Page 1 of 2
fORTUNA AS asc
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:57 pm
by damon
hI
tHE Greeks seemed to emphazise that we use Fortune as the ASC,maybe even more than the natal chart ASC.
Well, I have a sibling who cannot have kids due to an operation.
It happens that her natal chart has Jupiter in 5th in Scorpio,but with F as ASC, Saturn in Capricorn goes to the 5th as lord of 6th.
Looks like a better fit
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:47 am
by Tom
tHE Greeks seemed to emphazise that we use Fortune as the ASC,maybe even more than the natal chart ASC.
This is not true. There is nothing in Greek astrology that says Fortune should be emphasized over and above the natal ASC. They did use the lots as a sort of derived ASC. For example using the lot of marriage derived from the natal chart, as the ASC would describe the marriage or married life of the native, and using Fortuna would describe those things in the life of the native described by Fortuna. The ASC was never given second tier status.
Your premise is without merit.
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:50 am
by damon
Hi Tom
See below,the part in bold.
My own experience: two friends of mine whose job involves metaphysics have the Lord of Fortune in 9th from fortune.
A cousin of mine who is extrovert and daredavil didn`t fit his Taurus ASC. With Fortuna rising you get a lot of fire .
Antoine Garth The Five Places of Destiny: 4. LOT of FORTUNE The Lot of Fortune is the gateway to this system of delineation. Fortune operates as an ascendant, becoming the "new east" and providingan invisible second chart, placed upon the first, having all the houses related to it, as if it were a new chart. All of the angular, succedentand cadent houses from the Lot of Fortune have the same potency and meaning as their radical counterparts.From Valens: "In another manner, when you have come to know the place allotted for Fortune, also consider the squares to it and theremaining figures to be, as it were, upon the genethlialogical pivot points. That is, the Lot itself will possess the power of the Horoskopos(Ascendant), that of life; the tenth zoidion(zodiac sign) from this, the power of the Midheaven, that of reputation; the 7th, the power of theDescendant; the 4th, of the subterraneous zoidion, and the remaining places will possess the power of the 12 regions. For some havemystically established the universal Horoskopos and its squares to be the cosmic pivot points, but the Lot and its squares to be thegenethlialogical pivot points."Genethlialogy is defined by Nicholas Devore in his Encyclopedia of Astrology as "that department of Astrology which deals with the birth of individuals whereby one forms a judgment of the characteristics of a person from a map of the heavens cast for his given birth moment." Valens clearly believed that delineation derived from the Lot of Fortune (as the ascendant) more relevant than the radical ascendant tojudge the characteristics of a person. Fortune, like the Horoskopos (ascendant), represents our physical body, health and inclination. Italso points to the kind of work we do
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:31 pm
by Paul
Hi Damon
I think it's too sweeping to say "that we use Fortune as the ASC,maybe even more than the natal chart ASC. ".
Instead I think its truer to say that there are examples where, within a given technique or context, the focus moves to the lot of fortune as the main emphasis. I think that more accurately reflects the state of things and Valens really is a good example of that.
I think it's true that there are correlations between the ascendant and the lot of fortune but I think it's a matter of context whether one or the other gets focus. Both have some indication of health for example, the ascendant in a broader manner than the lot of fortune as I understand it.
But I don't think this is quite the same as simply using it as the ascendant which is what is implied by this statement I quoted.
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:45 pm
by damon
Paul wrote:Hi Damon I think it's too sweeping to say "that we use Fortune as the ASC,maybe even more than the natal chart ASC. ". Instead I think its truer to say that there are examples where, within a given technique or context, the focus moves to the lot of fortune as the main emphasis. I think that more accurately reflects the state of things and Valens really is a good example of that. I think it's true that there are correlations between the ascendant and the lot of fortune but I think it's a matter of context whether one or the other gets focus. Both have some indication of health for example, the ascendant in a broader manner than the lot of fortune as I understand it. But I don't think this is quite the same as simply using it as the ascendant which is what is implied by this statement I quoted.
Thanks.
Still,some cases are so clear cut. My cousin,a pilot and a daredevil,has Taurus rising.
With fortune rising you suddenly have Mars rising, Sun in 10.
Makes you wonder
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:02 pm
by Tom
Anecdotes prove nothing. We can all find an axiom or aphorism and a case where it applies, thereby "proving it" or does not apply, therefore "disproving it." Aphorisms should all be accompanied by a tacit, "all other things being equal," to put them in their proper perspective.
Secondly cherry picking a statement by one person about one Greek astrologer is not credible evidence that "the Greeks" emphasized fortuna over the natal ASC. It might be true that Garth believes that about Valens. But that is as far as it can go based on the statement quoted. I like Garth's stuff, though.
It is true that fortuna has to do with the body as it is the part of the Moon and the Moon is associated with the body. Fortuna has to do with temporal things and the body is one of those. And it is true it has a spiritual component as well. It's not an easy concept to fully grasp. John Frawley once said trying to define fortuna is like trying to catch the wind. There are a lot of opinions out there, about it, ancient and modern. However it seems to be true that the Greeks and medieval astrologers used fortuna far more than their later counterparts. Even Morinus, who had no use for the lots, used fortuna.
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:23 pm
by Paul
damon wrote:Paul wrote:Hi Damon I think it's too sweeping to say "that we use Fortune as the ASC,maybe even more than the natal chart ASC. ". Instead I think its truer to say that there are examples where, within a given technique or context, the focus moves to the lot of fortune as the main emphasis. I think that more accurately reflects the state of things and Valens really is a good example of that. I think it's true that there are correlations between the ascendant and the lot of fortune but I think it's a matter of context whether one or the other gets focus. Both have some indication of health for example, the ascendant in a broader manner than the lot of fortune as I understand it. But I don't think this is quite the same as simply using it as the ascendant which is what is implied by this statement I quoted.
Thanks.
Still,some cases are so clear cut. My cousin,a pilot and a daredevil,has Taurus rising.
With fortune rising you suddenly have Mars rising, Sun in 10.
Makes you wonder
I agree with Tom that one example doesn't prove anything.
However I also think that you should use what works for you, a lot of astrologers tends to follow in the footsteps one a particular astrologer which inspires them, whether it be Morin, or Lilly or Bonatti or in this case Valens. Maybe it would be worth reading though his work and seeing exactly how and where he puts emphasis on the LoF and apply it to some examples and see if you get a consistent trend.
http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vet ... entire.pdf
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:27 pm
by damon
Thanks Paul
I have that one.Not a user friendly reading but I am looking for the passage where he mentions Fortune should be used as ASC for personality etc, just like the radical chart.
I find the method in chapter 5 interesting,but couldnt understand how to calculate cronocartorships.
I am way too used to softwares
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:39 pm
by Paul
damon wrote:Thanks Paul
I have that one.Not a user friendly reading but I am looking for the passage where he mentions Fortune should be used as ASC for personality etc, just like the radical chart.
I find the method in chapter 5 interesting,but couldnt understand how to calculate cronocartorships.
I am way too used to softwares
Chronocrators are mostly just time lords. The most common are profections and you don't need any software to calculate basic profections. You just take the first year of the native's life as being related to the first house, the second year with the second house. Keep in mind that the first year of your life is when you're aged 0. So when you're 6 months old etc. You've not completed a full year. What this means is that when you're 1, you move to a second place profection year.
When you reach twelve you start over again. This means that ages 0, 12, 24, 36 etc are all the 1st house. So the time lord in question here is the lord of the 1st house. The next year it will pass to the lord of the second house.
There's more to it than that but that's the basic approach. I would recommend (if I'm allowed) Chris Brennan's course on hellenistic astrology as he goes through these examples in good detail in a manner that's easy to understand. He also goes though other time lord techniques like zodiacal releasing from the lot of fortune which you may find interesting.
If you need software, I believe Chris Manwaring's software Delphic Oracle provides the relevant information for all of these time lord techniques mentioned.
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:40 pm
by damon
Thereyou are. Already in Valens days some Astrologers seemed to emphasize Fortune
" 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? /80K/ 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 will be responsible for loss of goods and sickness of the body
Re: fORTUNA AS asc
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:48 pm
by johannes susato
damon wrote:hI
tHE Greeks seemed to emphazise that we use Fortune as the ASC,maybe even more than the natal chart ASC.
Manilius - if he is part of the helenstic astrolgogy at all - stresses just this in Astronimia, Book III, verses 45 - 202. POF is the begin of 12 equal parts of the zodiac, (gr. athla, lat. sortes) which he calls the most important thing in the art of presaging the fate.
Johannes
Re: fORTUNA AS asc
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:59 pm
by Paul
johannes susato wrote:damon wrote:hI
tHE Greeks seemed to emphazise that we use Fortune as the ASC,maybe even more than the natal chart ASC.
Manilius - if he is part of the helenstic astrolgogy at all - stresses just this in Astronimia, Book III, verses 45 - 202. POF is the begin of 12 equal parts of the zodiac, (gr. athla, lat. sortes) which he calls the most important thing in the art of presaging the fate.
Johannes
Some astrologers do indeed create a kind of house system from any particular lot, but normally spirit and fortune. However it is a bit different to say that they do this (normally within a given context) and that they use the lot as the ascendant. This isn't true. The ascendant is still there and still is focused upon. It is more that we could envision a particular sign in aspect by square or opposition to the sign of the lot as being particularly important, especially any planets there. In other words we're creating a cross or house system from a given lot, but we're not actually ignoring the actual natal ascendant here. We're not saying fortune is the ascendant. Instead we're saying that the sign that fortuna is in is its own first house, and the sign opposite it is fortuna's seventh house etc.
But the actual 1st house and seventh house in the chart stay the same. This distinction, whilst probably meant, was not implied in the original post. When we have this derived house system from the lots we're looking at the chart within a very narrow and specific context. Normally in relation to career or what we do out in the world with regards spirit, and more material or tangible effects with regards fortuna.