28-01-2016, 09:28 PM
Anton et al.
Precession certainly seems to be a viable explanation, even though that means the Pisces-first sequence conflicts with the traditional Aries-first sequence used for astrology and perhaps medically as well. I was of the impression that the errors in the Julian calendar accentuated the discrepancies rather than diminished them.
Wikipedia indicates that the equinox moved from Aries to Pisces approximately 100 BCE and will exit about 2700 CE. So that puts the middle at 1400 CE. And as that midpoint was approaching, from the examples of MarcoP, the work of Roger Bacon, the Hebrew calendar, etc., it would have been apparent that the spring equinox wasn't in Aries any more.
This seems to create a duality. Aries first is the traditional start of the Zodiac sequence. But Pisces first is some sort of 'modernized' astronomical version based on 'scientific observation".
The VMs author, then, has not chosen to go with the traditional sequence. This does not support the use of astrological interpretations. And if this fact can be combined with Ellie Velinska's matching of the VMs illustration with the Oresme cosmos, then perhaps this can add some medieval, scientific connections in the VMs.
I found this example interesting.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It's a bit later than VMs parcment dates, but still before the Gregorian reform. And look, it's got heraldry. The VMs also has heraldry in the Zodiac section and makes a surprising use of it.
.
Precession certainly seems to be a viable explanation, even though that means the Pisces-first sequence conflicts with the traditional Aries-first sequence used for astrology and perhaps medically as well. I was of the impression that the errors in the Julian calendar accentuated the discrepancies rather than diminished them.
Wikipedia indicates that the equinox moved from Aries to Pisces approximately 100 BCE and will exit about 2700 CE. So that puts the middle at 1400 CE. And as that midpoint was approaching, from the examples of MarcoP, the work of Roger Bacon, the Hebrew calendar, etc., it would have been apparent that the spring equinox wasn't in Aries any more.
This seems to create a duality. Aries first is the traditional start of the Zodiac sequence. But Pisces first is some sort of 'modernized' astronomical version based on 'scientific observation".
The VMs author, then, has not chosen to go with the traditional sequence. This does not support the use of astrological interpretations. And if this fact can be combined with Ellie Velinska's matching of the VMs illustration with the Oresme cosmos, then perhaps this can add some medieval, scientific connections in the VMs.
I found this example interesting.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It's a bit later than VMs parcment dates, but still before the Gregorian reform. And look, it's got heraldry. The VMs also has heraldry in the Zodiac section and makes a surprising use of it.
.