin who pointed out - others have too, but he is the first one to come to my mind) - a planet in good 'celestial' state - saturn in capricorn, or sun in aries in this chart - tend to be positives in a chart, regardless of other factors.. another way to think of this set up is how both the sun, saturn (and jupiter - if you want to go by just sign placement squares) are all planets of the same sect.. planets in the same sect tend to work best with one another.. jupiter in capricorn in the 3rd according to this theory would perhaps be more challenging then saturn in capricorn! so many theories, and without talking directly to the person who has the chart directly, we are left to wonder! my brother has saturn in capricorn in the 3rd and he has never suffered for words and communicating.. i am sure all the other set up's in his or any chart also contribute to this..

Damon wrote:

ThanksMark When he says in an angle does he mean MC cusp or 90 degrees from Lot?

I think Mark Riley translates it that way but Valens is definitely using WSH here in this context so he really means the 10th place (sign) from the lot.

Damon wrote:

He doesnt tell whether squares or oppositions to F are good or bad. Or does it depend onthe planet(benefic or malefic) which makesthe aspect?

Absolutely. The squares to the Lot are all strong but whether they are malefic or benefic depends on planets involved. I do think the topical meaning derived from the ASC colours it too.

Damon wrote:

Has anyone ever tested whetherthe Lot as ASC might bethe chart that best describesthe native or his destiny andthe natal chart to be more general,like some sort ofSun sign?

If you mean a statistical test then no. Such approaches are controversial anyway as delineation is holistic not reductionist. Its not a question of either/or. You need to look at charts from both approaches. Indeed you can weave the two together. I have seen numerous charts where success is hard to explain from the radical (ASC based) chart.

But have a look for yourself. You dont need to accept my views. I always look at both the Lot of Fortune and Spirit in a chart . I think their dispositors are as revealing regarding career as the MC ruler.

I for ex have Sun Venus and Mars in Capricorn in 8th house opposite Fortune in 2nd,hence in a evil weak house.But from the lot they are strong in 7. thanks

I would interpret this that this increases the power and 'busyness' of these planets but their negative association from the radical chart doesnt go away. In the Mystery chart the power of Jupiter and Saturn (in the radical 3rd) is greatly strengthened by their being 10th from the lot. But in a way the two methods interact. For example in the Mystery chart we have career (10th from the lot) reflected in the 3rd house from the ASC. Plus we look at the whole chart and see that Jupiter disposits the ASC ruler (Mars) and Mercury while Saturn is Lord 3 and bound ruler of the MC. Just wish I had thought of all that earlier!

Mark

Thanks Mark
Im reading that chapter and it appears that favourability of aspects to ASC depend on sect and dignity, but when F is the ASC he doesnt seem to care about sect.

I also read this which suggests he was using quadrant method as Mars could not be rising in Scorpio ,when the rising sign is Libra.Maybe it was late Libra rising. But later he appears to use WSH.

Sun in Scorpio, moon in Cancer, Saturn in Aquarius, Jupiter in Sagittarius, Mars in Scorpio, Venus
in Libra, Mercury in Scorpio, Ascendant in Libra. Since the birth was at night, I investigate the moon: this
happens to be in Cancer, trine with Mars. We find Mars rising just after the Ascendant and in its own
house <Scorpio>, triangle <Scorpio>, and sect <nocturnal>. Then we find Venus sharing
rulership with Mars, being in the Ascendant and in its own house <Libra>. Third, we find the moon at
MC in its own house <Cancer>. It is obvious that the nativity is distinguished, since the houserulers are
configured so appropriately. Investigating the Lot of Fortune, I find it in Aquarius; Saturn is there, the
ruler <of> and in <the> Good Fortune, in its own house <Aquarius> and /80P/
triangle <Aquarius>. Likewise the 11th Place from the Lot of Fortune, i.e. the Place of
Accomplishment, is <Sagittarius>, and Jupiter is there.

I noticed too that I have Daimon in Aries in 10th from Fortune in Cancer,and the lord,Mars is exalted in 7th from F. Mars,lord of Daimon, is also in 10th from Daimon.
Unfortunately he doesnt say much about the effect of Daimons lord in the angles from Daimon itself

I also read this which suggests he was using quadrant method as Mars could not be rising in Scorpio ,when the rising sign is Libra. Maybe it was late Libra rising. But later he appears to use WSH.

I see this rather differently. In the passage quoted noted Valens states 'Mars is rising after the ascendant'. I take that to be the next WSH following the ASC. And yes we probably have a late Libra ASC although Valens doesn't list degrees here. However, its quite clear Valens sees Mars in a separate house from the ASC ('in its own house').

Valens actually does use quadrant houses (Porphyry) in another part of the Anthology. He cites an older astrologer called Orion who developed the technique. However, he only uses quadrants to determine length of life to determine the effectiveness of planets. They are generally not used for topics although even that point is more controversial than it seems. I would rather not get drawn further into that point here as I intend to open a thread on this.

Damon wrote:

Unfortunately he doesnt say much about the effect of Daimons lord in the angles from Daimon itself

Its pretty clear you apply the same logic you would to the lot of fortune.

Take a look at this passage from Valens:

It is best to find the ruler of Daimon at the Lot of Fortune or at its 10th Place (=Midheaven).If so, then the nativities are illustrious and distinguished. If it is in its proper place or at another angle, the nativities will be as distinguished and vigorous as they can be under the circumstances. If it is turned away from its proper place, just precedes an
angle, or has malefics in aspect, it indicates exile and distress abroad. If it is in conjunction with a benefic or has benefics in aspect, the native will live abroad for a long time, having a varied and fluctuating livelihood. If it has a malefic in aspect, the native will become needy, destitute, experiencing trials and imprisonment. Likewise if the ruler of the Lot or of Daimon> is in opposition to this place, it indicates men who reside abroad and become distressed. Often the goods of such men are not inherited by
their own families, but by strangers.

Its worth noting Valens doesn't have a simplistic formula for calculating the lot of Fortune and Daimon. He reverses the normal procedure in certain circumstances. For example where both luminaries below the horizon. So arguably, he might have regarded Fortune=Spirit and Spirit=Fortune in the Mystery chart.

Mark

So if both Light are above horizon he might have fortune as spirit and spirit as fortune too?

Damon wrote:

So if both Light are above horizon he might have fortune as spirit and spirit as fortune too?

No. Noone ever suggested that. Let me explain.

There are 3 traditions from the hellenistic tradition on how to calculate the lot of Fortune.

1) The most widespread or 'mainstream' tradition is that derived from Dorotheus and Valens which reverses the calculation for day and night births. Nearly all surviving hellenistic sources, we have available, used this approach to calculation.

2) Ptolemy is the major source to reject the idea of reversal of the calculation for day and night births. However, Ptolemy doesn't just reject the different calculation for night births. He also breaks with the hellenistic tradition before him and dispenses with the lot of Spirit entirely. He remained the only source suggesting this in hellenistic astrology. However, as Ptolemy gained increasing influence in the medieval and renaissance period his approach gained ground. Hence, by the time of 17th century astrologers like Lilly or Gadbury you only find reference to Ptolemy's calculation.

3) A third tradition is mentioned by Valens in the Anthology. He quotes a passage from Petosiris which seems to say that you use the diurnal calculation for the Lot of Fortune in a day chart, and then you use the nocturnal calculation in a night chart- but only if the Moon is above the horizon at that time. If the Moon is below the horizon at night then you use the diurnal calculation for Fortune.

Since this passage was directly quoted from Petosiris, who was one of the principle authorities in the Hellenistic tradition, one would assume that it would have carried a lot of weight back then.

However, no one ever seemed to mention this variation elsewhere. Even Valens, who quotes this passage from Petosiris, seems to disregard it in the rest of his example charts in the Anthology.

Personally, I do give consideration to this rule in 'dark charts i.e. where both the luminaries are both below the horizon. Its works out better in some charts. For example, Silvio Berlusconi.

Mark