I am not so sure that precession of the equinoxes has much to do with the reason why Pisces is first, unless the author actually misunderstood the relevance of this effect himself.
The point I was trying to make is that this effect only concerns the constellations that coincide (more or less) with the zodiac signs, but not the zodiac itself. At the vernal equinox, on 21 April, the sun enters the sign of Aries. It did in 0 CE and it does now.
The cycle of zodiac symbols in the MS (whatever its purpose - could be any type of prognostication) represents these zodiac signs.
The fact that Pisces comes first deviates from the very consistent tradition of starting with Aries. It may have been a personal preference (the sign of Pisces being somehow important to him/her). Other examples should be of interest, as would be any written account of why Pisces could play a special role more in general.
The association between zodiac signs and months in the MS is yet another topic of interest...
The point I was trying to make is that this effect only concerns the constellations that coincide (more or less) with the zodiac signs, but not the zodiac itself. At the vernal equinox, on 21 April, the sun enters the sign of Aries. It did in 0 CE and it does now.
The cycle of zodiac symbols in the MS (whatever its purpose - could be any type of prognostication) represents these zodiac signs.
The fact that Pisces comes first deviates from the very consistent tradition of starting with Aries. It may have been a personal preference (the sign of Pisces being somehow important to him/her). Other examples should be of interest, as would be any written account of why Pisces could play a special role more in general.
The association between zodiac signs and months in the MS is yet another topic of interest...