The Voynich Ninja

(20-06-2021, 02:01 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I just wanted to say that your Voynich artwork is amazing.

Thanks Mark, let's keep my artwork to its own specific thread though, or this one may get sidetracked 

(20-06-2021, 01:14 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The one rosette which really annoys me is the top left rosette as unlike so much of the page it lacks much specific detail, at least within the circle. Really the only specific detail is the ring of crescent moons, as I describe them, in the centre. That lack of detail leaves it wide open to a lot of different interpretations, which I find frustrating. I think also, to me, it poses the question as to why the author chose to include so little detail; was there little detail to include or was it a conscious decision not to include much detail.

In response to this comment about the top left rosette, I would not describe it as lacking in specific detail just because it has more "empty space" than some of the others. In the ideas we have put forth of a structure that references Christ's side wound and the birth of Ecclesia, it is precisely the space and shape of this "opening" in the center that is an important detail in itself. Even though the outer border of this rosette is circular, like the others, the shape in the middle does not form a ring, but rather more of an "almond-shape." Though we did not set out to explain all details (and certainly don't suggest that any details we have not mentioned are meaningless), this is one that we found important. This is bordered on the inside by what you describe as crescent moons, and what Koen described as a "tongue" shape that also resembles teeth or claws. If this is one of the (less common) ways the VM represents flames or light, as he proposed, this location would be an appropriate place to find them: "Tongues of fire," representing the birth of the Church, are combined with other patterns that can be read with a consistent meaning.

(20-06-2021, 05:17 PM)CaryR Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(20-06-2021, 01:14 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The one rosette which really annoys me is the top left rosette as unlike so much of the page it lacks much specific detail, at least within the circle.

In response to this comment about the top left rosette, I would not describe it as lacking in specific detail just because it has more "empty space" than some of the others. 

Though we did not set out to explain all details (and certainly don't suggest that any details we have not mentioned are meaningless), this is one that we found important.

I suppose I would say that one could describe the contents of this rosette accurately in fewer words than some of the other rosettes, especially the corner rosettes. That is what I mean when I say it is lacking in detail.

(20-06-2021, 05:07 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The specific / generic dichotomy is problematic because there are examples of both. Generic buildings, cities, etc. are fairly common. Few European artists of the Middle Ages would have had an accurate picture of Constantinople or Jerusalem, let alone Troy. Specifics need to be proven and that is a great difficulty. The devil is in the details and not all examples are equally devious. Places are difficult, either known or nearly impossible to identify.

Constantinople and Jerusalem are real places. However the suggestion in some theories such as the one described in this article is that the buildings do not correspond to any real places. Do you know of any examples of documents of the period which contain many different distinct buildings with specific details such as we see on the rosettes page that have no real meaning or connection to real places?

I commented on Koen's blog post in more detail, but my response is more or less the same as Lisa Fagin Davis: I'm impressed so far, and think this line of inquiry is worth pursuing further.  I'm excited to see where this takes you guys.

R. Sale, I see the connection you draw between the rainbows of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the La Sainte Hostie de Dijon (and its iconographic ilk), and between Agnus Dei and the "armadillo", in a whole new light now.  These puzzle pieces fit almost too well into Koen and Cary's theory.

Mark, to be perfectly clear, I think it is possible that the buildings represent something real, but I also think they may be generic. Medieval art is filled to the brim with generic buildings. Here's one of the images I included in the post. The clerics are watching the birth of Ecclesia from "a church".



This image shows that the presence of churches is complementary to our analysis. I still don't think the buildings *must* be churches though, I saw them mostly as non-church towers. But if you want to discuss the nature of these buildings further, it would probably be better in a dedicated thread.

I have difficulty with the term "Ecclesia". In theology, isn't ecclesia synonymous with church ?

Ecclesia, just like Church, is a wonderfully polysemous word. It can be the building (sp. iglesia, fr. église) but also all the faithful as a group. Manuscripts show Ecclesia being born from Christ's wound because from that moment on, it was theoretically possible to become a Christian: the Old Covenant had been replaced. In practice, Ecclesia started at Pentecost, because on this day the apostles converted the first believers. Those people formed "Ecclesia" at that point, even though no church had been built yet.

In medieval images, I often get the impression that they use the female figure Ecclesia to mean "Christianity". She opposes Synagoga, who stands for Judaism and the Old Covenant.

Our interpretation of the Rosettes foldout is that it overlays the abstract Greek-cross plan of an "ecclesia" (building) over the world, while at the same time portraying Ecclesia ("Christianity") replacing Synagoga.

(20-06-2021, 08:34 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Ecclesia, just like Church, is a wonderfully polysemous word. It can be the building (sp. iglesia, fr. église) but also all the faithful as a group.

This reminds me of a passage from Hildegard von Bingen's Scivias:

"Of living souls the heavenly edifice is built of living stones. Like a vast city it embraces the great multitude of nations, and like a wide net an immense multitude of fish." (Sc II,3)

"Scivias" Codex: Panel 12
[attachment=5602]

(20-06-2021, 07:23 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Mark, to be perfectly clear, I think it is possible that the buildings represent something real, but I also think they may be generic.

But if you want to discuss the nature of these buildings further, it would probably be better in a dedicated thread.

I will try to see if I can present a thread on the Voynich buildings.

The buildings are one kind of specific detail, but even if we removed all the buildings from the page then there are very many other specific details, which I think are easily ignored.

Maybe I should create a thread pointing out examples of some of the different specific details on the page, listing them all would be too big a task to undertake I think.

My concern is that so many of the details seem to be ignored or maybe not even observed.

@Mark
Don't know if fits, but I do  remember an illustration with a number of different 'citadels?' in pastel colors as a border.

Unfortunately, it didn't make it into the file on generic buildings. I think it was related to the Crusades as there were certain Islamic elements to some of the examples. It may have been in the KBR library. Lots of architecture in some of those texts.

Would invented Classical buildings qualify?

Do you  know Hypnerotomachia Poliphili? A lot of invented architecture described there - with drawings.


@R H

We need to see these things in the way they were perceived in Q2 of the 1400s. We need to know the history and traditions relevant to those times. Religion would certainly be foremost. Heraldry had a part in religion and religion had a part in heraldry. Think of all the different types of crosses used in heraldry.

The VMs is contrived in a way that does not explain itself plainly. It 'borrows' a variety of iconic elements, modifies the appearance in various ways that produce visually ambiguous but *recoverable* structural illustrations, as exemplified by the VMs Cosmos. The use of images from different sources intentionally increases the difficulty of a full interpretation in several illustrations.

The VMs appears in the manner of some strange, even exotic, herbal text book. It appears to be instructional and informative. However, it is not. It is not an example of information provided. Instead, it is the quiz that follows afterward. Do the clues in the VMs illustrations (such as the 43 undulations - not without some ambiguity) provide details that the reader can reconnect to viable historical sources? Clearly the dualistic interpretation of heraldic orientation on White Aries is an intentional use of misdirection. This sort of trickery might be styled as medieval 'sophistication', a test of interpretation based on altered iconographic elements and word etymology.

The problem of ambiguous misdirection is the recovery of the correct direction. Can heraldic canting be used to 'uncant' something that has been canted? It should work - that is the purpose, but how much ambiguity can be added? How much trickery? How does interpretation function if information and vocabulary have been lost, if the old iconic elements have now lost their meaning?


And there's the problem with individual investigations. One VMs theory cannot stand on its own because of the ambiguity. Yet over the years a certain set of possibilities from various sources that share a more restricted provenance within the C-14 dates and have shown geographic ties with Paris and Dijon, a potential difficulty minimized by the Anglo-Burgundian occupation of Paris from 1420 to 1435, have now accumulated and are significant for further investigation to discover where it all may lead. 

Is there farther to go? Absolutely.