(03-01-2020, 01:24 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (03-01-2020, 10:28 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Here is a blog post from 10 years ago. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
My interpretation is that the water represents Asia, maybe the great expanse of ocean such as Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean. The top right that corresponds to Europe should be self-explanatory. The top left is unclear as to what it represents (dessert??jungle??), but it corresponds to Africa. Sometimes different representative drawings are shown.
I can see that interpretation, but look at the text of Oresme in du ciel et du monde book 2 chapter 25, he states the habitable part of earth would be on the upper right, although you are right, he says it is the part where they reside, which would make it Europe as well.
(03-01-2020, 01:50 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.These are the three elements earth, water and fire.
This was already discussed at some length in this forum.
In the Oresme diagram, earth is represented by a landscape (possibly with paradise in a corner).
The top left is fire.
I am not sure of this. The fire i see is the red outside the cloudband of air, which is consistent with its place in the spheres. I believe it is neither fire nor air in the keft top quarter, but a reference to the uninhabitable parts of earth. Sacrobosco had said only one of the quarters of earth were habitable, the habitable part being in the north. It is a movement in thought from the earth sphere surrounded by the water sphere to a more complex understanding, involving whether the Antipodes could exist, how far the water was between Spain and India, whether it was nobler to be near the heavens, etc. Quire 13 to me is a travel of the ecumene by water, which pulls that all together into a realistic view.
(03-01-2020, 01:24 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (03-01-2020, 10:28 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Here is a blog post from 10 years ago. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
My interpretation is that the water represents Asia, maybe the great expanse of ocean such as Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean. The top right that corresponds to Europe should be self-explanatory. The top left is unclear as to what it represents (dessert??jungle??), but it corresponds to Africa. Sometimes different representative drawings are shown.
Yes, that blog post is interesting.
(03-01-2020, 07:12 PM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (03-01-2020, 01:24 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (03-01-2020, 10:28 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Here is a blog post from 10 years ago. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
My interpretation is that the water represents Asia, maybe the great expanse of ocean such as Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean. The top right that corresponds to Europe should be self-explanatory. The top left is unclear as to what it represents (dessert??jungle??), but it corresponds to Africa. Sometimes different representative drawings are shown.
I can see that interpretation, but look at the text of Oresme in du ciel et du monde book 2 chapter 25, he states the habitable part of earth would be on the upper right, although you are right, he says it is the part where they reside, which would make it Europe as well..
How does one then account for the example that I have provided where there are clearly 2 habitable areas? And for which I have other reasons to believe it to be a T/O map.
There are also hybrids.
On the blog I posted recently, I pointed out that the "ages of man" idea, in some cases, is borrowed format-wise from the Fortuna illustrations.
This also happens with cosmological drawings.
You have T-O maps. You have elements drawings. And there are some that include both, and some that are a combination of several concepts.
(03-01-2020, 07:37 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (03-01-2020, 07:12 PM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (03-01-2020, 01:24 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (03-01-2020, 10:28 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Here is a blog post from 10 years ago. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
My interpretation is that the water represents Asia, maybe the great expanse of ocean such as Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean. The top right that corresponds to Europe should be self-explanatory. The top left is unclear as to what it represents (dessert??jungle??), but it corresponds to Africa. Sometimes different representative drawings are shown.
I can see that interpretation, but look at the text of Oresme in du ciel et du monde book 2 chapter 25, he states the habitable part of earth would be on the upper right, although you are right, he says it is the part where they reside, which would make it Europe as well..
How does one then account for the example that I have provided where there are clearly 2 habitable areas? And for which I have other reasons to believe it to be a T/O map.
I think it is just the evolution of various opinions and understandings being updated and expressed over time. Could be an us and them thing, for instance the Antipodes were thought not to exist, or if they did, the word of Jesus wouldn't have reached them so they didn't count anyway, or some such idea. If you are in the habitable world but you have been to Africa and know there are towns there, then you might draw them in as you know them. Depends too whether you travelled by land or sea, if you went to Asia by sea you might mistake it for an oceanic society when in reality there is a lot more land than Europe.
I am not saying You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. 3 does not show TO map, it could be the two conflated, i would prefer that possibility myself, as it would bring in more concepts that way. Or, it could have nothing to do with the Oresme example at all. Maybe an explanation that more of Asia had been learned about than is evident on most available maps has been included. I am just saying that if you follow the Oresme hints then that is where the text leads, to the Aristotlean elements and the ideas of how earth and water reconcile with each other, along with other evolving concepts such as a revolving earth, time, space, etc. However the reason i lean towards it being a possibility that the element are shown instead is that water ties more things together in my interpretation.
Again it all means nothing without figuring out the vms text. I am just offering these ideas in case it sparks other ideas that may not occur if we keep deciding it must be this or it wouldnt be that. I wonder if similar types of hints are hidden in the discrepancies between the two sets of legends. Affrika vs Africa, that sort of thing. I get the feeling that things that are confusing or often misinterpreted are highlighted somehow.
IMHO there are several different things all flapping in the breeze at the same time.
There are maps. These show specific geographic features and label the locations on various towns / cities. These were generally of a T-O structure.
There are cosmic representations. Most of these were geocentric and poly-concentric for the planets and stars.
Then there are there are the less common representations of earth or simplified versions of the cosmos. Here is where there seem to be more of the inverted T-O images. The difference here is that cosmic representations generally contain stars of some description between the Earth and the cosmic boundary. These generally take the form of a pictorial representation of th Earth as in the Oresme example (BNF Fr. 565) or the de Metz example (Harley 334).
And they generally have a pictorial representation of water in the lower half.
See: You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
Then there is the VMs, which switches to a linguistic representation.
Looking at the historical images, I see no reason to suggest that different types of illustrations (regular T-O vs. inverted T-O) are attempting to represent the same thing. Therefore it is hard to see why the relevant vocabulary in the two VMs representations should be comparable.
The more important factor here (again IMHO) is not the authorial source, but the time and place of manuscript production - Oresme c. 1410; de Metz 1425-1449, both produced in Paris. Plus the de Metz manuscript has an illustration of a 'woman in a fish's mouth' much like the one in the VMs Quire 13.
[
attachment=3829]
Without on the previous discusion.
Does anyone have any idea what it means here?
The cross appears to be Ortodox.
(05-01-2020, 08:49 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The cross appears to be Ortodox.
Technically, it's missing a third (slanted) bar
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
It could be some type of
globus cruciger.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
Or maybe you have discovered the prototype for the holy hand-grenade of Antioch.
Thank you nablator,
actually I know the meaning of the " Reichsapfel "" orb ". I actually wanted to know what the abbreviation " G , R, M " means.
I don't know from where, it's been in my archive for ages