Lots = Pillars of Fate

[Omnisphericus]

I'm opening this thread in order to practically put in use certain (so called) arabic (or Greek) lots by analyzing certain charts of the celebrities.
I will try to use AA ratings of charts of celebrities given on the site Astro-Databank, and convert these charts in to whole sign house system because it was a house system used by Hellenistic astrologers who used these lots in great deal.

In general my examination will be concentrated on particular lots like the Lot of Fortune (LOF), Lot of Spirit (LOS), Lot of Basis (LOB), Pars Hyleg (PH), Part of Exaltation (short: Exaltation).
I will add some other lots sporadically.

I welcome all of you who are interested in this lots and their practical use to participate in this discussion and we may learn through it.

I will start with a great introduction by the great authority on the subject Curtis Manwaring:

Greek lots (also known as arabic parts) are sensitive points in a birth chart based upon the positions of the planets at birth, and the ascendant (with a few exceptions). The theory is that the planets in the heavens signify the more general circumstances that exist in the world at any given moment in time. What makes these planetary relationships unique to the individual is the way the individual exists in them, in relation to their ascending degree and sign. In essence, the lots are a tool that help the cosmic soul see how a relationship formed in the heavens applys to an individual through the use of analogy. For example, the cosmic soul says, for instance (lot of father), I know what the relationship of fatherhood is in the heavens; it is like the relationship between Saturn and the Sun. The distance between them is the implied relationship. So if the native is like the Sun, place the Sun on the ascendant and the distance between the Sun/Asc to where Saturn falls out in relation to the Sun is like the relationship the native has to his father. Another way of stating this is: "As Saturn is to the Sun, so too is the father to the native". The same principle extends to the other lots.

LOF is called the Lunar Horoscope (ancients called the ascendant - horoscope). The Moon in traditional astrology is representative of the Body in general (the ascendant as well), so LOF as Lunar Horoscope is a representative of the general health of the native, a source of wealth and well being (and this is not money and worldly success only, a good health condition is also Fortuna!).
Paulus from Alexandria says:

"And fortune signifies everything that concerns the body, and what one does through the course of life. It becomes indicative of possessions, reputation and privilege.

Many of the ancients were calculating charts with the Fortuna as Ascendant, and therefore if the ruler of the Fortuna is 10 Signs from the Fortuna is said to be very fortunate.

Valens says:

"... the Lot itself will possess the power of the horoskopos, that of life; the 10th zoidion [sign] from this, the power of the midheaven, that of reputation; the 7th, the power of the descendant; the 4th, of the subterraneous zoidion, and the remaining places will possess the power of the 12 regions."

The 11th sign from the Fortuna is also very important because it is a Place of
Acquisition.
Valens:

"We have also found the 11th place [sign] from Fortune to be an acquisitive place, a bestower of belongings and goods, and especially when benefics are upon it or are testifying [in aspect].

LOS is showing the Spirit, the Vitale inside the body (Fortuna). It is what is moving the body - the Will Power, a will to action.
Paulus says:

"Spirit happens to be lord of soul, temper, mindfulness, and every power; and sometimes it also cooperates in the determination concerning what one does."

LOB is derived from the Fortuna and Spirit (body and soul), so it represents the basis of the individual and its placement is of great importance.

The Exaltation is not a lot (though there exist a lot with calculating particular degrees but here we will use only the sign exaltation).
The Exaltation can be found by calculating how much is the distance (by signs) from the placement of the Sun (if diurnal chart) in your chart to the natural place of exaltation of the Sun - Aries. Then you add that number counting from the Ascendant on.
For example, lets say an Ascendant in Leo, Sun in Pisces, you have one sign from Pisces to Aries. You then calculate one sign from Leo which would be Virgo. So the Place of Exaltation of this 'person' is Virgo.
If a night chart you use the Moon and Taurus (place of exaltation) instead of the Sun and Aries.

Pars Hyleg is showing the Life Purpose of the person.

So, this is in short what these particular lots are representing.

Lets try this with example.
Here's Whitney Houston's chart:


LOF = 8.02 Cancer
LOS = 8.48 Scorpio
LOB = 7.39 Scorpio
Exaltation = Scorpio
Pars Hyleg = 13.15 Taurus

First that we notice is Fortuna's ruler: Moon is in 10th Place from Fortuna with the greater Benefic Jupiter.
This is great, Jupiter is ruler of the radical 10th.
Pars Hyleg, 'the Life Purpose' is in Taurus, 11 signs from the Fortuna.
She reached the Audience. She "Acquisited" a great number of audience. That was her life purpose.
Pars Hyleg in the Venusian Taurus is showing that her purpose is to Sing (Taurus ruler the throat), to make music.

Next, look how close (partile) are the degrees of LOF, LOS and LOB.
LOS and LOB are making Partile Trine to the Fortuna.

The thing that LOB, LOS and Exaltation are in the same sign is already a great deal of significance.
But, they all share same ruler which is not so strong.
Mars is in 12th Place from them in fall in Libra. In 8th radical place. This is an idle place. The ruler of radical 8th Venus is in 6th place in combustion.
All this shows troubled life.
As it was indeed.
The Fortuna and the ruler in 10th place from it, is showing the eminence, the glory and success. But the LOB and LOS are too weak through their ruler.
Mars in 8th in fall and ruler of the Spirit can show "weak will".
That Mars is making partile square to the Fortuna, and an opposition to the Fortuna's ruler Moon.
So, all in all that Mars is creating great troubles to all the significant points in the chart.

At this moment I will refer you to this discussion here:
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46808

Here I 've calculated her chart to find the Hyleg and Alcocoden and I was able to be precise with months about the years of life showed by her Alcocoden.
I didn't make the calculations of the Lots back then, but now as I'm examining her chart through this lots I can see how the both techniques are showing the similar results. Again, Mars is the greater 'trouble maker'.
Lot of Fortuna is her Hyleg and Mars her Alcocoden.

 

[Omnisphericus]

Calculations of the Lots

Lot of Fortuna:
Asc + Moon - Sun (by day)
Asc + Sun - Moon (by night)

Lot of Spirit
Asc + Sun - Moon (by night)
Asc + Moon - Sun (by night)

Lot of Basis
Asc + Lot of Fortuna - Lot of Spirit

Pars Hyleg
Asc + Moon - SAN (syzygy, the last lunation prior birth).

Exaltation
The amount of signs from the placement of the Sun to the Aries, then that number of signs added to the Ascendant (by day).
The same but instead of the Sun and Aries, you go with the Moon and Taurus (places of exaltation).

 

[Omnisphericus]

10 rules of Antoine Garth

Look for this:

1. Seek the Lot of Fortune and note whether it is either angular (in the 1st, 10th, Seventh, Fourth) or in the house of the Good Spirit (11th or 5th). If Fortune is found in any of those houses, take a note.
(Find the Lot of Fortune and determine whether it is angular, or if it culminates from the
Ascendant. Culminate means to count ten houses away. Or, if it culminates from the Lot of
Fortune . That’s our first, ‘ooh, something’s going on here.’ As an addendum to that, if you see
the Lot of Fortune in these houses, you will start to get interested. In any house, the Lot of
Fortune can show great fortune, but in these particular houses, it tends to be a marker or kind
of like a sign post. 1st house, 10th house, Seventh house, Fourth house, Eleventh House, Fifth
House. In general those are the ‘good’ houses, the productive houses of the chart.)

2. If the ruler of the Lot of Fortune culminates – that means if it is ten houses away from the Lot of Fortune or the Ascendant.

3. If the ruler of the Lot of Spirit culminates from the Lot of Fortune, or the
Ascendant, but most specifically from the Lot of Fortune.

4. If the ruler of the Exaltation is culminating from the Lot of Spirit or the
Ascendant.

5. If the ruler of the Spirit is on the Fortune, and the ruler of the Fortune is on the Spirit.

6. If the ruler of the Lot of Basis is with the Lot of Fortune that creates – not
gigantically notable but notable nonetheless.
If the ruler of the Basis is on the Lot of
Fortune , or the Spirit, if it’s on either of these lots – that’s good.

7. If the ruler of the fortune is on the Spirit, the ruler of Spirit is on the Basis
and the ruler of Basis is on the fortune.

8. If all four of fortune, Spirit, Exaltation, Basis are exalted or in their own
domicile – or even just two of the four.

9. If there is an exalted planet on the Lot of Fortune , Spirit, Basis, Exaltation, it creates notable genitures. Exalted planets on any of the lots but especially the Lot of Fortune and the lot of Exaltation.

10. If a benefic is with the ruler of the Lot of Fortune. If Jupiter is exalted it’s even better.

 

[sandstone]

perhaps one could define "notable genitures" and whether whitney houston was a "notable geniture" for example..

thanks for these posts and your work here omni...

 

[Moog]

Good job! Very good posts, Omnisphericus. Thank you!

 

[Omnisphericus]

Monica Bellucci

Thank you for the encouragement fellows!

Lets look Monica Bellucci's chart:


It is a day chart Sun in 10th!
Fortuna in 15 Scorpio on MC though in the 11th sign.
Ruler Mars is in the 10th Place from Fortuna with the benefic Venus!

LOS is at 24 Pisces in radical 3rd.
Exaltation Ruler Venus is at the 10th Place from Fortuna alongside with the Ruler of Fortuna (Mars) while the domicile ruler is at the Venus's sign Taurus.
Venus is her overall Almuten (Almutem Figuris) also.
Robert Zoller says about Venus being Almuten Figuris (Guardian Angel Planet):

"If the Almuten figuris is Venus, she will be a lover of beauty, of music, of men."

Pars Hyleg is at 23 Taurus conjuncting Jupiter with 2 degrees orb.
Her 'Life Purpose' is that of Beauty (Venus). Fashion Model and Movie Actor.

Lot of Basis is at 10Virgo in the 11th Place from Fortuna with the Ruler Mercury at its own sign. This is very strong.

Her Exaltation is at Cancer with the ruler Moon, in 10th from Fortuna.

The 10th from Fortuna is quite strong.
It has the Fortuna ruler.
The Almutem Figuris and Exaltation ruler of LOS - Venus.
It has the ruler of the Part of Exaltation (Moon).

The Lot of Basis is at radical 9th with the Ruler Mercury in its own place.
9th is called House of God by the ancients. This explains her role as Mary Magdalene in the Passion of Christ movie. She was also called 'The Goddess of beauty' (3rd house is the house of Goddess and she has the LOS there).

The ruler of the LOB and the ruler of LOS are making partile Trine.

 

[Omnisphericus]

Kurt Cobain



Night Chart, ruler Mercury in 7th in detriment.
Fortuna in 9th in 8Taurus, ruler Venus in 7th in Exaltation (Pisces), but applying conjunction to Saturn ruler of 6th and ruler of LOS at 1 Aquarius in 6th.

Lot of Spirit is quite weak. It is in 6th and the Ruler Saturn in 12th from LOS.


If something is showing the eminence and popularity or success in his life that is the 10th and 11th Place from Fortuna.
LOS is in 10th Place from Fortuna. The ruler of Ascendant and the ruler of Fortuna (the Sun as well Saturn) are in 11th from Fortuna. The 11th is a place of Acquisition, place of the Good Diamon, place of Friends. So, this is suggesting that the person would have powerful friends who will help him to elevate on the stage of fame.

The Part of Exaltation is in Cancer in radical 11th Place with the ruler there in its domicile alongside Jupiter.
This is another indicator of fame.

Pars Hyleg is at 12 Aquarius in the Place of LOS.
His 'Life Purpose' is to bring an unique style (Aquarius) in the world of music (ruler Saturn in Pisces).
It's interesting how the Fortuna in 9th is showing something. I remember in the early 90's when Nirvana had huge popularity, I read transparent from Nirvana Fans: "Kurt Cobain is God". 9th is the House of God.

LOB is at 27Sagittarius in Radical 4th in 8th from Fortuna and 11th from LOS.
The Ruler Jupiter is in the Place of Exaltation alongside with the ruler of Exaltation (Moon) and in the sign of its own exaltation.

The conclusion of these 3 charts is that the fame is shown by the ruler of the Fortuna being placed in 10th or 11th from Fortuna.
In some cases the Fortuna was in 10th itself.

The fame doesn't necessarily brings good and happy life to the persons.
And one thing is to have indicators for fame and worldly or material success, and another thing is to live happy and fulfilled life.
As we saw, the other lots and their rulers are showing this type of indicators for possible downfalls in life.
6, 8 and 12 house (from Asc and from Fortuna) are not considered as positive by the ancients. 10th and 11th are considered as very productive and positive.
Sadly, going up materially in life doesn't necessarily means going upwards spiritually/psychology or on a soul level as well. This is the balance which is lacking in the charts of Kurt and Whitney.

 

[Omnisphericus]

Elvis Presley



LOF 27Libra
LOS 27Capricorn
LOB 12Virgo
Pars Hyleg 0Aquarius
Exaltation in Libra

LOF in radical 11, ruler in 4th from Fortuna on LOS in Capricorn.
Sun, Mercury, Venus and LOS are all in Capricorn.

LOB is in radical MC, ruler Mercury in Capricorn WITH the LOS and the ruler of Fortuna (Venus).

Pars Hyleg in Aqarius in 5th from Fortuna (5th - the performer) with the ruler Saturn in its own sign.
Pars Hyleg in Aquarius is again showing the Uniqueness as in the case of Kurt.
Unique (Aq) Performer (5th).

Exaltation is in radical 11th alongside with the Fortuna and Mars.

The weak point in the chart is the ruler of the Ascendant in radical 12th making square to Saturn.

His Almutem Figuris is Moon.
Here's what Robert Zoller says:

If the Moon, s/he will want to care for, be cared for, eat and make love, dream, etc

I would add that the Moon is giving him that personal magnetism, charisma.

 

[Omnisphericus]

Valens on Eminance

perhaps one could define "notable genitures" and whether whitney houston was a "notable geniture" for example..

thanks for these posts and your work here omni...

I investigate a bit today and found what Valens is saying on fame, fortune or eminence:

The Distinguishing Characteristics of the Triangles, the Houserulers, the Helpers, and the Sects
of the Sun and the Moon—for Day or Night Births.

An examination of the distinguishing characteristics of the previously mentioned triangles, along with
the lofty or mediocre fortune of each person’s nativity, will be indicative. For day nativities, it will be
necessary to examine the sun: 1) in which triangle it lies; 2) its predominant houseruler and its helper, viz.
whether it is at, following, or preceding an angle, rising or setting, and whether it is in its own signs; 3)
which benefic or malefic it has in aspect. Having determined all this, then make the prediction. If <the
houseruler> happens to be in the Ascendant or at MC or is in one of the operative signs, <astrologers>
forecast a fortunate and illustrious nativity; if it follows an angle, a nativity of moderate fortune; if it
precedes an angle, a base and unfortunate nativity. It is also necessary to see how the sun itself is situated
and which stars it has in aspect. For night nativities it will be necessary to inspect the moon in a similar
fashion and to determine how the predominant houseruler of the triangle and its assistant are configured, as
was stated above.

Curtis Manwaring and Robert Schmidt are eminent scholars on the subject of Hellenistic astrology (of which Valens is representative) and from what I've read in both of them (as in Valens as well) I can try to sum what I've learned.

1. So, you first look at which sign Sun is (by day or Moon by night).
Then you look for the ruler of the triplicity and its placement.
The order of the houses (from best to 'worst') is as follow:
1, 10, 11, 7, 4, 5, 9, 3, 2, 8, 6, 12.
(Some consider 10th to be of greatest importance).

If the ruler of the triplicity is angular and strong (in its own sign or rulership by exaltation) than this is the first indicator for fortune.

For example, in Elvis Presley's (night) chart, Moon is in Pisces.
First triplicity ruler is Mars (by night) and Mars is in 11th. This is strong position though Mars is in detriment.
Venus, 2nd triplicity ruler is in succedent (2), and third ruler is the Moon itself in 4th (angular house) having a reception by Venus.

2. Next you look for the Domicile ruler of the Fortuna and its position.
In Presley's chart is in 2nd. But we can see something here.
The triplicity rulers are as follows:
- Mars in 11th in Detriment, in the sign of Fortune and in Domicile of the 2nd tr. ruler (Venus)
- Venus in 2nd in Capricorn in the sign of the Lot of Spirit and sign where Mars is Exalted.
- Moon is in 4th in the sign where Venus is exalted.

So, these three rulers Receive each other, in a way..

3. You look for planets on angles from Fortuna.
In Presley's chart the 4th from Fortuna is full.
It contains Sun, Mercury (ruler of the LOB), Venus and LOS.
10th house ruler (Moon) is almutem figuris and in radical 4th.

4. We look for the Lot of Spirit and its condition.
Presley's lot of spirit is in 4th from fortuna and its ruler Saturn in 5th in a domicile sign.

5. You look for the Acquisitive place (11th sign from LOF).
In Presley's chart this is Leo in radical 9th with the Ruler Sun in the bunch of planets in Capricorn.

6. Next, they use the Lot of Exaltation (not only the Place of Exaltation which we used above).

Lot of Exaltation:

[Day] Lot = Ascendant + 19 Aries - Sun
[Night] Lot = Ascendant + 3 Taurus - Moon

Presley's LOE is in 13Aquarius with the Ruler Saturn in its own sign here.

 

[sandstone]

omni - i admire and respect what you're doing.. my question isn't based on what valen says.. valen is not around to tell us whether whitney houston or elvis presley are "notable genitures"... we can follow the principles and try to figure it out on our own, but we also have to have a concept of what exactly constitutes a ''notable geniture".. this is from the pov of it actually being connected to the present reality.. so i ask again - is whitney houston or any other notable person not notable if they don't have what valens or the modern interpreters of valens consider a "notable geniture"? this is the basis for my question.. cheers - james

 

[Omnisphericus]

omni - i admire and respect what you're doing.. my question isn't based on what valen says.. valen is not around to tell us whether whitney houston or elvis presley are "notable genitures"... we can follow the principles and try to figure it out on our own, but we also have to have a concept of what exactly constitutes a ''notable geniture".. this is from the pov of it actually being connected to the present reality.. so i ask again - is whitney houston or any other notable person not notable if they don't have what valens or the modern interpreters of valens consider a "notable geniture"? this is the basis for my question.. cheers - james

Hmm I'm not sure I understand your question. (It may be because English is my second language)
'Notable person' by what/which standards?

 

[dr. farr]

omni - i admire and respect what you're doing.. my question isn't based on what valen says.. valen is not around to tell us whether whitney houston or elvis presley are "notable genitures"... we can follow the principles and try to figure it out on our own, but we also have to have a concept of what exactly constitutes a ''notable geniture".. this is from the pov of it actually being connected to the present reality.. so i ask again - is whitney houston or any other notable person not notable if they don't have what valens or the modern interpreters of valens consider a "notable geniture"? this is the basis for my question.. cheers - james

In my opinion, I think that a "notable geniture" only POINTS to a likelihood (of fame, etc), just as the indication of an "anaretic year" only POINTS to the likelihood of a critical year (ie a potentially dangerous year) for the subject.

Now, did the Greco/Romans have this "points to a likelihood" idea, or did they think one MUST have a notable geniture to actually have a notable life? Hard to say: hermetic thinking (going back to Alexandria) definitely has the "pointing to likelihood" outlook (that is where I GOT this attitude!)
Ptolemy (not a hermeticist but an Aristotelian) seems-from some of his statements at least-to possibly lean in this direction as well. Stoic philosophy of that ancient period would definitely say "MUST have a notable geniture to actually have a notable life", and certainly the increasingly determinist authors of the Islamic-transitional era and Middle Ages (Medieval European authors) would concur. The re-emergence of hermetic thinking in the early European Renaissance, had somewhat of a modifying influence upon the then-dominant deterministic astrological outlook, and so I think a more relativist concept (ie, a "pointing to likelihood" outlook) developed later on (which, of course, would definitely be the Modernist understanding regarding this question, ie, the "pointing to likelihood" outlook rather than the "MUST have notable geniture to have a notable life" outlook)

 

[piercethevale]

Greetings.
I apologize for my ignorance on the matter. I am curious about this, "Lot of Basis", as I am not familiar with it never having heard any reference to it before.
I am to understand that it represents the 'basis' of ones very existence? That is to mean, the reason and purpose of the particular incarnation? [for those of us 're-incarnationists']
I have Zoellers book, I must have overlooked this. I didn't give His book a thorough reading. [Nor do I particularly care to. I had expected something more comtemporarily written and not something mostly quoted directly from Bonatti with no attempt to render it more understandable by the vernacular. I wasn't particularly impressed with Zoellers theories, definitions or explanations of or about "Arabic Parts", or other astrological concepts and techniques either, for that matter, anyways. I still have my copy, as it is not without it's service and value to me.]
I appreciate the insight and effort you are giving in benevolence and good cheer in this thread. The subject of the 'Lots' is the most focused and strongest of my desire, presently and for some time back, as to more astrological knowledge and understanding. I have considered doing my own book on the subject of the Lots and degree symbolism...[Sabian, in particular.] and have a project, ongoing, to more correctly translate the titles of some of the Parts or Lots from those of distinctively foreign or notably ancient source. One example would be that of the Part identified presently as the Part of Imagination as I pointed out in a thread that it should be more correctly and descriptively identified or titled as the "Part of Intuition" ...as to it being the planet Uranus in the formula and not Neptune.
[The Part of Basis would be a title I may find need to propose/petition for a 'name change'..as all Parts/Lots are a 'Basis' of some abstract precept..for the most 'part', anyways.]

 

[sandstone]

omni and dr farr,

dr farr gets at a good chunk of my thinking, question and concerns around the ideas expressed here omni.. the other part that i would want to know is the reverse of this : if a notable person like whitney houston can have the astro signature(which is under examination for this thread) of a "notable geniture" missing as it appears she has, what does this say about the basic idea of arriving at whether a person has a 'notable geniture' or not? in other words if we find otherwell known famous people without the supposed required astro signature of a notable geniture what does it say about the concept?

thanks

 

[dr. farr]

Omni of course can provide his expert opinion, but to me, it simply means that this concept is to be understood as one of perhaps several testimonies which should be considered: good old Charles Carter once said that there should be agreement from at least 3 different methods/techniques, before a predictive conclusion should be made, and I fully agree with that point of view.

PS: the Lot of the Basis is also known as the "Foundation" or "Part of Foundation" and the "Pillar of the Horoscope", and became somewhat popular during Islamic-transitional era times.

 

[sandstone]

i would agree with ceo carter on that dr farr..

that said - i believe this is the very same approach that some are taking with the important lots - of fortune, spirit, exaltation and basis.. that would be 4, as opposed to carters 3, lol.. well maybe exaltation isn't a lot, so 3 1/2 then.. my question still stands..

 

[piercethevale]

In my opinion, I think that a "notable geniture" only POINTS to a likelihood (of fame, etc), just as the indication of an "anaretic year" only POINTS to the likelihood of a critical year (ie a potentially dangerous year) for the subject.

Now, did the Greco/Romans have this "points to a likelihood" idea, or did they think one MUST have a notable geniture to actually have a notable life? Hard to say: hermetic thinking (going back to Alexandria) definitely has the "pointing to likelihood" outlook (that is where I GOT this attitude!)
Ptolemy (not a hermeticist but an Aristotelian) seems-from some of his statements at least-to possibly lean in this direction as well. Stoic philosophy of that ancient period would definitely say "MUST have a notable geniture to actually have a notable life", and certainly the increasingly determinist authors of the Islamic-transitional era and Middle Ages (Medieval European authors) would concur. The re-emergence of hermetic thinking in the early European Renaissance, had somewhat of a modifying influence upon the then-dominant deterministic astrological outlook, and so I think a more relativist concept (ie, a "pointing to likelihood" outlook) developed later on (which, of course, would definitely be the Modernist understanding regarding this question, ie, the "pointing to likelihood" outlook rather than the "MUST have notable geniture to have a notable life" outlook)

I would give the 'Lots' the qualitative of being points of determinate ordinance rather than potential of fecund quality. As that is what they do, by design of the formulae incorporated, give the ordinance of the point of most probable activation...a probability assured or as about as near as one might, depending upon the quality or nature of the 'Lot' itself and the individual of reference.
As I myself, personally also work with, analyze and interpret them through Sabian Symbology I find them to be most definitely potent and thus am inclined to believe that given a 'profile' to validly identify in comparison to with, I should be able to deduce from that as to which is whatever precisely confers that, what a, "Noble Geniture" might be. I dare say I have already done so and more than once, too. I do have some refs. that will attest to that.
I wouldn't be much of an Astrologer, a reader of natal charts, if I couldn't, I would dare say.
Are you all aware of the Part known as that of "Nobility and Honor' and how about the one of "Noble and Illustrious Acquaintance"?.
Then there's the 'Hermetic Lot of Eros", described as that which is indicative of the quality [or 'qualities''] that one does wish to nurture, cultivate, expand and or develop in ones self, and also that quality [ties] that we seek out in those we seek to have as closet friends/confidantes/estimable peerage. I would think that incorporating these into the structure of astrological determination of this 'Geniture' would give, the one seeking, much added detail to establish the particular profile that is sought here. As to "Noble and Illustrious Acquaintenance", need I remind everyone of the old adage: 'Tell me whom your friends are and I will tell you who you are."?
Also the focus of application as to specific precept can apply so easily to a chart of some historic notoriety and in great or complete retrospect I find it rather as easy a challenge to determine the existence in a person of such a precept as a 'noble geniture' as to that of "Catastrophe" in certainty...seeing as how any 'Catastrophe' of the greatest magnitude or noteriety of any definition of prerequisite is easily determined in most all notable historic personages of full historical accounting...or fully enough, which might be as well.
Surely, those gentlemen known by historic account as the Magi had the ability to determine and predict the highest degree of probability of 'noble geniture' as near as a probable a certainty that one can arrive at for anyone. They employed both means astrological and numerological, according to my 'over abundantly extolled', Mr. Cayce.
If they can do it...anyone can...given the same tools.

 

[dr. farr]

Sandstone:
Ah, but use of the Lots + exaltation for a predictive determination is only ONE (complete) technique: following Carter, 2 other complete techniques, or consideration of other chart elements relative to suggestive indications (or otherwise), would be necessary!

 

[Omnisphericus]

In my opinion, I think that a "notable geniture" only POINTS to a likelihood (of fame, etc), just as the indication of an "anaretic year" only POINTS to the likelihood of a critical year (ie a potentially dangerous year) for the subject.

Absolutely! Sometimes Lots are not so strong in the chart but the person has a great Sun (which is the prime indicator for Fame!) and this shows the 'notable geniture'.
For example, at the moment I'm looking the charts of the two most famous singers (of all times, singers that are Elvis Presley of this region) and they though have good placement of the Lots (not extra good, but ok) the Sun in the degree of MC and the Sun being Almutem Figuris is the main power here!

Robert Zoller:

"If the Almuten figuris is the Sun, the native will want to lead, express his creative power and be recognized. "

So, there are many indicators of fame, as there are many indicators for accidents or 'anareta years'. One need to take everything into account.
So, I think this partially answers the question of sandstone.

dr farr gets at a good chunk of my thinking, question and concerns around the ideas expressed here omni.. the other part that i would want to know is the reverse of this : if a notable person like whitney houston can have the astro signature(which is under examination for this thread) of a "notable geniture" missing as it appears she has, what does this say about the basic idea of arriving at whether a person has a 'notable geniture' or not? in other words if we find otherwell known famous people without the supposed required astro signature of a notable geniture what does it say about the concept?

But she didn't missed the 'notable genitures' indicators.
She has the Ruler of the Fortuna in 10th sign from the Fortuna alongside Jupiter, the greater benefic who is the triplicity ruler of the Moon (the prime Light in her chart).
This is the first rule for showing eminence.
Secondly, she has LOB, LOS and Exaltation in the same Place in 5th from Fortuna (again good house).
I'm sure that there are additional indicators of which I'm not aware at the moment.
Yes, her chart shows weaknesses, but they are on soul/spirit level, it seems out that she had weak will which led her to the weaknesses she had in her private life which eventually led to premature death.
But again, the native has the power of Choices. Someone more familiar with the temperaments in the chart would calculate now how and where she could get out of the weaknesses that the other part of her chart are showing.
I believe that there are alternatives for many things shown in our chart. The human being is capable of growing and changing, so maybe some more spiritual inclinations would over compensate the despair she felt in life and etc..

it simply means that this concept is to be understood as one of perhaps several testimonies which should be considered: good old Charles Carter once said that there should be agreement from at least 3 different methods/techniques, before a predictive conclusion should be made, and I fully agree with that point of view.

Yes Dr.Farr, this is the point I try to make.

that said - i believe this is the very same approach that some are taking with the important lots - of fortune, spirit, exaltation and basis.. that would be 4, as opposed to carters 3, lol.. well maybe exaltation isn't a lot, so 3 1/2 then.. my question still stands.

To me, they are One = Lots!

Ah, but use of the Lots + exaltation for a predictive determination is only ONE (complete) technique: following Carter, 2 other complete techniques, or consideration of other chart elements relative to suggestive indications (or otherwise), would be necessary!

Yes! I saw this replay after I answer previously.

 

[Omnisphericus]

Piercethevale, you've mentioned the Lot of Eros.
Robert Schmidt (I recommend you to check his name on Google because he is great scholar of Hellenistic Astrology and particularly the Lots) says that Lot of Basis is either Lot of Eros or Lot of Necessity.

Here's what Robert Schmidt is saying on Lot of Basis:

In any given chart, the Lot of Basis will be either the Lot of Eros or the Lot of Necessity, so Basis is actually not a separate lot at all. The principle of taking the shorter arc between Fortune and Spirit simply tells us whether Eros or Necessity is favored in a given chart—that is, which of these two is related to the ‘foundation of the native’s fortune’. Since Eros is Spirit’s Lot of Spirit and Necessity is Fortune’s Lot of Fortune, Basis will be one of these two.

The delineations of Eros and Necessity in Book IV of Valens make it fairly clear that in either case we are talking about two subclasses of voluntary action on the part of the native. Eros concerns actions that we want to undertake but do not need to undertake; Necessity, actions we need to undertake but would rather not have to do. Thus, these two lots complement one another. As far as our actions are concerned, Eros has to do with the carrot and Necessity with the stick.