The Voynich Ninja

In further studying the paint vs. line problem, I decided to trace the lines of the three "swimming" creatures on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. . 
For the full account you can check You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., but I'll put the most important stuff here.

Problems with this image in the manuscript:

• In some places, the lines are covered in the thick, green paint, making them harder to see
  
  
• …or totally impossible to see.
  
  
• The color, white background and green water don’t “follow the lines”. This results in a confusing patchwork crossing the borders of the creatures in various places.
  
  
• At some places where the green paint dries at the edges, it creates a darker line which can be mistaken for a creature outline.
  
  
• Some parts, like the tails on the blue and the red one, have been totally covered in “water”.
  

So I traced all visible lines, and this is the result:


Some observations:

• Red and Blue have forked tails like Green.
  
  
• Red has a ridged back.
  
  
• Blue has a saw pattern on the top of his snout and a line pattern on his back.
  
  
• Yellow has a forked snout. It’s small, but clear upon close inspection.
  

[font=Lora, serif]This leads me to believe that Green, Blue and Red belong to the same “class”, the forked tail might represent "fish tails". That doesn’t mean that these three are fish, but the forked tail communicates that they were seen as something like that, i.e. associated with a watery habitat. They are distinguished by three different patterns: Green has dots running across his flank, Blue has a subtle pattern of lines on his back, and Red has a ridged back. Whether this means that they are different species, I don’t know.

Yellow has been given a different tail, a fuller body and a different neck. His stance seems to suggest hostility or fear towards Blue, and perhaps also Red and Green.[/font]

So what do you guys think? 

If you look at historic images of the flood (Noah imagery) you will find pictures of animals in the water (not always identifiable as a specific animal) and some that look like they are dead/drowned.


Even though the VMS does not strike me as particularly or overtly Christian (crosses at the tops of crowns were commonly seen and a cross in a hand was also a common symbolic image to Christians and nonChristians alike), this rightside part of the VMS pond reminds me of some of those Noah illustrations.

Hmm, I never saw it as a flood scene, given the pond-like nature of the water. Also, I may have been mistaken in describing the creatures as reptilian because of their tails. Wouldn't this split tail suggest an aquatic nature instead?

(15-03-2016, 08:13 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hmm, I never saw it as a flood scene, given the pond-like nature of the water. Also, I may have been mistaken in describing the creatures as reptilian because of their tails. Wouldn't this split tail suggest an aquatic nature instead?

If you look at medieval chronicles of the flood, many of them look like ponds or puddles. It was a convention in some areas to draw it that way (it also looks more like an ocean in others). And many have drawn-and-then painted-over animals in the water, some of which are upside-down or otherwise dead or drowned looking.


I'm not saying the VMS author's intent was to represent a biblical passage, but the style of the drawing follows medieval tradition for Noah stories.


You'll also notice rainbows on another page. Rainbows had two main purposes in similar manuscripts. Some were to represent the sun coming out after the flood, others were to represent the relationships between constellations. So... a biblical flood tradition was used by some illustrators to represent astrological (and astronomical) relationships.

---

(15-03-2016, 08:13 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hmm, I never saw it as a flood scene, given the pond-like nature of the water. Also, I may have been mistaken in describing the creatures as reptilian because of their tails. Wouldn't this split tail suggest an aquatic nature instead?

The one bottom right, except for the nose, could be interpreted as a lion rampant. The one above it, as a drowned mammal, like a fox, for example. Only the one on the left has a more definite reptilian look to it.

The thing about flood and creation stories is that some illustrators tried to make them naturalistic but I've noticed that others made them more fantastical, possibly because a few drawings were supposed to represent all animals (and this may have been a symbolic way of suggesting that).

This makes me think that the "second painter" perhaps tried to make it look more like the type of scene you describe. If you compare my outlines to the original image, you'll see that Blue as well as Red (i.e. the two animals in the water) have had specifically their telling attributes of a reptilian or aquatic nature obscured by heavy paint. The heavy painter made them look like mammals, while originally they weren't supposed to.

Blue looks almost exactly like Green, with a forked tail, pointy nose and slender build. Red looks a bit different, but he still has the forked "fish tail" and a ridged back. If I look at the outline, I see a water pool where three aquatic beings roam, and the yellow one (could be a lion) is spooked by one of them.

If the heavy painter was really trying to "correct" or "improve" the work, perhaps he was trying to make this scene more familiar by turning the fish-tailed pond dwellers into swimming or drowning mammals.

Hello Koen Gh,
thank you for pointing out these interesting images.
I think the only relevant pattern is the dot line on the bottom left figure: they were drawn in dark ink, while I see the others as accidental effects of paint “splashing”.

That line of dots is strongly suggestive of a salamander or newt, “stellio” (“starred”) in Latin.
Attached images from top to bottom:

[Voynich]
Bibliothèque Nationale de France, lat. 6838B, Folio 34v
Kongelige Bibliotek, Gl. kgl. S. 1633 4º, Folio 55v
Bibliothèque Nationale de France, lat. 14429, Folio 112r
Koninklijke Bibliotheek, KB, KA 16, Folio 126r
Michael Maier, Atalanta fugiens, 1618?

More images here:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

PS: The Salamander is also related with water and in bestiaries it is sometimes represented entering a well (see image on the left):
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
if it falls into a well, the strength of its poison kills those who drink the water. 
(the Aberdeen Bestiary, Aberdeen University Library, Univ Lib. MS 24, 12th-century, England )

PPS: see also You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:

• Several different animals on fol. 79v. These could be a fish, a salamander, a lion, and a lamb in the "Golden Fleece" posture.
  

I agree that the "pattern" on the blue one is probably due to leaking ink, but the red one definitely has a ridged back. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. His also having ears sets him apart from the other two, I think.

Salamanders are an option maybe for the green and the blue one, but like you say, they are usually associated with fire. In antiquity as well as the middle ages, the split "fish tail" was often given to water monsters. Their hanging around at the pond reinforces that interpretation. It almost looks like someone had to draw some creatures he wasn't familiar with and turned them into sea monsters just for good measure.

(16-03-2016, 12:14 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I agree that the "pattern" on the blue one is probably due to leaking ink, but the red one definitely has a ridged back. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. His also having ears sets him apart from the other two, I think.

Salamanders are an option maybe for the green and the blue one, but like you say, they are usually associated with fire. In antiquity as well as the middle ages, the split "fish tail" was often given to water monsters. Their hanging around at the pond reinforces that interpretation. It almost looks like someone had to draw some creatures he wasn't familiar with and turned them into sea monsters just for good measure.

Koen, your post got me curious about what the pond would look like if I digitally removed the paint (and then touched it up slightly). It doesn't reveal much more about the three pond critters than what you've sketched above, but if you are curious, the result is on my blog:

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

Hey, I would have never found the extra-branched tail on the red one - how did you do that? Your method seems much better than me tracing lines like an idiot

The mystery around Red is only getting bigger. Would you think it's possible that originally he was floating on a branch? That would explain his "bent" posture, and the extra branches. Hmm, I don't know, in your image it really looks like a tail that splits into several parts. 

About the thing on the left.. there definitely seems to be a vertical structure there, but I can't make out much. One thing is sure: someone tried to hide something in this pond.

(16-03-2016, 08:20 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hey, I would have never found the extra-branched tail on the red one - how did you do that? Your method seems much better than me tracing lines like an idiot

The mystery around Red is only getting bigger. Would you think it's possible that originally he was floating on a branch? That would explain his "bent" posture, and the extra branches. Hmm, I don't know, in your image it really looks like a tail that splits into several parts. 

About the thing on the left.. there definitely seems to be a vertical structure there, but I can't make out much. One thing is sure: someone tried to hide something in this pond.

I have quite a bit of image-processing software (costs a lot). I try to let the computer do as much of the job as possible so I'm not imposing my own assumptions on the data, but I did manually lighten up the parts that were inside the lines and obviously painted over after I digitally removed as much green paint as possible. There were more lines than I expected.