+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Imagery (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-43.html)
+--- Thread: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 (/thread-5385.html)
Pages:
1
2
The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - pjburkshire - 19-02-2026
When I look at the nymph in the top-left of f72r2 - Gemini (the Twins), it looks to me like she is standing on grass. What do other people think?
The ofchdady ( ofchdady ) nymph of Gemini (the Twins)
- It looks like she is standing on grass
- It looks like she is standing on a bed of nails
- It looks like she is standing on something else
- She is not standing on anything
- Not sure, can't tell, image too damaged to know
Also, there is something on her left ankle. I don't know if that is a smudge or part of the illustration. If it is part of the illustration, what is it? An ankle bracelet? A bandage?
..........................
Edit: I probably should have made the option as "unidentified" and not "something else". If you think it could be either grass or a bed of nails, I count that as "unidentified" and would mark it as "something else".
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - pjburkshire - 19-02-2026
Poll closes after 14 days.
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - E Lillie - 19-02-2026
The "nymph" is definitely standing on something. Looking at it under the maximum magnification provided by Jason Davis' "Voyage the Voynich" site it appears as a series of hashmarks similar to the "grass" near the central figure of the "Virgo" zodiac folio (72v2) with a separate, smaller group of hashes under the figures left foot.
The left ankle seems to have a smudge on it similar to another directly in front of it and several others scattered about the illustration.
Best, Ernest
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - Koen G - 19-02-2026
Grass is a safe bet; E Lillie points to some good manuscript-internal evidence.
Maybe even Earth, since there are four nymphs standing on something around Gemini, and Earth fits well in a certain group of four.
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - Jorge_Stolfi - 20-02-2026
(19-02-2026, 04:37 PM)pjburkshire Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.When I look at the nymph in the top-left of f72r2 - Gemini (the Twins), it looks to me like she is standing on grass. What do other people think?
I think that the "Artist" started drawing that nymph (the first one of the "overflow" ones) from the head down. As usual, he miscalculated, and eventually (probably after doing the hips, possibly even after doing the knee) he discovered that there was no way to get her feet on the circle, not even by stretching her legs as much as possible. So he drew the "grass" in order to fill the gap and have her stand on something.
He seems to have adjusted the starting height after that experience. Yet nymphs 2 and 5 still look taller than the others...
All the best, --stolfi
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - Rafal - 20-02-2026
Yep, she's standing on the grass.
Nick Pelling writes about her a bit:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Nick's interpretation is quite brave. Decide yourself if you like it or not:
The unusual thing about the nymph at the top left of the Gemini page is that she appears barefoot, and apparently standing on some grass. So… what might that all be about?
What I quickly found out was that 26th May is the day of Madonna of Caravaggio. The story (there’s a better page in Italian here) is that on 5pm on 26th May 1432,
an abused peasant wife Giannetta de’ Vacchi was collecting grass for her animals in Mazzolengo meadow near Caravaggio (near Cremona in Bergamo, 20 miles east of Milan),
when the Madonna suddenly appear to her in a bright light. Mary told her that She was displeased about her husband’s drinking (and that She would stop that): and also that Giannetta
should convince Milan and Venice to halt their war. The Madonna then touched the ground with Her foot, and a spring appeared.
Despite initial disbelief from the people, the spring (and Mary’s footprint) quickly started to attract visitors and pilgrims.
Giannetta ended up meeting both Filippo Maria Visconti (the Duke of Milan) and Francesco Foscari (the Doge of the Serenissima); and in 1433 the war stopped.
Duke Filippo Maria Visconti wanted a church built near the spring (this was consecrated on 20th December 1451, supported by the Sforzas). And in 1475 this modest church
was replaced by a Sanctuary, which still stands. Even today, you can go down into an undercroft beneath the Sanctuary and draw water from that spring.
Might the grassy nymph be signifying the Madonna of Caravaggio? Nothing’s for sure (yet), but I think it’s a strong possibility,
particularly if the Voynich Manuscript was made near Milan from 1432 onwards.
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - Aga Tentakulus - 21-02-2026
If one is standing in the grass, is the other standing in the water?
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - Bernd - 21-02-2026
While I like Jorge's idea that the 'grass' is a filler for miscalculated space, this is clearly not the case for the other nymphs standing on something. Aga's 'water' nymph would reach the circle without it and the two on tubes had their legs shortened so the tubes definitely were deemed important.
Regarding the 'grass' itself, if we look at Taccola's drawings, these parallel strokes originally were a crude form of hatching to indicate either depth or shadows. What the VM artist wanted to say with this is beyond me however.
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - Jorge_Stolfi - 21-02-2026
(21-02-2026, 08:36 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If one is standing in the grass, is the other standing in the water?
I cannot explain my real theory of what is going on with the nymphs on that part of the diagram (outer band, from 06:00 to 08:30). But here is a delphinized approximation. For that nymph, the explanation is basically the same as for the first "overflow" nymph on f72r2. Namely, the "Artist" started drawing the nymph from the head down, and ended up drawing the knees to far from the middle text band. He hacked a fix for his mistake by having her stand on some platform, like a tub of water or a pillow.
Next, for some reason, he decided to draw a happy clothed family instead of four more naked nymphs. Maybe the Author told him to do so, because those four stars were somehow special. Maybe the Scribe had just learned to draw clothed people. Maybe he was just bored. Anyway, so he started drawing the first child, which of course had to be smaller than the typical nymph. But again he started from the head, and again discovered only too late that the kid would be floating on thin air. So he added a "log" to have him stand on something.
And then he had to draw the second kid the same way.
I wonder whether a psychologist could say something about the Artist from his apparent obsession with having every figure stand on something, rather than float in the air?
All the best, --stolfi
RE: The ofchdady nymph of Gemini (the Twins) - February 2026 - Rafal - 21-02-2026
I like the theory that the artist struggled with human proportions.
He was probably drawing the Zodiac pages in the chronological order, from Pisces to Saggitarius (and then probably missing Capricorn and Aquarius).
At first he drew nymphs in tubes/barrels. It allowed him to hide the legs and explain weirdness in proportions. You never know if nymphs in the barrels are sitting, standing or crouching so you won't have problems with legs being too long and too short.
He also couldn't decide if the nymphs are to be naked or dressed and should they be only women or a mix of women and men. In the latest pages they are all naked and women only. In Gemini they seem to be a mix.
Gemini is also te first page which doesn't have nymphs in barrels. He probably didn't feel good with drawing full human bodies then and indeed could make some legs too short and then mask it with something random added.