The Voynich Ninja

The problem is that mosaics and other architectural art forms are often the only surviving witnesses. We often simply so not know how the ancients illustrated their texts. Many traditions have been lost entirely... so teferring to coins, statues, frescos and mosaics is often our best option.

I agree that Carolingian copying is just one option. I must admit that I find figuring out what happened between the Hellenistic originals and the eventual imagery in MS Beinecke 408 incredibly complicated. 

As far as the images in the roundels go. You may be right about copying errors. A similar explanation would be damaged or poor quality exemplars, allowing a tree to be interpreted as the feline's tail. If the face of the goat was damaged, the copyists would have to improvise as well.

Anyway, you demonstrate that looking at earlier art can lead to finds that surpass those found in medeval works. And the results are impressive

So far I was convinced of the type of exemplars used for two of the images. Diane provided a convincing comparison between the 'Virgo' and a Nike-type coin. Secondly, I'm convinced that 'Gemini' is based on Classical imagery as well, as still found in some Carolingian Aratea manuscripts. 

The feline and the goats can now be added to the list. 

I suspect the 'bulls' as well as the 'Scorpio' are Egyptian in origin, though I'm not convinced yet. My idea about scorpio is a bit too exotic and unconfirmed to mention in a public forum. 

But you seem to be on the right track. I hope the big picture will become clear when more convincing exemplars are found.

(04-08-2016, 01:18 PM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(04-08-2016, 07:36 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've seen this comparison before I think.

Really, where?

Quote:What would that mean though, if indeed this is supposed to represent the Qsar mosaic leopard? Other animals in the Qsar mosaic have greenery behind them too.

Right... and depictions of Leo generally do not.

Quote:One of them is an actual lion.

...and the VMS illustration does not look like a lion.

Quote:I don't really see any other connections, do you?

You mean beyond being a blue leopard with a very similar looking tree in the background?

Quote:One more problem I see, is how would the mosaic be known to someone to reference it, if it was dug up in 1957 as a mysterious find? It seemed they were surprised by some of the imagery so it seems too obscure a reference, even if somehow someone had knowledge of it during the time of the creation of the MS.

Well I'm not saying someone saw this exact same image of course, but something similar that stemmed from the same tradition.

Linda is probably thinking of the various mosaics which I've shown from Tunis, though I didn't refer to this one.  Since I know of no-one else save you, Sam, who has focused more on the manuscript than on theories about it, I don't think it is likely that anyone except you would have hunted similarities for the imagery on its own terms, rather than limiting the search to whatever theory they adhere to.

I've never seen anyone else refer to mosaic imagery except me in this context.  Carry on as you are!

---

(07-08-2016, 02:18 PM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I also found this goat, from El Djem in Tunisia (2nd century AD):



Coincidental similarity?

Also, Diane, I think you've mentioned before that you think one of the VMS goats is wild and the other domestic, and the stock imagery site with this mosaic image specifies that it is a wild goat:

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

Hi Sam - I don't come by so often these days, so forgive the delay.

Interesting that you should ask about the 'wild' and the 'tame'.

I tried to talk about the following some time ago.. like when I first began analysing this section 2009-2010.. but met such resounding silence that I didn't try to show further how important I think it.

Within the manuscript, there is a whole pattern of allusion that isn't the usual Latin idea of "good vs bad".  It's far more interesting, and works like ..  as if the people who made the images felt that everything *should* have its natural complementary-opposite.  As if an open door couldn't exist in the world without the closed door, or the tame without the wild, or the benevolent without the ill-intentioned. (I'm trying to avoid theological terms, here.. ).

It isn't in the least a Latin European mind-set and it extends to the botanical section too - the wild/tamed plant is a crucial distinction for the makers.

But it even extends to the disposition of the animals around the notional circle: the 'wild' tend to be creatures from the south, and those 'tame' from the north.  Sorry, that's a bit too technical.

If you take a really, really close look at the month-names, you'll probably be able to see the same thing there too - a pattern of the open and the closed. 

I keep thinking of Newbold who translated the marginalia on f.116v as reading "to me you have given many gates".  He was a classical scholar and a professor in his field.  I do not think it entirely right that we never hear much of his reading, these days.

So, nobody else has a comment on this?  The goat mosaic find in particular provides the only known example of an image in the VMS that appears to have been directly copied from the same source as some other image.  You might think such a find would be considered significant.

I must say, the silence here is deafening.

Well,

arguing that a drawing in a 15t Century MS, and a mosaic from the 2nd century AD are copies of the same source
is a huge stretch, so perhaps not many people are that convinced, or simply don't find any particular comment to add.


For me, the statements from a well-know expert in zodiac iconography:

"The signs of the Zodiac do not present problems - they are simply not of the Arateia type but were modernized.
[...]
The genre scenes, eg. Aries eating a bush, suggest that the signs were redrawn from a calendar. "

are far more convincing.

(14-08-2016, 10:43 AM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So, nobody else has a comment on this?  The goat mosaic find in particular provides the only known example of an image in the VMS that appears to have been directly copied from the same source as some other image.  You might think such a find would be considered significant.

I must say, the silence here is deafening.

Near as I can tell, you have shown an example from Libya, and one from Tunisia. What is the same source, exactly? 

I went to my old computer to see if I had saved a copy of the one I said I'd seen before, but couldn't find anything so I don't know if it's a case of deja vu or whether I actually saw it, but I could swear it was a blue leopard with a palm tree behind, and if it's not your example then perhaps it's one in the same tradition as you say, so I really was hoping to find it, but no luck. If I come across it I will let you know for sure.

I don't understand why people think it is a palm tree, though, why can it not just be the lion's tail in the drawing? Seems the simplest idea. I did see a copy of your mosaic example that said it was an olive tree, although it was on a stock picture site so who knows, not likely an expert involved there, and I couldn't find any other reference to it. But, do you know what they call the trimming that results in a tree that looks like that? Lion tailing.

Insofar as the goat, yes, similar, but I wouldn't say a definite copy job. Like all the different forms of art involving these animals, yes there are similarities, but again nothing that can confirm anything.

---

(04-08-2016, 01:18 PM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Quote:I don't really see any other connections, do you?

You mean beyond being a blue leopard with a very similar looking tree in the background?

No, I'll give you that. I meant with the other mosaics that had made up the floor with your example. For instance the fish do not match the fish in the manuscript.

(15-08-2016, 08:51 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Well,

arguing that a drawing in a 15t Century MS, and a mosaic from the 2nd century AD are copies of the same source
is a huge stretch

I don't see why it's a huge stretch at all, considering that many works from antiquity survive in only a single copy that was produced much later.

Quote:For me, the statements from a well-know expert in zodiac iconography:

"The signs of the Zodiac do not present problems - they are simply not of the Arateia type but were modernized.
[...]
The genre scenes, eg. Aries eating a bush, suggest that the signs were redrawn from a calendar. "

are far more convincing.

You cite these opinions as though she considered the evidence I presented above and dismissed it as irrelevant, but of course these opinions were offered before this evidence was available, so it is hard to see the relevance of this quote here.  In any case, the remark about "redrawn from a calendar" seems to imply that she perceived an outside influence of some kind in the VMS Zodiac imagery, which along with the point about the imagery being "modernized" is actually perfectly consistent with the scenario I outlined above.

Anyway, although you did not really say so in a direct way, I will interpret your remarks as indicating that you believe the similarities in the images I presented above to be purely coincidental.

I would still be interested to see if anyone else has any opinions on this.

(15-08-2016, 01:06 PM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(15-08-2016, 08:51 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For me, the statements from a well-know expert in zodiac iconography:

"The signs of the Zodiac do not present problems - they are simply not of the Arateia type but were modernized.
[...]
The genre scenes, eg. Aries eating a bush, suggest that the signs were redrawn from a calendar. "

are far more convincing.

You cite these opinions as though she considered the evidence I presented above and dismissed it as irrelevant, but of course these opinions were offered before this evidence was available, so it is hard to see the relevance of this quote here.  In any case, the remark about "redrawn from a calendar" seems to imply that she perceived an outside influence of some kind in the VMS Zodiac imagery, which along with the point about the imagery being "modernized" is actually perfectly consistent with the scenario I outlined above.

Anyway, although you did not really say so in a direct way, I will interpret your remarks as indicating that you believe the similarities in the images I presented above to be purely coincidental.

I don't want to second-guess about what she may or may not have thought, but obviously she will be fully aware of the existence of zodiac images in mosaics throughout the ages.

Given the difference both in time and geographic location of the two images, I do consider them independent, so the similarity to be a generic one. If one has a large number of images of a goat, some will end up being quite similar.

I understand (interpret) the modernisation to have been a gradual process. Documents being copied throughout the ages.

(15-08-2016, 09:00 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Near as I can tell, you have shown an example from Libya, and one from Tunisia. What is the same source, exactly? 

What I meant is that the goat in the VMS and the goat in the mosaic appear to have the same source, which was presumably an image in a book of some kind.  Whether the leopard image and the goat image came from the same source book or different books I don't know.  Really we can only speculate here since no ancient books have survived intact.  If they had, then we would look at them directly, rather than try to get a sense of their contents by looking at these mosaics.

Quote:I went to my old computer to see if I had saved a copy of the one I said I'd seen before, but couldn't find anything so I don't know if it's a case of deja vu or whether I actually saw it, but I could swear it was a blue leopard with a palm tree behind, and if it's not your example then perhaps it's one in the same tradition as you say, so I really was hoping to find it, but no luck. If I come across it I will let you know for sure.

Okay, thanks.

Quote:I don't understand why people think it is a palm tree, though, why can it not just be the lion's tail in the drawing? Seems the simplest idea. I did see a copy of your mosaic example that said it was an olive tree, although it was on a stock picture site so who knows, not likely an expert involved there, and I couldn't find any other reference to it.

It might actually be an olive tree.  I was calling it a palm tree because it vaguely resembled a palm tree to my eyes, but I'm not knowledgeable about trees at all.  The main point is that the tree in the mosaic looks like the one in the VMS Leo image.

Quote:But, do you know what they call the trimming that results in a tree that looks like that? Lion tailing.

Interesting.  But in any case, the tail in the VMS looks different from any Leo image I have seen, which makes the resemblance to this tree quite striking.

Quote:Insofar as the goat, yes, similar, but I wouldn't say a definite copy job. Like all the different forms of art involving these animals, yes there are similarities, but again nothing that can confirm anything.

Admittedly I did find some vaguely similar goats in medieval manuscripts but nothing as close as this image.  I think the roughness of the coat, the shape of the tail, and the presence of the ground and the tree in the VMS image point toward an afffinity with this mosaic.  Also, some of the differences seem like they can be accounted for by changing the frame of the image from square to circular, such as the shorter tree and the different position of the legs.

Anyway, I'll put you down as another vote for "coincidence".  Any others?

---

(15-08-2016, 01:23 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(15-08-2016, 01:06 PM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(15-08-2016, 08:51 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For me, the statements from a well-know expert in zodiac iconography:

"The signs of the Zodiac do not present problems - they are simply not of the Arateia type but were modernized.
[...]
The genre scenes, eg. Aries eating a bush, suggest that the signs were redrawn from a calendar. "

are far more convincing.

You cite these opinions as though she considered the evidence I presented above and dismissed it as irrelevant, but of course these opinions were offered before this evidence was available, so it is hard to see the relevance of this quote here.  In any case, the remark about "redrawn from a calendar" seems to imply that she perceived an outside influence of some kind in the VMS Zodiac imagery, which along with the point about the imagery being "modernized" is actually perfectly consistent with the scenario I outlined above.

Anyway, although you did not really say so in a direct way, I will interpret your remarks as indicating that you believe the similarities in the images I presented above to be purely coincidental.

I don't want to second-guess about what she may or may not have thought, but obviously she will be fully aware of the existence of zodiac images in mosaics throughout the ages.

But that's sort of the point - these mosaic images aren't from zodiacs, and the use of a goat to represent Aries is unusual in the first place.  So of course there's no reason to think that she had seen these particular images.

Quote:Given the difference both in time and geographic location of the two images, I do consider them independent, so the similarity to be a generic one.

Again I don't see any basis to this kind of objection considering that plenty of material from the ancient Mediterranean is known to have been transmitted to medieval Europe by various routes.

Quote:If one has a large number of images of a goat, some will end up being quite similar.

Like I said in my response to Linda above, there are some very specific points of similarity and I doubt one can find a better comparison in a medieval manuscript (and if one could, that would also likely be a valuable clue).

Quote:I understand (interpret) the modernisation to have been a gradual process. Documents being copied throughout the ages.

Which is not entirely different from the scenario I outlined in the original post.

(15-08-2016, 01:28 PM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.in any case, the tail in the VMS looks different from any Leo image I have seen, which makes the resemblance to this tree quite striking.

Hi Sam,
what about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.?
It's one of the sources discussed on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

(15-08-2016, 01:50 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(15-08-2016, 01:28 PM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.in any case, the tail in the VMS looks different from any Leo image I have seen, which makes the resemblance to this tree quite striking.

Hi Sam,
what about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.?
It's one of the sources discussed on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

That's admittedly an interesting one, in that the three-pronged shape is certainly similar.  But the "frayed" character of the tail in the VMS image still looks much more like the tree in the mosaic image than in this Cod Sang 402 image.  So, it is still basically consistent with what I outlined in my original post, where the image began as something similar to the leopard mosaic and then was reshaped along European lines (possibly over several generations of copying), with the tree being reinterpreted as a tail.  It's possible that one of the influences was an image like the one you've shown here.  It seems like the frayed character was retained from the original tree, but the three-pronged shape was influenced by this type of Leo tail.