The Voynich Ninja

(08-12-2017, 09:30 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Right, so I'll add for Libra unique (so far): "method of connecting chains to crossbar" 
And perhaps a note saying that the perspective on the supports around the central spike is unusual?

Sagittarius: are his boots really laced, though? I can only see one line where the vertical part bends into the horizontal part.
I'll add with "rare" that the tail on his hat is exceptionally long and voluminous.

I would also add with "unique" that the trigger bar is attached on the wrong side of the nut, it should be between the user and the nut, not between the tip and the nut.
Also, would his facial hair style be a unique feature? I don't recall any Sagittarii with only a goatee, though it's not something I've always paid attention to.

And also, would a Leo with blue spots be considered rare or unique? For the sign, so excluding imagery from other sources.

Libra: Chains or cords (I think both were in use at the time). The VMS might be cords. It depends what it was used for. If for heavy items, chains, for light items, sometimes cords.

The narrow cups are also of interest. The shape of the cups also had to do with what was being measured. If it's something broad and fat (like a head of lettuce), a flat tray is better. If it's something small or that blows away easily, small deep cups are more practical. How accurate the Libra drawing is, I don't know, as I mentioned, the space around the spike is exaggerated.


Crossbow: I tried very hard to find a crossbow with the catch behind the trigger, but after looking at about 200+ real crossbows and old drawings, I haven't found one yet, so yes, the trigger should be behind the nut. As far as I know, a medieval crossbow was never built the other way around. If someone comes across one, they should post it.


Sagittarius: Hmmm, regarding laces, I may have confused him with another figure and I don't have time ATM to go through and figure out where I saw laces but if I do, I'll update.

The goatee is not unusual in manuscripts of guys wearing tunics in general (non-zodiacs) and it's not unusual for centaur- or satyr-Sagitarrius, but it is unusual in the human Sagittarius. It's difficult to tell if stained-glass images have goatees, because the leading is usually around the chin and is darker.

There's a naked Sagitarrius from Seckau, Sekava, Austria (c. 12th century and later) which MIGHT have a beard but the shading makes it hard to tell.
In Ludwig XII 8, there is a light beard or heavy goatee.

In other words, in Sagittarius with legs, there are only a couple with goatees and they are debatable. Rare.



Leo with spots is uncommon (some have a few spots along the edges to indicate shading, but not to indicate a spotted animal). When you find them, they are usually eastern zodiacs.

Leo with blue spots is rare. Excluding non-zodiac imagery, I only found six that were distinctly blue and they range from the 9th to the 14th centuries, from England and Germany. There are two bluish-gray (mostly gray) from Belgium, but no spots. There's also a bluish-gray one from France, but mostly gray and no spots.

I guess blue Leo went out of style. They don't have spots but Morgan MS M.729 has a stripy texture. BTW, the maneless lion is in Kitab al-Bulhan snd sometimes tigers rather than leopards are used. In Arabic manuscripts, the cat usually has a rider. There are several versions. The earlier Arabic astrology manuscripts tend to be textual rather than illustrated.



If you'd like to see Leo with a horse-neck and man-face, check out Royal MS 1.D.X. There's also one from Augsburg drawn like this.

So spots are rare and blue spots/paint dots might be unique to the VMS.

Thanks, JKP, I'll update the thread in a bit. Even though the forum is somewhat in hibernation stage, I think this process is very useful.

About the scales, when googling for the man-faced Leo you mentioned I saw these:



It's from Morgan MS M 440, 13thC Liege (then part of Flanders). It's got blue cups and a rod-like crossbar, and maybe an similarly opened up top? Only the VM one is square. The most elusive thing about the VM scales is the small "extensions" which seem to come out of the thick crossbar.

That scale is pretty wide compared to most.

I don't know what is intended with the VMS scale ends, but my guess is that there may be metal spikes inserted into the dowel ends (since going through an entire dowel is difficult). Not sure, but metal caps on the ends were not unusual, so spikes may have been used in some places.

I really hoped to find one. I've been keeping my eyes open for years. Different regions had different fabrication techniques. I still have my fingers crossed.

Alright, we've got a post for every sign now. 

For Scorpio, would the star connected to mouth be unique? I don't recall having seen anything like that elsewhere.

Also, and this is more tricky since it integrates a number of parameters, its legs are mammalian. Four of them, no reptilian angles, relatively long. What I mean is that it's "standing high" on four legs, it's not a creeper critter. I've been paying attention to it and this may be rare or even unique - what do you guys think?

The curled tail seems common and I also recall a number of examples with those round ears.

I only have a moment to look this up, I have to go, but I found about 5% Scorpius with curled tail (I have to check that number later when I have more time), but they are mostly dragons, not lizards. Dragons are frequently depicted with curled tails. What is different about the VMS is that it is a lizardy shape, not a more obvious dragon, and the direction of the tail. Not unique, but definitely uncommon.


There are many images of "fire lizards" in medieval manuscripts (not associated with the lizard-Scorpio) and the way they are drawn is all over the map, but since many are drawn from above, it's difficult to know how they would have drawn them from the side.

Quite a number of the lizard-Scorpios have six legs, which might be an allusion to the tarasque/tarask and which might explain longer legs since the tarask is a mythical animal (which was drawn in many different ways). I don't know how much overlap there is between the lizard-Scorpios and the tarask-Scorpios in terms of how illustrators perceived them.


Many of the drawings are so far from expert that sorting out WHAT they were trying to draw from how they drew them is a real challenge.


I'm beginning to wonder if the strange animals in the VMS green pond are difficult to identify as specific animals because they represent "beasts". I've noticed in quite a few manuscripts that when they talk about "beasts" in the text they often drawn nonspecific animals next to it, not quite mythical, not quite natural.

JKP: yes, I see what you mean, they often draw some oval shaped creature seen from the top. My point remains though, that these tend to have bent, crustacean- or spider-like legs, which give the impression that the creature's belly is low to the ground (as God intended). The VM critter has straight, mammalian legs. I'd be tempted to list this as a unique feature for now, unless people think there are counterexamples.

Also, yes, I think on one level the pond creatures are relatively random "beasts". But not on the other level - but that would take us too far

May I ask that when examples are given, their date be included?

Koen, I've come to start a thread about the 'browsing Aries' figure having recently found another example in medieval art. Perhaps other members will too, so we'll know better just how rare it might be.

The things which seem 'unique' often seem so because the search for comparisons is artificially limited.

(08-12-2017, 07:58 PM)Diane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.May I ask that when examples are given, their date be included?

Koen, I've come to start a thread about the 'browsing Aries' figure having recently found another example in medieval art. Perhaps other members will too, so we'll know better just how rare it might be.

The things which seem 'unique' often seem so because the search for comparisons is artificially limited.

Diane: I know, I wanted to limit them to Zodiac imagery for this particular exercise. Once you start looking outside, certain things are easier to find, like the "Leo" as a panther type.

But the question for this thread is simple and specific: which traits from the VM images are never or rarely seen in Zodiac imagery? Clear questions yield clear answers

Did you mention that the crossbowman is left handed?
See my recent musing in this thread on why this is important.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Left -handedness may be hard to check: do you use your dominant hand to hold the bow or to manipulate the trigger? But there are examples of both, so it's probably not an issue. 

Something else though. Is this the only "idle" Sagittarius? All others I've seen are aiming. The hallmark of the Sagittarius appears to be his intention to shoot, while this one is just blissfully smiling, bow half pointed down.