The Voynich Ninja

The order and structure of the VMs Zodiac does not represent the typical sequence and standard arrangement of a medieval zodiac. VMs has Pisces first, which may have reasons in the use of the Julian calendar, but it also splits Aries and Taurus for no plausible reason, many would say.

But Aries and Taurus are now pairs. Split, artificial pairs. A pair of artificial pairs, while Pisces has generally always been a pair of fish. Pisces is a natural pair. So are Gemini and Cancer. The pairing in Cancer is unusual, but still natural - as opposed to the Aries and Taurus examples. Pisces and Cancer are now paired as being pairs of aquatic animals. And this is a second pair of paired pairs.

But for whatever reasons, the restructure of the VMs Zodiac sequence has been seen as unfamiliar, disruptive, strange and exotic. Too unknown and foreign for even the simplest of patterns to be recognized. The paring paradigm is established in the VMs Zodiac signs. Pairing continues in the heraldry-like patterns from the very top of Pisces outer ring. Pairing is seemingly valid, but is the heraldry?

Hopefully, this will put the topic back in the Imagery section, where it belongs. If anyone has more to say.

As to the critiques about the validity of heraldic identifications in the VMs Zodiac illustrations, I have cited a particular use of heraldic canting that I have called the papelonny pun. It is based on specific armorial, heraldic patterns and traditional definitions and on the objective placement of these same elements in the VMs Zodiac illustrations.

Is the investigator, who is not familiar with the pattern, the definition or even the name of the papelonny pattern going to find this pun amusing? Convincing? At all? Probably not. The time devoted to modern investigations clearly has shown that the presence of the pun remains unseen until the proper, traditional, heraldic name can be used to identify the specific pattern in the VMs illustration. The trap remains invisible until it is sprung. The design remains generic until it is identified. Heraldry, through the use of heraldic canting, validates heraldry, which is the historical Fieschi identification and all that goes with it. Heraldry verifies the intended interpretation of heraldry, if you know where to find the essential, traditional, historical facts.
.

I'm not sure if I understand this correctly - let me see.

I agree that this sequence of images is strange, if it was meant to be a zodiac. Your use of words like "disrupted" seem to imply that it was once a zodiac, which has been purposefully reworked, for "pairing" purposes. To me, it seems like a simpler explanation that it was never supposed to be a real zodiac in the first place.

So this pairing. You see a number of month roundels as pairs, and pairs of pairs. But what about the other ones? Does this pattern include all twelve images? How? And if not, why? And why go to the trouble of pairing in the first place? What is the purpose of this? What does it mean, culturally?

About the presence of heraldry, again the same question: why? What does it mean? Why there? What's the purpose of heraldry here, compared to the rest of the manuscript?

What I said was that the VMs Zodiac sequence was abnormal  and "has been seen as unfamiliar, disruptive, strange and exotic" and so on. But an *abnormal* zodiac is still and abnormal *zodiac*. If it's not a zodiac, what is it? A generic nothingness? An amorphous blob? Pisces is too much like Pisces to be something else. And the second part, the zodiac medallions from Gemini onward, stands reasonably well without significant internal complications or contradictions. [Two missing medallions could be a significant problem.] But as it stands, it looks like a modified version of a standard zodiac sequence to me.

Of course, most of the attention goes to the abnormal part of the sequence. The right place, but for the wrong reasons. The sequence is too strange to see the simple truth behind it. By the time of the VMs parchment dates, due to the errors in the Julian calendar, the vernal equinox was well into Pisces. Any calendar, based on this event would have to start with Pisces. Starting with Pisces then puts the three best natural pairs (Pisces, Gemini and, with a bit of help, Cancer) into close proximity.

What does it take to create the pairing paradigm? To make it five in a row? Pure, idiosyncratic audacity. Cleave them in twain. - - It works. - And it adds to the strangeness of the text, which was seen as a desirable addition, as I see it. If the VMs makes sense, then that sense is hidden. Finding that hidden sense is a puzzle and the VMs is a series of puzzles.

The examples I cite are the examples that the VMs Zodiac illustrations provide, those that I can see. They are pairings found in the first five of the VMs Zodiac houses. So why not turn all the houses into pairs?  Or is that too obvious?

Do all the astrological medallions need to be paired to fulfill the purpose of their being used?

Hiding something in an illustration is a strange conundrum. The object being hidden should look like it is not there, but it actually has to be there! If it can be clearly seen, it is not hidden. Therefore the image has to be ambiguous. And to clarify the subjective interpretation of ambiguity, a subtle collection of objective, positional confirmations.

Ideologically, the theme of pairing is found in Deuteronomy, where it says that in matters of litigation, fact should be established through the testimony of two or three witnesses. Transfer this requirement to VMs interpretation. The pairs are there to establish the paradigm. Following the pattern further is the choice of the investigator. This is a very strict requirement. And it is also a strong confirmation.

Heraldry, as a general subject, is a much better way to identify particular individuals and historical situations than with astrological medallions. Armorial heraldry was intended to identify individuals and families. Ecclesiastical heraldry is used to identify orders and ranks. The VMs combines both in a representation of a unique historical situation. The VMs is a complex and unique artifact. If it is to make sense in some way, then it will be in a way that is based on historical facts and traditions. The use of heraldry does just that, despite the illusion of the radial cloaking device. If it works, why not use it? That is to say, it was intended to function from the medieval perspective; whereas modern investigation has been much blocked by the obscurity of the relevant facts.
.