The Voynich Ninja

(30-05-2025, 07:20 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Her is one of the sources that claim that Medieval astrologers equated each sign with one whole calendar month: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.  
I don't know whether those sources are to be trusted.  If they are, I don't know when the switch to the 'astronomically correct' periods took place...

Indeed this source doesn't appear to be reliable. They include an illustration (Très Riches Heures, 1415 ca) which clearly shows the transition from Scorpio to Sagittarius on November 14th. This is roughly consistent with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (three centuries earlier). I doubt that in the middle ages there ever was a belief in a zodiac sign / month identity, therefore I doubt that there ever was any switch. 

[attachment=10714]

I don't think it's reliable either.
Some statements are shifted.
Slaughter month is November. (blood month)
Harvest is October (grapes/wine)
Sowing is September (winter wheat)

(28-05-2025, 11:52 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have a vague recollection that the Voynich MS isn't quite unique in this, and similar exceptions exist but are rare. It could well be useful to find such examples. My 'vague memory' is known to be wrong from time to time.

Ah, just found one again that has been discussed before. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.  is a very recent post showing the Byrhtferth diagram that has the same association between months and zodiac signs as the Voynich MS.

So while it is rare, it is not impossible or wrong.

Months are not one off, but are reflected as at the time and place was accepted. 

The source is a medical manuscript collection 1498. 
It contains all the Zodiac signs with explanations why are accepted the finishing months to be attributed to the signs.

(28-05-2025, 11:52 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So while it is rare, it is not impossible or wrong.

I found one in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (2018) about the same subject: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Textus astronomici (1400-1450) f. 21r matches the VMS sign-month association.

(02-06-2025, 08:04 AM)BessAgritianin Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The source is a medical manuscript collection 1498. 

It would be useful to know exactly which manuscript this is.

(02-06-2025, 08:10 AM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Textus astronomici (1400-1450) f. 21r matches the VMS sign-month association.

That figure appears to be included in the part: "Computus philosophicus (seu ecclesiasticus) cum commentario" of "Johannes de Sacrobosco (Holywood)".

I have no chance of deciphering this handwriting.
The "commentario" is the first single page of this text, and the rest is the "Computus philosophicus" .

I found a printed version of Sacrobosco's text. Hopefully, this link works (it seems so):

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

This corresponds with fol 22r of the NKCR manuscript, i.e. immediately following the diagram shown by @nablator:
"Est autem Signum certa zodiaci portio duodecima..."
Here, the figure has the zodiac signs and the months offset corresponding with reality.
Does this mean that the Czech MS has a simplified drawing??

(02-06-2025, 08:04 AM)BessAgritianin Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The source is a medical manuscript collection 1498. 
It contains all the Zodiac signs with explanations why are accepted the finishing months to be attributed to the signs.

I'm not sure of my reading, but it doesn't seem to explain why:

Aries
Hoc signum igneum est [?] continuet finem Marcii s[?] medium Aprilis attribuitur t[ame?]n magis Aprili, quia in eo finitur sorti[?]. Aut [?] nomen Arietis. Quia sic[ut?]...

Then I found a printed Computus Ecclesiasticus that matches (mostly) the rest of the text. It's the same text that René linked, with the same diagram (on the previous page) with zodiac signs and the months offset corresponding with reality.

[Et dicitur Aries, quoniam quemadmodum] Aries est animal, quod in parte anteriori viget, posteriori vero debile est: ita sol existens in illa parte zodiaci, quae Aries dicitur, in tempore hyemali parum habet virtutis scilicet caloris & siccitatis: in parte anteriori magis, scilicet versus aestatem. Vel ut dicitur. Aries tota hyeme sinistro lateri accumbit, aestate vero dextro. Si quidem sol tota hyeme accedit ad inferius hemisphaerium, aestate vero ad superius, quod est quasi latus mundi dextrum.

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

I think it could be:

Hoc signum igneum est et continet finem Marcii et medium Aprilis.

"This is a fiery sign and it spans the end of March and half of April."