Ridiculous assertions are made in this paper like -
''For example, a native who has a solar Lot of Spirit and focuses their intellectual faculties in a way that “emits” or generates works through the independent parthenogenesis of new ideas, versus a native who has a lunar Lot of Spirit and tends actualize their intellectual faculties by “receiving” or pulling together the work of others in order to reflect and compare them, thus also creating something new in the process.''. Robert Schmidt on skyscript pointed out that sun sign astrology separates at least 12 groups of people. Dividing people into two groups and making every nocturnal birth feminine is base. Therefore I recommend the following:
http://www.astrologiahumana.com/PartofFortune.pdf *
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9843&sid=6ce61deb9afb431779efb9cfbf935c3c
It appears to me, a good possibility that the predomination for the Lot was intended to be the same as for the length of life walking/circumambulation. Therefore one should reverse the day formula during day if the Sun is declining while the Moon is operative and one should not reverse the day formula for night, whenever the Moon is inoperative while the Sun is operative. In the length of life predomination, the same approach was taken - both sect and angularity matter.
I personally do not use the philosophical (I call them such) lots and Daimon.
Thus:
In all nativities, the Lightbringer is Predominator if he is operative.
If he is not, the other Light is Predominator if he is operative.
If both Lights are inoperative, the Hour-Marker is Predominator.
One obvious error of the Hellenics was that ''Fortune'' was assigned to the Moon. Obviously this would be true only in their dualistic gnostical scheme, but not according to the statement and formula of Nechepso who like a true Egyptian says ''whole circle has rightly been entrusted to the Sun''.
* The paper does not include the following statement:
''Many times Spirit (Daimon) becomes Fortune: for when the Light of the Sect is found in bounds of [a star] out of Sect; or, according to the masculine and feminine - that is, when the Sun is in a feminine sign by day, or when the Moon in a masculine sign by night; or when the Light of the Sect is not Eastern in the Hemisphere of the Sect; or when both Lights happen to be in the hemisphere under the Earth, and the other stars are found in an uncongenial condition because of the Light in overseeing position, that is, in the anteceding signs, then Fortune is taken in the direction of the following signs.'' - Serapio of Alexandria, translation by Eduardo J. Gramaglia
The question is what becomes of Daimon?
The Lot is the phase of the Moon, it is dependant on it, but also on the day or night cycle, that is decided by the Sun, not the Moon. Btw Nechepso does not say to measure Moon to Sun, he says to reverse measure the distance, because it is the same thing (I think it was more symbolic to reverse measure). ''Whether you measure from the Sun to the Moon and that distance from the Ascendant, or from the Moon to the Sun and do likewise, you will find the Lot located at the same point.'' This was pointed by Schmidt to contradict Chris Brennan's assertion that the measurement by geometry was symbolical and the medieval arithmetical is somehow wrong.
I think both are wrong (this only concerns abstract theory, not calculation) and that we should use geometrical measurement, but to reverse measure from the Hour-Marker instead of measuring from the second star. At least this is how Nechepso intended it in my view. Because the Sun is first, always.
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5523&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 - this is the skyscript thread for anyone interested.