In my articles on “Looking for the Lord of the Geniture” and on Ernest Hemingway’s Lord of the Geniture I proposed Saturn as Lord. In this article I would like to look at his chart from the Jyotisha perspective. Remember that Jyotisha uses the constellations and not the signs of the zodiac called by the same name. This means that through precession of the equinox the placements, as compared to a tropical horoscope are roughly 23 degrees earlier.
The first thing we want to do is to examine the condition of the ‘personal’ sensitive points of the chart. These are the ascendant, Sun and Moon. Let us begin with the
ascendant. We have a Leo ascendant joined by Mercury and Mars. The first house shows ones entry into the world, ones appearance and the impact of the personality on the
environment. Mercury, lord 2 the natural significator of writing is also lord of the 2nd house, the house of literary gifts. Mercury is joined by impatient Mars, which influences the writing style, making it abrupt and terse. Mercury and Mars are both aspected by Saturn (Mars fairly closely) from one of Mar’s houses, the 4th. So the literary themes, which are basic life themes for the native, will be of conflict and heroism. No steamy romance novels here. The Saturn aspect is rich in complexity. On the one hand Saturn is a friend of Mercury, so he will help with the discipline of getting the daily word quota done. But Saturn is also an enemy of Mars and in Mar’s house. So Saturn and those represented by Saturn will not be perceived as pleasant guests and will probably take on a nagging quality. It should be noted that this doesn’t encourage marital bliss (Hemingway was married four times). The difficulties provided by partnership are reflected in the Navamsa chart which shows among other things the quality of married life. Sun in its own sign in the first aspected by Saturn in its own sign in the seventh. Sun and Saturn are mutual enemies. And the partner will surely perceive the native to be self-centred and egoistic.
What is the condition of the Sun and Moon? Not so good. The Sun lord of the 1st is in the 12th house and unaspected. This shows isolation. The Moon is with Rahu, the north node, in the 5th, also unpleasant. This is only mitigated by an aspect from Venus. The Moon in the 5th encourages imaginative skills and this certainly helps him as an author. But the Moon as lord of the 12th doesn’t necessarily bring a happy and stable emotional life. True there are moments of beauty and inspiration (Venus) but there are also sudden dark and tempestuous moments as well (Rahu).
Now back to our question about the Lord of the Geniture. In the above chart we once again have three main contenders; Mercury, Mars and Saturn. According to the Jyotish method of weighting the strength of a planet (shad balla) Mercury is immensely strong. It is true that Mars and Mercury are strong by their placement in the 1st house. But, and I think this weighs strongly, Saturn, the only other angular planet, is the planet which has
enormous influence on the first house. He actively aspects the first house and its planets but is not aspected in turn. So in the Jyotic chart I would suggest that Saturn is the Lord of the Geniture, just as I suggested he was in the western chart. Of course, as always, I
welcome arguments that might favour the Moon or Mars. 🙂
Altair Astrology 
“Remember that Jyotisha uses the constellations and not the signs of the zodiac called by the same name.”
This is an incorrect statement, Jyotish uses a sidereal zodiac.
Constellations are irregular in nature, signs are not. Signs are 30degrees divisions of the ecliptic.
Jyotish, as traditional western astrology, uses signs, not constellations, the beginning of the zodiac can be either tropical (gamma point) or sidereal (a fixed star). This doesn´t make the sideral system constellational.
Hello Yuzuru,
Thank you for your comment. It is a matter of terminology. I think it is consistent to say that Jyotish uses the constellations. I would like to refer readers to the excellent introduction to Jyotish, “Light on Life – An Introduction to the Astrology of India”. There the authors say:
We can say ‘constellational’ because the divisions are oriented to the constellations even though they (the constellations not the divisions) are irregular as to how much space they occupy on the ecliptic. There is nothing wrong in saying that they are sidereal signs but there is also nothing wrong in speaking of constellations. Would:
be more acceptable to you? As you can see this might be a bit too much for many readers and that the simpler formulation is more helpful. I try to keep the articles at Altair as short as possible.