+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: VMs imagery analysis methodology (/thread-677.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: VMs imagery analysis methodology - R. Sale - 12-09-2016
Diane,
Am I willing to hold my theories up to the sunlight? You bet. My VMs investigations of several years have been focused on medieval heraldry, which I notice didn't make your list of influential factors. I think there is more heraldry to be found in the VMs Zodiac illustrations (Pisces & Aries) than meets the eye of the general historical investigator. However I would also say this. The purpose behind the construction of these VMs illustrations is not to provide instruction and elucidation for the uninformed. Rather the intent is to disguise and dissemble things that would otherwise have been known and recognized by the illustrator and her/his peers.
The primary example of this involves the interpretation of the two blue-striped patterns on the tubs in the upper left quarter of VMs f71r. What is the direction in which these striped patterns are oriented? Following the dominant radial nature of the illustration, the orientation of these two tub patterns will be given one set of interpretations. But with the radial influences eliminated, another interpretation emerges. This is the path to follow - for those who know the historical origins of the Roman Catholic tradition of the red galero. It is a path of interpretation in which the structure and content of these illustrations provides multiple confirmations of the identity of these representations. It is also an indication that some of the trickery is intentional, while other difficulties arise from the use of elements that have become obscure or have been altered subsequently.
Where would you like to start?
.
RE: VMs imagery analysis methodology - Diane - 12-09-2016
R. Sale,
I think that as a philosophical and methodological question, the title of this thread is potentially very interesting.
As you might have noticed, there are several methods employed by people presently engaged in researching the manuscript's origins, purpose, language and script.
Relatively recently, for example, Marco Ponzi began to use what he calls a 'binary' method, but which when I introduced it a few years ago, I explained as the 'sieve' method. The 'binary' method is very useful for cataloguers because it helps computerise image catalogues, though personal experience leads me to think it inadequate for provenancing work and I wouldn't use less than a seven-point sieve myself. The example I published used a nine-point - but it was just as example of how it helps find appropriate comparisons.
Otherwise, many are content to match what they perceive in the images, and what they personally see as the most salient details with images that occur in their chosen period and place of interest, and many add a further limit on restricting their search to one medium: manuscript art.
So there are different ways to go about this. What many people have tried to say before me, I think, is that there is no evidence to show that the patterns were intended by the makers to refer to European heraldry. Since you leave out so many patterns - such as the smaller circle inside a larger circle - and you do not address any other section or set of images, so it becomes very difficult to understand how your theory helps us understand the wider purpose of this manuscript. Surely it isn't a book about heraldry?
There's another point, too. I think many people agree that the dressed figures and red hats are in some sense a late addition to the images. So even if you were correct about the red galero, it wouldn't help us understand the earlier levels of this imagery. I'm not sure I've expressed that last point very well, but I acknowledge that while it is evident to me that not everything in the manuscript was first enunciated in early fifteenth century Europe, others hold the theory that it is all an original creation by some fifteenth-century European. I don't wish to provoke an argument on that last point; people must draw what conclusions they can from one of the few indisputable facts we have, which is the primary document.
RE: VMs imagery analysis methodology - R. Sale - 12-09-2016
Diane,
You'll have to thank Anton for the interesting title of this thread. Originally it was my response in another conversation. It does open a very large area of discussion. And my intent was to refer to something much more limited. Imagery analysis does not include language and script - IMO. And while it's difficult to eliminate the considerations of origins and purpose, perhaps they can be minimized. Now regarding the the topic of imagery analysis, by what methodology is that task performed? Standard methodology takes a VMs illustration and compares it to an image from an external source. This is natural, logical, and sometimes useful. But this is the VMs. And pinning something to the VMs is like nailing jelly to a wall.
The 'internal-external' comparison methodology has its uses and its limitations. What are the alternatives?
I am suggesting a different methodology that requires both elements of the visual analysis to be internal to the VMs. So take VMs Cancer, for example, a pair of crayfish (in general terms), where one might expect to find a single crab. Some investigators may try to identify the species and its geographic extent in the 1400s. Others may want to consider whether the style of these illustrations is Spanish or Japanese or somewhere in between. My statement is simple. The VMs Cancer medallion illustrates a pair of aquatic animals. A *pair* of aquatic animals. Pairing is the significant factor to be investigated in the VMs Zodiac. Pairing is, by nature, an internal to internal comparison. Pairing is not based on a sliding scale of relative similarity, but rather is a more simple matter that is either positive or negative. Pairing shifts the relevant criteria from being exclusively visual to something that is both visual and ideological. Even twins do not need to be visually identical to be a pair. And the extent and complexity of pairing in the first part of the VMs Zodiac is too great to occur simply by accident.
The problem with heraldry is the difficulty of identification and recognition. An investigator, having no familiarity with heraldry, might look at the Pisces and Aries tub patterns and see nothing but generic (nameless) designs. Stolfi did. And what is it that determines whether a certain pattern is considered generic - or not? Heraldry gives names to a substantial number of the patterns found in these few pages. I have not gone round and named each one because some are repetitious and relevant examples can be easily found in standard sources. Some, however, were more difficult. And not all can be identified, but they are quite few. Besides which, there is some trickery employed - just look at the chevrons - Pisces outer ring at 3 o'clock.
As a standard, cultural tradition established well before the VMs parchment dates, I believe the terms used in heraldry can be used in VMs discussion where relevant, such as with nebuly lines or in the example you cited above "such as the smaller circle inside a larger circle". These are rings, known in heraldry as annulets. So in the one VMs example, the pattern would be a semy of annulets. While the VMs illustration is a little sloppy, it is still a hypothetically valid possibility, though not one that I have seen in use. Another bit of trickery and misdirection, perhaps? However it is the presence and the use of obscure patterns like papelonny and gurges that demonstrate a strong knowledge of heraldry by someone involved here. And research depends on the investigator's knowledge of heraldry to recognize what is included and also what is ruled out.
The difficulty I have with the Hellenistic sort of investigation is not in accepting that such influence is or might be there. It is the matter of how these influences, going back a millennium before the VMs parchment dates, can be so readily apparent, while other pertinent influences, only a few centuries old at that time, can't be found just as well. I guess it's fairly simple really though, as long as the blinders of generic identity can be kept in place. But if the representation of VMs chevrons doesn't put the topic of heraldry on the table for further discussion in the view of certain investigators, maybe nothing will.