In that case I would argue that Aries is a better contender. See the Aries image in the Tubinger Hausbuch as pointed out by Darren Worley:
Are you sure this is Aries and not rather Leo (with the Sun)?
Das ist der Anfang des Textes zum Sonnenkopf-Tier von Koen.
Es sagt auch etwas über die Zeit aus.
Wann ein Knabe wird geboren in dem Monat und der Zeit, so die Sonne in den Widder geht.
Das ist von Sankt Gregorien Tag bis auf Sankt Loe ( Leo ) Tag. des heiligen "Babests?" das Kind wird bescheiden und ein .....bla bla bla.....
This is the beginning of the text on Koen's sunhead animal.
It also says something about time.
When a boy is born in the month and time when the sun goes into the ram.
That is from Saint Gregory's day to Saint Loe ( Leo ) day. of the holy "baby?" the child will be humble and a .....bla bla bla.....
Helmut, it's Aries. As Marco and Darren discuss You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view., the image is found in the chapter on Aries and the Sun indicates the spring equinox.
There is also visual proof:
[
attachment=4853]
Actually the page says something about "Sonne in den Wieder" at one's birth:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
[
attachment=4854]
Edit: sorry mr Tentakulus I entirely missed your post!
The picture story corresponds with the text.
Babests = old word for pastor, padre, prister, parson.
Here "holy father".
Darren Worley makes a comparison You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. between the VMS folio You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. (upper left ) and an illustration in the Tübingen Hausbuch ( You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. ).
[
attachment=4855]
Edit: Sorry, I hadn't read Koen's post yet.
Actually the page says something about "Sonne in den Wieder" at one's birth:
"so die sonne in den weder get", yes that is spring equinox and pope Gregory the Great is 12 March amd Leo the Great is 10 April, at least acording to the calendar in the Hausbuch
Thank you
The visual similarities are interesting. And structurally, two of the three major elements are held in common. Both have a 'ram' or some cousin of a sheep. Both have have a nebuly line, nicely done in the Tubingen illustration. But the third element in the Tubingen is the Sun. There is no sun in VMs critter illustration, the third part of the VMs is entirely different.
The Tubingen illustration might easily be interpreted as Aries has arrived and the sun is in the sky. I don' get that interpretation from the VMs critter. It's something more subtle, more mysterious, much more poorly presented - to heighten the ambiguity.
Reconsidering BNF 13096, exactly what is taking place in the illustration? It is an apocalypse after all, the end of the earth, the punishment of the wicked, and all that. But if that is true, then it would be the Agnus Dei, the Lamb of God, that is sending the punishment in the illustration. However, since the Agnus Dei is in a way an avatar for Christ, this might be seen as problematic. Somehow "Lamb, the Punisher" doesn't seem like the correct interpretation. So, perhaps it is something else, like the resurrection of the dead. The artist attempts to represent this power, but how could anyone do that?
So this is the problem with interpretations based on visual similarity; unless there is a very high degree of identity, there is always going to be ambiguity. The VMs was built to exploit this ambiguity. The VMs inverted T-O Earth presents a linguistic representation, not a pictorial image. Appearance cannot be trusted. Not that it is invalid. It's been made ambiguous.
What can be trusted, what can be objectively determined is position and location and structure. The key either turns the lock or it does not. There's no ambiguity about it. (And no cheating.) Structure is either the same or it is different.* So the problem with the Tubingen illustration, besides having only two of the three essential elements, is that it has the alternate structure: both elements are on the same side of the nebuly line, rather than being on opposite sides, like the VMs. Even if there had been an actual connection, that doesn't help explain the elemental and structural differences in the VMs image.
*The VMs presents some representations using combined sources, so it is not possible to say the resulting hybrid is either the same or different. Combinations can be separated.
What results is a match of VMs structure with historical tradition, backed up by visual ambiguity, which either promotes or contradicts those interpretations - depending...