+- 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: Why is Pisces first? (/thread-163.html)
RE: Why is Pisces first? - ReneZ - 30-01-2016
Oops, 21 April is a silly typo, of course, and that should be March.
That in the intervening centuries people let the calender get out of phase has nothing to do with precession, but is a miscount of the number of days in a year. It is an interesting suggestion that the person composing the zodiac cyle in the Voynich MS was trying to compensate somehow for this effect. One could look into that.
As regards the completeness and order of the cycle, I would turn the argument of JKP around: the fact that we see them in the correct order in the MS is strong evidence that in his area the pages have not been shuffled around.
But there is much more that we can say on this.
There are two signs at the end of one quire (#10). Then there is one quire (#11, which is a single large foldout) with only zodiac illlustrations, and then there is a quire fragment (#12) with two more illustrations.
At the start, as we have it in the MS, we have Pisces and half of Aries side by side on the same piece of parchment.
There is only one way in which one can fold the large intermediate foldout such that the second half Aries ends up next to the first. This is how it is now, and this puts all subsequent signs in the right order.
The remaining fragment is only one folio and has the next two signs.
We are missing Capricorn and Aquarius, but at the place where they should have been there is an excised leaf. There is a cut mark in the upper left corner of the next folio (f75) as evidence for this.
Finally, it is not possible to fold Q10 in a different way, such that Pisces ends up at the end, not, at least, without having other non-zodiac drawings ending up in between.
I guess the only way to become fully convinced of this is to try it out for oneself.
RE: Why is Pisces first? - -JKP- - 30-01-2016
I've always found it interesting that two of the zodiac symbols are repeated.
At first glance one might think that they were redrawn because the illustrator was unhappy with the result, but the content on the pages is quite different, the most noticeable difference being the lack of clothing (the clothed versions look as though they might represent real people), and the text is different, as well.
So why are Aries and Taurus repeated and not the others?
The VMS zodiac series is not as simple as representing one of each symbol. If the symbols were arbitrary and simply a traditional sequence (and not related to the outer rings), there would be no need to repeat them (I have no idea how the inner symbol might relate to the outer rings, I just know that in Medieval times people assumed relationships between astrological symbols/constellations and human events and body parts).
Something has been cut out between the two versions of Taurus.
You have to wonder if those missing pages are still floating around somewhere in a private collection. It's my guess that if the owner of the VMS removed pages to send to people who could potentially decode the document, they would choose ones with both pictures and text (e.g., plants or zodiacs) because the pictures could aid in deciphering the text.
RE: Why is Pisces first? - ReneZ - 30-01-2016
The small strip between the two Taurus images is similar to strips found in the folds of the bifolio f67-f68 and of the single folio f73, and is a kind of reinforcement that was sewn in at the time of the present binding.
I learned this as part of the answer to a question related to the bifolio 67-68. From the images, one cannot be entirely certain whether this is one very wide sheet (widest of all in the MS), or two sheets sewn together and these were the two ends.
It turned out to be the first option.
RE: Why is Pisces first? - -JKP- - 30-01-2016
(30-01-2016, 02:46 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The small strip between the two Taurus images is similar to strips found in the folds of the bifolio f67-f68 and of the single folio f73, and is a kind of reinforcement that was sewn in at the time of the present binding.
I learned this as part of the answer to a question related to the bifolio 67-68. From the images, one cannot be entirely certain whether this is one very wide sheet (widest of all in the MS), or two sheets sewn together and these were the two ends.
It turned out to be the first option.
Thanks for that piece of information René.
RE: Why is Pisces first? - R. Sale - 30-01-2016
Rene,
Yes, I thought so (re April), but there it is. You'll forgive me when I do the same?
Yes precession and the errors of the Julian calendar are separate, but they combine in a way to amplify the situation as it would appear to a person during that time. Precession has moved the equinox half way into Pisces by the time of the VMs parchment dates. And calendar errors have pushed it forward by at least a week more. And this occurs at the same time as the prime time for the composition of the VMs (roughly the first century after parchment manufacture).
It would not be possible, then, to present an annual cycle of zodiac signs, that begins in the spring, and still have Pisces as the last house of the sequence, given the location of the vernal equinox. Nevertheless, for those who come to the VMs with the expectation that a presumed medieval manuscript should follow traditional medieval standards - those set forth by astrology and the Zodiac Man - which always has put Aries first, then this is clearly something different.
This is a matter of the sequence in which the signs are encountered in the VMs. The interpretation and potential use of the information each page might contain is a separate matter. I believe there is only one option to create an alternate sequence in the zodiac part of the ms. Since much of the VMs Zodiac is on a single sheet of parchment, the alternative structure is to take it out, flip it over and rebind it. But this is unsatisfactory for several reasons and IMO not viable.
So in the VMs Zodiac sequence, Pisces first is Problem Number One. And we've looked at that some and found factors for a potential explanation. Problem Number Two is Aries. JKP mentions that the signs have been repeated. However, given that the number of encircling 'nymphs' here is only 15, the question is whether Aries has been duplicated, and there are now two whole versions of Aries, or whether Aries has been split in two and there are now two halves of Aries.
Problem Number Three is Taurus also appearing twice. Problem Number Three is Problem Number Two repeated. That's interesting, it looks like the same sequential discrepancy twice in a row.
Consider the pairing paradigm. Take a look at how many examples of pairing can be found in the VMs Zodiac illustrations.
.
RE: Why is Pisces first? - Linda - 24-01-2017
if you bind quires 10-12 I think it works out, with the missing page(s) being the last, which would likely complete the sequence, unless that quire is a cover for the other two, and it starts with Capricorn and Aquarius, being future times, then into the star circles, (and hopefully explanations to all of it) then into the rest of the zodiac? The star circles explaining precession, maybe? Can't tell, because they are both gone, so don't know which side of the page they sit, nor whether it was a double fold out, perhaps there is a second Pisces as well as doubles of the missing pages, or pages before, after, or in between, for that matter.
I have a vague idea that it is a history of mankind being shown. Pisces is first because of the precession idea already mentioned earlier in the thread. I am hoping that's what the star circles explain.
The hypothesis is that tubs and clothing are indications of civilized society, the tubs representing architecture and the clothing indicate culture, perhaps. Something about the feet too, how deeply they were entrenched, perhaps? Maybe if the feet are showing they got knocked off them? Other way around, it indicates them setting foot, leaving their mark, finding high ground?
The ages of Pisces back through to Gemini basically cover what is known of civilized history. Perhaps that is why there are two of Aries and Taurus, there is more known about them. Notice these all have the tubs, although they start to wane in dark Taurus, which takes us to about 4,286 bce. But lo, Gemini has some too, but they are standing on them this time. Could this mean living underground, in caves, mountains, perhaps? (Or perhaps that is where the indications were found, at dig sites?) One of them is not a tub like the others but could be a cave or quarry.
The rest are all naked and without architecture, nomadic peoples? Don't know whether the missing pages would be future or far past, but likely they were more naked ones, maybe that is why someone chose that leaf to be the one to take out, maybe send to someone? more of the same?
Back to Pisces, everyone is mired in their fallen architecture and there is no culture. ha. or maybe it's an indicative of coming back to a single culture but the nomadic culture has evolved into another. maybe it says get outta there and start exploring the world around you again, your house is about to be covered in sea water, indicated by the green? and then quire 13 takes you on a tour of the known world by water.
RE: Why is Pisces first? - Linda - 27-01-2017
I was looking at zodiac man again, there are a lot of visual similarities in the representations with our "zodiac" section, the way the fish are drawn, bull horns, etc. Also I noted that in keeping with body part theory seeming to fit with quire 13 from foot to head, the foot is connected to Pisces, so if the former idea has any merit, Pisces is first there too. The opposing sign to Pisces is Virgo, which also seems to be prominently featured.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
![[Image: zodiacman1411.jpg]](http://www.luminarium.org/encyclopedia/zodiacman1411.jpg)
![[Image: zodiacalman5.jpg]](http://www.luminarium.org/encyclopedia/zodiacalman5.jpg)
![[Image: zodiacal6.jpg]](http://www.luminarium.org/encyclopedia/zodiacal6.jpg)
This one made me think pairing paradigm:
![[Image: zodiacalman4.jpg]](http://www.luminarium.org/encyclopedia/zodiacalman4.jpg)
RE: Why is Pisces first? - Koen G - 27-01-2017
For thread restoration's sake, I wrote here before that during the first centuries BCE the Roman calendar corresponded to the months as we see them now in the VM, December being the tenth (decem) and final month. Helmut then added that a number of European calendars, including the Venetian one, also used to start on March 1. Apparently the general conversion to January 1 only came during the 16th century.
So if we assume that the intention behind the series was to use it as some kind of calendar (somebody wrote month names on it after all), and we change the question to "why is March first?", then the answer should be clear: because some calendars started with March.
RE: Why is Pisces first? - Helmut Winkler - 27-01-2017
(27-01-2017, 09:01 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For thread restoration's sake, I wrote here before that during the first centuries BCE the Roman calendar corresponded to the months as we see them now in the VM, December being the tenth (decem) and final month. Helmut then added that a number of European calendars, including the Venetian one, also used to start on March 1. Apparently the general conversion to January 1 only came during the 16th century.
Some calendars started on March 25 (Annunciationis Mariae), e.g Archdiocese Trier
So if we assume that the intention behind the series was to use it as some kind of calendar (somebody wrote month names on it after all), and we change the question to "why is March first?", then the answer should be clear: because some calendars started with March.
I think so too
RE: Why is Pisces first? - Linda - 27-01-2017
cool. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
also found this You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
the previous and next henry's regnal years started in September.
Interesting. In the calendar of Romulus, there is no Jan or Feb at all, the year starts in March. Could this be related to the "missing" pages? You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.