VMs: Re: Meaning of Pisces?

[Rene Zandbergen <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all,

--- JJJRLandau@xxxxxxx wrote:

> r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx writes:
> 
> > [...] Still, without any exception
> >  known to me, all lists of zodiac constellations
> >  start with Aries. The writer of the Voynich MS
> >  _must_ have known this, so he must have
> >  deliberately started with Pisces. 
> >  Why?
> 
> Starting the Zodiac with Aries is a convention from
> Classical times, when the 
> vernal equinox occurred when the Sun was in Aries
> (that is, the intersection 
> of the Ecliptic and the Celestial Equator happened
> to fall in the 
> constellation Aries).  However, due to Precession of
> the Equinoxes (which 
> causes the Zodiac to rotate once every 26,000
> years), said intersection now 
> occurs in Pisces and has done so for centuries.
> The fact that the writer of the VMs (or at least the
> composer of the 
> astronomical charts) started with Pisces shows that
> he was working at a time 
> when the vernal equinox fell in Pisces, which is to
> say he was writing much 
> closer to our own day than to the days of Classical
> Greece and Rome.  

Yes, but still, all zodiac illustrations after this
time start with Aries. And now, we have moved (or
are about to move) into the 'Age of Aquarius'.
Also, the constellation boundaries were quite 
arbitrary in the old days, so it is hard to
say when the 'age of pisces' started.

> Whatever else we can say about the VMs, we know that
> the star charts were NOT 
> copied from some 2,000 year old document.

If we assume that the start of Pisces is not a 
personal thing....

Cheers, Rene

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! - We Remember
9-11: A tribute to the more than 3,000 lives lost
http://dir.remember.yahoo.com/tribute