(01-09-2026, 11:40 AM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Trying to understand every detail of the Rosettes foldout can lead to a dead end, because some elements may simply reflect the author's whimsical choice—such as the section of crenellated wall connecting two of the lower spheres.
So you see that as simply decorative additions? Do you think they chose that decoration because they were familiar with it? Personally, or through manuscript drawings? I don't know, I think the more details, the more we should be able to see in it to help us understand which details are important and which are not. We know that many drew crennelations of that style in locations where they did not generally occur, however it tells us something about the person who decided to draw it that way.
Quote:What matters is the forest, not the trees.
I sometimes think this too, and sometimes I even think some of the trees are there just to keep you from seeing the forest at all.
Quote:And what the overall image conveys is the author's desire to show his conception of the universe and how astral influence is transmitted.
Ok.
Quote:The circles we see are the celestial spheres, as indicated by the fact that two of them are tent roofs and another features a baldachin, serving to represent celestial domes metaphorically as well.
Hmm. I see three tent roofs, the third is smaller and yellow and has a lot more loopy rope stuff going on. I assume the baldachin is in the rosette with the sun below.
Quote:And the central sphere can be nothing other than the outermost sphere, where the fixed stars are located. And all those tubes we see represent the way astral influence is channeled—originating here and radiating throughout the universe all the way to Earth.
But the tubes don't actually go anywhere but inward. Nothing is showing anything getting to Earth from there. In fact the angles of the tubes seem like they might miss the Earth entirely, even if something was travelling through toward the direction of Earth.
'Can be nothing but'...requires an explanation. Can you give some reasons why? Why can it not just be a cloundband of fixed stars above some towers or containers, on a succession of plateaus, also surrounded by a cloudband, with maybe the ground below all that with pipes in it, surrounded by whatever the triangles are? Anyway I was just trying to describe it without any theory in mind. But what makes you think they are spheres, other than the idea of celestial spheres, if it is not all the spheres? I thought that idea made sense until you said that the planets aren't there. Maybe the tents hide some of the planets, because, as you say, they don't matter, they're just travelling about, camping out under the stars. Maybe that is why the tents?
There are six other rosettes with asterisks. If those are stars, they have escaped. Or maybe it is their influence. There is another with a cloudband, albeit of a differring design. There are another two rosettes with tubes, albeit with differences. There are four more rosettes with the stacked slabs, plus some on pathways, some including the dots or tick marks. The fringe is on all the pathways, and in two more of the rosettes. The dots or tick marks on the little triangles on the outer edge are on the fringe in the crescent Rosette. So the only unique items are the triangle fringe, the containers, the patterned line on the top half, and the 3d nature of the asterisk cloudband. None of this says sphere to me.
When you say it is the sphere of fixed stars, I look at the cloudband of asterisks and say, sure, why not, a solid 3d field of stars, above everything else, in their own cloudband realm. But then what are the other asterisks? Just decoration, like the crennelations? Totally possible. Just a doodle. But then the central cloudbands and asterisks lose meaning too, why would it not be just a doodle too?
Quote:If I am asked which planet corresponds to each sphere, I say I do not know, because the author does not seem to have been much concerned with that. It does seem certain, however, that the upper-left sphere corresponds to the Moon, as we can see crescent shapes on it.
I agree with you there, I don't see them there either, but I will ask again what the rest of the rosettes are doing there then, when it supposed to be the celestial spheres?
I was thinking if some of the planets are under the tents, they may be saying that something magnifies their light, compared with fixed stars. We are seeing them from above now, we normally see them from below, or from the side, maybe because it has something that makes it brighter, like how a tent with a candle inside glows inside and out (depending of what the tent is made of) whereas a candle in the middle of nowhere is just a small flickering flame in the dark.
Also, here is a list I found of what medieval people thought each represented in terms of influence (ala Ai, so correct me on them if necessary, i am no expert on these ideas)
Saturn: cold, dry, melancholy
Jupiter: temperate, beneficent
Mars: hot, dry, aggressive
These occupied the farthest spheres, they needed the most reason for amplification of light so I will suggest these are the tent spheres. Maybe the yellowish one is Mars, hot and dry so not a full tent so you still catch the breezes, and the colour seems appropos to some degree, maybe it used to be even more orange.
Venus: moist, fertile, attractive
Hey look, the fourth in that group seems to be about water.
Mercury: variable, intellectual
That sounds like the rosette with the Volvelle.
Moon: changeable, governs growth and moisture
You have already identified the Moon and Earth, I accept those. The fringes seem like vegetation to me, and the crescent moon rosette has the most advanced kind, with the dots, and a double row to boot. Note that the vegetation is in between the two conglomerates of slabs, I think those are slabs of rock, as in mountains or hills, bringing the moisture down for the plants, and changeable, from hill to valley to hill.
One more Rosette left, but it doesnt seem to be the sun at first sight, but maybe it works with it somehow, there are already two recognizeable suns, one right nearby, so it is not forgotten. Hmmm. The baldachin could mean either king of planets, or it could function as a metaphor for shade, as could the whole structure.
Quote:Throughout the codex, we see the sun, the moon, and stars—many stars. That is why I believe that, in the authors' conception, the planets do not play a significant role. Naturally, at that time, planetary conjunctions—such as that of Saturn and Jupiter—were highly significant for astrological predictions. However, as I mentioned, the astrology found in the Voynich manuscript is of a different nature; it appears to focus on the influence of the fixed stars and, perhaps, the Moon.
There could be planets in some of that star stuff? Plus there are missing pages and quires that might have contained some key concepts or context. There are no stars in the rosettes though, if you speak of the items in quires 8 thru 12, and 20, the closest thing is the asterisks. If you qualify them as stars too, then that is fine, they do also occur on the first page of quire 9, along with the stars.