27-02-2024, 02:14 AM
Pages: 1 2
27-02-2024, 02:14 AM
27-02-2024, 07:58 PM
What about the nymph with a ring in the upper left of f79v?
28-02-2024, 03:14 AM
(27-02-2024, 07:58 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What about the nymph with a ring in the upper left of f79v?
That would be a case in point. By my argument the lower page shows nymphs as shape-shifters and alludes to various stories on that theme in Dolomite legends and myths.
The nymph laying down with rainwater splashing in her face, holding the oversized ring - I can't see how it can be construed as marriage symbolism in any way. Rather, these seem like magic rings, and attributes of these nymphs. In context, there is an argument to be made they are the protective rings that feature in the story of the Rosengarten and the origins of the alpenglow.
Or do you see something else in the nymph with a ring in the upper left of f79v?
28-02-2024, 11:03 PM
If you read certain details in the biography of Colette of Corbie (d. 1477), you may find it referenced that she had several interesting 'dreams'. After a 'dream' (1406) of Saint Anne, she reversed her position on the "concept" of Trinubium - meaning married three times. The importance of this concept only lasted for a limited time. And so it became another of those things that time has almost forgotten.
More to the point. In another 'dream', she received a ring from Saint John, and when she awoke, she had a real ring. In addition to the mystical ring, it is also part of her story, that she received a special cross.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The ring is a ring, not a mirror. A ring could be any ring. A cross could be any cross. But a ring and a cross taken together present a much more limited set of potential interpretations. This is how the VMs reveals its information; it is through the pairing and the combination of interpretations of the artist's known environment. A blue striped tub and a red galero on a single nymph is not accidental - and neither is this.
Colette was supported by the rulers of Burgundy - Margaret of Bavaria (d. 1424), wife of Jean (John) the Fearless (d. 1419). Colette then was assisted by Marie, Duchess of Auvergne (d. 1434), who was one of two surviving daughters of Jean, Duke of Berry (d. 1416). It was the thrice-married Marie who inherited BNF Fr. 565, which has been tied to the VMS cosmos. Here, again, it is the combination of the historical data that limits the range of possibilities to a person possessing both pieces of information.
Colette continued to be supported as well by Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy and his third wife Isabell of Portugal [m. 1430]
But wait, there's more. Right below the "sleeping" nymph is the VMs "Critter" - the 'Infamous Armadillo' or whatever. And again, it is not the identity of the critter itself, it is the combination of historical interpretations when the critter is interpreted in combination with the NEBULY line. The nebuly line is a cloud band and a cloud band is a cosmic boundary. The only critter that belongs with a cosmic boundary is the religious Agnus Dei.
There were various medieval representations of the Agnus Dei. Sometimes inside a cosmic boundary, less often shown with blood. The blood always remains inside the cosmic boundary, with one exception [BNF Fr. 13096 f. 18] where it is outside. The Apocalypse of S Jean was an old text in the Burgundian library. The same structure, with the droplets outside the cosmic boundary, is replicated in the VMs.
It has also been long said that the critter might be interpreted as a representation of the Golden Fleece. The resemblance is ambiguous, but the potential reference is clearly to Burgundy and the Valois era. And also, this sort of ambiguous substitution is the same tricky technique that is seen in the VMs mermaid, where the substitution of mythical Melusine of Luxembourg is also connected to the Valois descendants.
The illustrations can be ambiguous. The history is obscure. Yet the connections are valid and they are compatible. There is a clear indication of relevance with the C-14 dates. There is a particular version of much historical information present (scattered and disguised) in the VMs illustrations.
More to the point. In another 'dream', she received a ring from Saint John, and when she awoke, she had a real ring. In addition to the mystical ring, it is also part of her story, that she received a special cross.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The ring is a ring, not a mirror. A ring could be any ring. A cross could be any cross. But a ring and a cross taken together present a much more limited set of potential interpretations. This is how the VMs reveals its information; it is through the pairing and the combination of interpretations of the artist's known environment. A blue striped tub and a red galero on a single nymph is not accidental - and neither is this.
Colette was supported by the rulers of Burgundy - Margaret of Bavaria (d. 1424), wife of Jean (John) the Fearless (d. 1419). Colette then was assisted by Marie, Duchess of Auvergne (d. 1434), who was one of two surviving daughters of Jean, Duke of Berry (d. 1416). It was the thrice-married Marie who inherited BNF Fr. 565, which has been tied to the VMS cosmos. Here, again, it is the combination of the historical data that limits the range of possibilities to a person possessing both pieces of information.
Colette continued to be supported as well by Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy and his third wife Isabell of Portugal [m. 1430]
But wait, there's more. Right below the "sleeping" nymph is the VMs "Critter" - the 'Infamous Armadillo' or whatever. And again, it is not the identity of the critter itself, it is the combination of historical interpretations when the critter is interpreted in combination with the NEBULY line. The nebuly line is a cloud band and a cloud band is a cosmic boundary. The only critter that belongs with a cosmic boundary is the religious Agnus Dei.
There were various medieval representations of the Agnus Dei. Sometimes inside a cosmic boundary, less often shown with blood. The blood always remains inside the cosmic boundary, with one exception [BNF Fr. 13096 f. 18] where it is outside. The Apocalypse of S Jean was an old text in the Burgundian library. The same structure, with the droplets outside the cosmic boundary, is replicated in the VMs.
It has also been long said that the critter might be interpreted as a representation of the Golden Fleece. The resemblance is ambiguous, but the potential reference is clearly to Burgundy and the Valois era. And also, this sort of ambiguous substitution is the same tricky technique that is seen in the VMs mermaid, where the substitution of mythical Melusine of Luxembourg is also connected to the Valois descendants.
The illustrations can be ambiguous. The history is obscure. Yet the connections are valid and they are compatible. There is a clear indication of relevance with the C-14 dates. There is a particular version of much historical information present (scattered and disguised) in the VMs illustrations.
29-02-2024, 03:05 AM
(28-02-2024, 11:03 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If you read certain details in the biography of Colette of Corbie (d. 1477), you may find it referenced that she had several interesting 'dreams'. After a 'dream' (1406) of Saint Anne, she reversed her position on the "concept" of Trinubium - meaning married three times. The importance of this concept only lasted for a limited time. And so it became another of those things that time has almost forgotten.
More to the point. In another 'dream', she received a ring from Saint John, and when she awoke, she had a real ring. In addition to the mystical ring, it is also part of her story, that she received a special cross.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The ring is a ring, not a mirror. A ring could be any ring. A cross could be any cross. But a ring and a cross taken together present a much more limited set of potential interpretations. This is how the VMs reveals its information; it is through the pairing and the combination of interpretations of the artist's known environment. A blue striped tub and a red galero on a single nymph is not accidental - and neither is this.
Colette was supported by the rulers of Burgundy - Margaret of Bavaria (d. 1424), wife of Jean (John) the Fearless (d. 1419). Colette then was assisted by Marie, Duchess of Auvergne (d. 1434), who was one of two surviving daughters of Jean, Duke of Berry (d. 1416). It was the thrice-married Marie who inherited BNF Fr. 565, which has been tied to the VMS cosmos. Here, again, it is the combination of the historical data that limits the range of possibilities to a person possessing both pieces of information.
Colette continued to be supported as well by Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy and his third wife Isabell of Portugal [m. 1430]
But wait, there's more. Right below the "sleeping" nymph is the VMs "Critter" - the 'Infamous Armadillo' or whatever. And again, it is not the identity of the critter itself, it is the combination of historical interpretations when the critter is interpreted in combination with the NEBULY line. The nebuly line is a cloud band and a cloud band is a cosmic boundary. The only critter that belongs with a cosmic boundary is the religious Agnus Dei.
There were various medieval representations of the Agnus Dei. Sometimes inside a cosmic boundary, less often shown with blood. The blood always remains inside the cosmic boundary, with one exception [BNF Fr. 13096 f. 18] where it is outside. The Apocalypse of S Jean was an old text in the Burgundian library. The same structure, with the droplets outside the cosmic boundary, is replicated in the VMs.
It has also been long said that the critter might be interpreted as a representation of the Golden Fleece. The resemblance is ambiguous, but the potential reference is clearly to Burgundy and the Valois era. And also, this sort of ambiguous substitution is the same tricky technique that is seen in the VMs mermaid, where the substitution of mythical Melusine of Luxembourg is also connected to the Valois descendants.
The illustrations can be ambiguous. The history is obscure. Yet the connections are valid and they are compatible. There is a clear indication of relevance with the C-14 dates. There is a particular version of much historical information present (scattered and disguised) in the VMs illustrations.
I have followed all of that research with interest. In my own case, years back, I pursued the Melusine myths and related connections. But I think there is a far simpler reading of the nymph iconography, such as I present.
(I don't think the Voynich images are entirely devoid of nuptial symbolism, by the way, but it is Solomonic.)
The "critter" is curious, I agree, but I don't think it is a mythological allusion.
Different readings, different methodologies. I gave up on the assumption the visual vocabulary of the MS. is being used consistent with its precedents, just as I don't assume a Latin letter in the script is being used as a Latin letter.
29-02-2024, 08:41 PM
The situation here is an example of the difficulties resulting from single element investigations. Such investigations often become too wide-ranging and can sometimes go off course.
"It the ring is a mirror, then....."
If there are two elements, and both of them need to be valid simultaneously, then the options are more strictly limited and defined.
In the instances where it seems to be more clear as to what the VMs artist intended, it does occur that there are two or more independent elements that contribute to the (apparently) intended interpretation - like the ring and the cross together, like the 'critter / cosmic boundary / droplets' structural sequence.
While the Order of the Golden Fleece did originate from the story of Jason and the Argonauts, and that is what most people associate with it, historically it wasn't that long before the backstory was Christianized, and Jason was replaced, for obvious moral reasons, by Gideon. In the VMs, the illustration is primarily a representation of the Agnus Dei, one with a very uncommon structure, and secondly a connection to medieval, Valois Burgundy. Any mythological allusion to Jason or biblical allusion to Gideon is tertiary.
"It the ring is a mirror, then....."
If there are two elements, and both of them need to be valid simultaneously, then the options are more strictly limited and defined.
In the instances where it seems to be more clear as to what the VMs artist intended, it does occur that there are two or more independent elements that contribute to the (apparently) intended interpretation - like the ring and the cross together, like the 'critter / cosmic boundary / droplets' structural sequence.
While the Order of the Golden Fleece did originate from the story of Jason and the Argonauts, and that is what most people associate with it, historically it wasn't that long before the backstory was Christianized, and Jason was replaced, for obvious moral reasons, by Gideon. In the VMs, the illustration is primarily a representation of the Agnus Dei, one with a very uncommon structure, and secondly a connection to medieval, Valois Burgundy. Any mythological allusion to Jason or biblical allusion to Gideon is tertiary.
03-03-2024, 12:04 AM
(29-02-2024, 08:41 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The situation here is an example of the difficulties resulting from single element investigations. Such investigations often become too wide-ranging and can sometimes go off course.
"It the ring is a mirror, then....."
If there are two elements, and both of them need to be valid simultaneously, then the options are more strictly limited and defined.
In the instances where it seems to be more clear as to what the VMs artist intended, it does occur that there are two or more independent elements that contribute to the (apparently) intended interpretation - like the ring and the cross together, like the 'critter / cosmic boundary / droplets' structural sequence.
While the Order of the Golden Fleece did originate from the story of Jason and the Argonauts, and that is what most people associate with it, historically it wasn't that long before the backstory was Christianized, and Jason was replaced, for obvious moral reasons, by Gideon. In the VMs, the illustration is primarily a representation of the Agnus Dei, one with a very uncommon structure, and secondly a connection to medieval, Valois Burgundy. Any mythological allusion to Jason or biblical allusion to Gideon is tertiary.
Or we could both be wrong.
Here is an alternative interpretation of that full page, including the 'armadillo':
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I agree, images and motifs ought not be considered in isolation, but in their combinations and sequences as presented in the ms.
03-03-2024, 01:32 AM
These things have been under investigation discussion, disputation for years - for years before this forum started. There is no shortage of opinions. I would simply add that over that time, a few bits of new evidence have been added, and that this has sometimes guided, confirmed or shifted the interpretation. In those lucky instances, I am at least hopeful that the revised interpretation is preferable to its predecessors.
In the case of the VMs critter, there is a nice illustration of Aries with a great cloud band, So, this is a valid interpretation, although I don't recall the presence of any droplets. However, the Agnus Dei illustration in BNF Fr. 13096 has the same three-part structural correspondence and an interesting provenance. Cloud symbolism derives from the nebuly line - etymologically.
Is the woman with the spindle just a woman with a spindle? Is the spindle just a spindle? In the VMs drawing, note the fine markings on the side of the spindle - which represent the planets. Therefore, it is a representation of the cosmic spindle. Who gets to hold the cosmic spindle today? Is it Annette or Barbara? If it is the cosmic spindle, then there is only one choice as to who holds it. That is Ananke, Lady Necessity - unless you've found evidence to the contrary.
In the case of the VMs critter, there is a nice illustration of Aries with a great cloud band, So, this is a valid interpretation, although I don't recall the presence of any droplets. However, the Agnus Dei illustration in BNF Fr. 13096 has the same three-part structural correspondence and an interesting provenance. Cloud symbolism derives from the nebuly line - etymologically.
Is the woman with the spindle just a woman with a spindle? Is the spindle just a spindle? In the VMs drawing, note the fine markings on the side of the spindle - which represent the planets. Therefore, it is a representation of the cosmic spindle. Who gets to hold the cosmic spindle today? Is it Annette or Barbara? If it is the cosmic spindle, then there is only one choice as to who holds it. That is Ananke, Lady Necessity - unless you've found evidence to the contrary.
04-03-2024, 03:19 AM
(03-03-2024, 01:32 AM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.These things have been under investigation discussion, disputation for years - for years before this forum started. There is no shortage of opinions. I would simply add that over that time, a few bits of new evidence have been added, and that this has sometimes guided, confirmed or shifted the interpretation. In those lucky instances, I am at least hopeful that the revised interpretation is preferable to its predecessors.
In the case of the VMs critter, there is a nice illustration of Aries with a great cloud band, So, this is a valid interpretation, although I don't recall the presence of any droplets. However, the Agnus Dei illustration in BNF Fr. 13096 has the same three-part structural correspondence and an interesting provenance. Cloud symbolism derives from the nebuly line - etymologically.
Is the woman with the spindle just a woman with a spindle? Is the spindle just a spindle? In the VMs drawing, note the fine markings on the side of the spindle - which represent the planets. Therefore, it is a representation of the cosmic spindle. Who gets to hold the cosmic spindle today? Is it Annette or Barbara? If it is the cosmic spindle, then there is only one choice as to who holds it. That is Ananke, Lady Necessity - unless you've found evidence to the contrary.
We should ask Admin to move these discussions to the relevant thread:
I follow your argument. The allusion to Agnus Dei in the Voynich illustrations is very oblique, though, and it raises the question of whether the symbolism is not, in the first instance, preChristian. I can find instances of the Agnus Dei being used as axial symbolism, but the wool/cloud symbolism may be Platonic and only loosely Christianized here. Nor do I think the fact the nymph holds the Cosmic Spindle makes her Ananke, necessarily. It only indicates that she is axial; by my reading, a nymph of the mountain peak.
Pages: 1 2