Re: astrological iconography

[Zandbergen@xxxxxxxxxxx (Rene Zandbergen)]

"Rafal T. Prinke" wrote:
> 
> Rene Zandbergen wrote:
> 
> > What is even odder is of course the fact that they're
> > there at all. [etc]
> 
> Unless the basis of the Zodiacal sequence is not
> astronomical but calendaric. As Prof. Sniezynska-Stolot
> suggested, the iconography indicates the signs were
> redrawn from a calendar 

But then it would make sense that the month names were
written there right when the MS was created, which is not the
popular view but which I would not want to discard either.

My only guess is that the sign of Pisces and the month of
March are special to the writer of the MS:
- his birth date
- the date he believed the world/universe was created
- the date he believes he's going to die
- etc.

I'll prepare a note with my 'unproven theory' of the 
meaning of the zodiac iconography, in case you hear from
Prof. Sniezynska-Stolot again.

Cheers, Rene