The Voynich Ninja

Looking at the detail on the three figures with the wavy lines on the page. The vertical straight lines seem to be "part of" the wavy line, at least all of them follow the same sequence of having the wavy line followed by straight vertical lines, the two examples that are not this creature have double versions of this, all wavy then straight vertical lines. After the vertical lines we have dots and squiggly lines on one, and just squiggly lines on the other.

I wonder if this wavy line + straight vertical line shows up elsewhere, rather than just the normal wavy line examples?

I remember one example off the top of my head. Italian, had some deity up in the sky. 

Ah, here we go: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. 
This was posted many years ago, but I still find it an intriguing detail.

(21-11-2025, 02:43 AM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@rikforto Post #170
Nice examples. If the cosmic boundary interpretation of the nebuly line is accepted, then the question is what type of animal would have been associated with a cosmic boundary? Possibilities would include the Agnus Dei or animals from the zodiac. The differentiation here is based on the third part of the critter diagram, the short vertical strokes under the nebuly lines. These match with the Agnus Dei interpretation but make no sense with zodiac animals.

I just pulled them out of a link; all credit to R. Sale for knowing this tradition and where to find it.

The only animals I saw in the example set were some horses that were part of a battle, and the rest of the page made it clear to me that it was the subject of a prayer. The way the nymphs and beast on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. appear on clouds (and this is very subjective) is more like the way saints and Jesus appear when manifesting on Earth in contemporary examples, which seems to be the more common interpretation. From what I've seen, my intuition is that whatever is going on in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is some kind of heavenly apparition or other divine manifestation or imagining, though I don't know my intuition on this particular topic is worth very much! That would give some credence to the Agnus Dei interpretation, though it's hardly definitive.

The question I think we can ask without assuming too much about the status is why would a beast of any stripe appear to have a similar status to two of the nymphs? (I half recall a variation of this was asked earlier, but a quick skim did not turn it up.) It's quite possible to argue that they simply have different statuses, but that would be very strange in my view!

(21-11-2025, 02:07 PM)rikforto Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The question I think we can ask without assuming too much about the status is why would a beast of any stripe appear to have a similar status to two of the nymphs? (I half recall a variation of this was asked earlier, but a quick skim did not turn it up.) It's quite possible to argue that they simply have different statuses, but that would be very strange in my view!

The line doesn't really mean status but "not from here" as far as I gather
This is the way this artist does this sort of line, its not the same style but means the same thing I think 
So we have an angel and a beast done in the same way on the same page

[attachment=12551]

Oh, slightly different connotation of "status" here! Someone suggested that the beast might somehow represent the universe with nebulae representing the boundary of the universe. I think for that to be the case, we'd want to interpret the nymphs the same way, the same "status" as a cosmological drawing. But if they are apparitions from heaven (or whatever), they would have the same "not from here status", but have different "statuses", meaning different "station", in heaven (or whatever). In fact, I'd expect the beast to have a lower station lower for being literally lower on the page, though that is probably pushing past what we can discern here without more context.

Maybe the armadillo on a pillow, AKA armapillow, might be a lamb on a book, a laminated book?.. tough crowd.
Koens example was a goddess of the clouds raining on a field. This feels pretty close?
We have a horned ram-like lamb in a cosmic boundary raining down water. 

The images get mixed and matched a lot, but I think this is “Lamb of God” (Agnus Dei) judging by the halo.
However the book with 7 seals that they are on should make this “Lamb of the Apocalypse” (Lamb of Revelation).
.. but it seems this distinction has never really been paid much attention to.
Someone who can read the text can probably confirm which they meant to do.

Apocalypse (Latin MS 19)
Origin Place: France
Date of Creation: Third quarter of the 14th century
Link to MS - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Link to page - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

[attachment=12553]


As they are mixed up so much I have included images from what I'll just call "the 7 seals lamb".
Requires some more research to find time correct examples - I just grabbed the low hanging fruit.

[attachment=12554]

First of all, terminology is critical. If one cannot name the artistic element correctly, one cannot interpret it properly - according to medieval standards. If it *actually* were a "wavy" line, then the general medieval interpretive reaction would be 'waves and water'. That would totally alter the overall impression to some sort of aquatic scene. <An armadillo bellyflops on a sponge - and bounces,> Whereas, with a 'nebuly' line the etymological derivation denotes clouds and its use in cloud bands by various artists promoted a "celestial" connotation.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

There were several ways in which cosmic boundaries were represented. Besides cloud bands, there are solar patterns, golden rays, or blue pools. Almost every source shows that the artist seems to have had their own way to visually represent that 'rendering of the fabric of the cosmos". Sometimes little more than a squiggly line, some artists omit altogether.

Nebuly (Wolken-), cloudy, celestial, cosmic is a valid set of medieval interpretations in general. And specifically, in the VMs cosmos, it applies to the nebuly cosmic boundary. Does the same interpretation apply to the VMs critter?

If it does apply, for the sake of further exploration, then other things follow from there. Some "critter" associated with a celestial boundary implies certain restrictions and so on.

It is clear from the VMs illustration that this is a three-part interpretation. It is not a one-part identification of the critter per se, an interpretation that is often neglectful of the other two parts. One may promote a preferred pareidolia, but that doesn't influence what the artist intended - an interpretation based on *all three parts*.

The same three artistic elements fit together in the same sequence in comparison with BNF Fr. 13096 f. 18.

Like other VMs illustrations, the VMs critter itself is intentionally ambiguous. Like the VMs cosmos, and the VMs 'mermaid', the critter is a combination of influences. The first is the Agnus Dei, the second is the Golden Fleece. The Golden Fleece is an interpretation from an unknown source in the distant investigative past. That's why the ram, make that lamb, has an arched back, because it's a fleece - partly.

Fleece:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Not only is the Order of the Golden Fleece a product of the Burgundian court from 1430, BNF Fr. 13096 was part of the Burgundian library.

Do you think the association of the golden fleece with a rain event is relevant? The images you link do have a lot of clouds with lines under them (although the fleece is on the wrong side...)

As I see it, the three-part structure is taken from the Agnus Dei illustration. The Golden Fleece is a combination / overlay that only applies to critter. It's a method similar to the mermaid interpretation.

Harley 334 and the Lauber illustrations show a generic mermaid and other fish, creatures, monsters. The VMs artist borrowed this format, then subtly introduces the "mermaid-like" Melusine of Luxembourg in place of the generic mermaid.

The VMs critter illustration is similar, introducing suggestions of a "fleece-like" representation combined with the Agnus Dei lamb in the Agnus Dei format.

The Gideon illustrations are the wrong sequence. Close, but no cigar. They show different variations of "fleece" representation.

I am really not fully convinced that it's a ram. I do like the similarity with the Tuebingen Hausbuch illustration, but also those in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., which of course is not a ram.

The second most important aspect of this is that there are plenty of reasonable alternatives, so the argument that it is an armadillo, and what one should derive from that, is not valid.

The most important aspect for me is this:
there is a fundamental difference between what an illustration looks like, and what it represents.
The association between what it looks like and what it represents is often made only too easily.

Of course, when the name of the object (or person) is written near it, we know what it represents, but we are not in that position with the Voynich MS.