30-01-2016, 07:34 PM
Rene,
Yes, I thought so (re April), but there it is. You'll forgive me when I do the same?
Yes precession and the errors of the Julian calendar are separate, but they combine in a way to amplify the situation as it would appear to a person during that time. Precession has moved the equinox half way into Pisces by the time of the VMs parchment dates. And calendar errors have pushed it forward by at least a week more. And this occurs at the same time as the prime time for the composition of the VMs (roughly the first century after parchment manufacture).
It would not be possible, then, to present an annual cycle of zodiac signs, that begins in the spring, and still have Pisces as the last house of the sequence, given the location of the vernal equinox. Nevertheless, for those who come to the VMs with the expectation that a presumed medieval manuscript should follow traditional medieval standards - those set forth by astrology and the Zodiac Man - which always has put Aries first, then this is clearly something different.
This is a matter of the sequence in which the signs are encountered in the VMs. The interpretation and potential use of the information each page might contain is a separate matter. I believe there is only one option to create an alternate sequence in the zodiac part of the ms. Since much of the VMs Zodiac is on a single sheet of parchment, the alternative structure is to take it out, flip it over and rebind it. But this is unsatisfactory for several reasons and IMO not viable.
So in the VMs Zodiac sequence, Pisces first is Problem Number One. And we've looked at that some and found factors for a potential explanation. Problem Number Two is Aries. JKP mentions that the signs have been repeated. However, given that the number of encircling 'nymphs' here is only 15, the question is whether Aries has been duplicated, and there are now two whole versions of Aries, or whether Aries has been split in two and there are now two halves of Aries.
Problem Number Three is Taurus also appearing twice. Problem Number Three is Problem Number Two repeated. That's interesting, it looks like the same sequential discrepancy twice in a row.
Consider the pairing paradigm. Take a look at how many examples of pairing can be found in the VMs Zodiac illustrations.
.
Yes, I thought so (re April), but there it is. You'll forgive me when I do the same?
Yes precession and the errors of the Julian calendar are separate, but they combine in a way to amplify the situation as it would appear to a person during that time. Precession has moved the equinox half way into Pisces by the time of the VMs parchment dates. And calendar errors have pushed it forward by at least a week more. And this occurs at the same time as the prime time for the composition of the VMs (roughly the first century after parchment manufacture).
It would not be possible, then, to present an annual cycle of zodiac signs, that begins in the spring, and still have Pisces as the last house of the sequence, given the location of the vernal equinox. Nevertheless, for those who come to the VMs with the expectation that a presumed medieval manuscript should follow traditional medieval standards - those set forth by astrology and the Zodiac Man - which always has put Aries first, then this is clearly something different.
This is a matter of the sequence in which the signs are encountered in the VMs. The interpretation and potential use of the information each page might contain is a separate matter. I believe there is only one option to create an alternate sequence in the zodiac part of the ms. Since much of the VMs Zodiac is on a single sheet of parchment, the alternative structure is to take it out, flip it over and rebind it. But this is unsatisfactory for several reasons and IMO not viable.
So in the VMs Zodiac sequence, Pisces first is Problem Number One. And we've looked at that some and found factors for a potential explanation. Problem Number Two is Aries. JKP mentions that the signs have been repeated. However, given that the number of encircling 'nymphs' here is only 15, the question is whether Aries has been duplicated, and there are now two whole versions of Aries, or whether Aries has been split in two and there are now two halves of Aries.
Problem Number Three is Taurus also appearing twice. Problem Number Three is Problem Number Two repeated. That's interesting, it looks like the same sequential discrepancy twice in a row.
Consider the pairing paradigm. Take a look at how many examples of pairing can be found in the VMs Zodiac illustrations.
.