+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Analysis of the text (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-41.html)
+--- Thread: No text, but a visual code (/thread-2384.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
RE: No text, but a visual code - Linda - 26-12-2021
(26-12-2021, 05:55 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Look at this image
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Sufficient data have been provided in this forum to make a correct iconographic interpretation of this image and of the entire Quire 13.
It has? Funny how no one appears to be in full agreement about it.
Quote:You just have to take a look at these threads:
Do i really have to? Can you not summarise what about them in particular you are referring to?
So a quick look at the last one shows Vviews talking about a diagram regarding the origin of pearls, Koen mentions a discarded theory about making brandy, then mentions the possibility of it suggesting water flow (hey, i agree with that one!), Marco mentions canopies, but that he has found nothing convincing so far, Anton mentions circus tents or carousels but has no idea what the relevance would be, JKP mentions tents and grottoes in relation to bathing, and suggests this may have actual merit, Davidsch agrees with bathing rituals, stating it is not a normal balneological diagram but perhaps the tree of life/youth is involved; they continue to discuss tents and balnea, R Sale & Wladimir join in and basically agree with some earlier statements, Diane says she concentrated on the pole, and to read what she thought on a blog that no longer exists...i will stop here because it goes off tangent there but it seems sufficient to show that you need to clear up what your point is in referencing these threads since they don't seem to add anything to what you seem to be trying to say.
Quote:Dotted scallop pattern-roof tiles and Divine cloud- tent, both threads started by Koen
Under de big tent, thread started by Marco
Those umbrella, pinecone things, started by VViews
From the face of it, one vote for roof tiles, two votes for tents, one for pinecones and umbrellas in their place...not seeing your point?
Quote:I do not want to add anything else, except that the only possible interpretation is that it is about the stars that come down from the sky
You don't want to add anything else, but then you say the only (that is a pretty big add right there) possible (super big) interpretation is yours.
Meanwhile there is nothing in the image that speaks of stars to me except knowing your interpretation of the female figures as representing such, due to others in other quires interacting with stars (but then why are there both figures and stars if they are both stars?) and no sky that i can see, although i can understand the idea of rooves, tent canopies and umbrellas as standing in for same (although not pinecones).
As i have a completely different take on this image, i would say that in conjunction with even the small snippet of the threads that i paraphrased is sufficient data to reach the conclusion that yours is in fact not the only interpretation possible, and that sufficient data has not been provided to make a correct interpretation of this image, much less that in all of quite 13. I can't speak for the others but my guess is that their interpretations differ from yours also.
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 27-12-2021
Okay Linda. It is always good to disagree to advance the investigation.
I put this image
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
In the Voynich there are a few images that recall the roof of a tent o pavilion like that
In the VM the tents are clearly metaphorical, as Koen G wrote in the thread Divine cloud + tent
For me it is a metaphor for the roof of the sky, the last sphere of the medieval universe
I put the image from my previous post again
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Can you give me an alternative iconographic reading to the one I do, a reading that is consistent with the rest of the book and with the culture of its time?
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 30-12-2021
My interpretation of the Voynich iconography is practically the same as that made by Erwin Panofsky, one of the great experts in medieval and Renaissance iconology.
It is worth remembering his opinion, which was conveyed by Mary d'Imperio in her 1978 work 'The Voynich Manuscrit: An Elegant Enigma'.
This said Panofsky:
So far as can be made out before the manuscript has been decoded, its content would comprise first: a general cosmological philosophy explaining the medical properties of terrestrial objects particularly plants by celestial influences transmitted by astral radiation and those 'spirits' which were frequently believed to transmit the occult powers of the stars to the earth: second, a kind of herbal describing the individual plants used for medicinal and conceivably, magical purposes: third, a description of such compounds as may be produced by combining individual plants in various ways
A similar opinion was that of Father Petersen, also one of the first researchers, who said the following:
The illustrations in the manuscript make it appear all but certain that the text deals with medicinal plants and their use in medieval remedies. The drawings of folios 67-86 seem to illustrate astrological matters, and possibly the medieval theory of vital spirits functioning as animate beings represented by small nude figures
RE: No text, but a visual code - R. Sale - 31-12-2021
What we have here (IMO) are examples of proposed interpretation based on appearance. Panofsky said, "so far as can be made out" and Father Petersen said, "make it appear". And I agree with their interpretation of the *appearance* of the VMs illustrations. The difficulty is that much in the appearance of the VMs turns out to be problematic. Appearance can be misleading. Appearance can be deceptive.
If the interpretation of VMs appearance were clear and straight-forward, there would not be so many difficulties. Is there any example where the interpretation of appearance has advanced VMs investigation one step forward?
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 02-01-2022
The great value of the iconographic interpretation of the Voynich made by Panofsky and Father Petersen is that it fits very well with medieval thought. His ideas are like a mirror of the way the world looked at the time.
These are not unorthodox ideas in any way. It is the conception of the world of Christian authors, of Albertus Magnus or Roger Bacon. It is clearly seen for example in the encyclopedia by Vincent de Beauvais, in which we can read:
Some have said that there is no herb on Earth which has not a star in the sky which is concerned for it and causes it to grow
We see it also in the work The Image du Monde by Gautier or Gossuin de Metz as a design of God:
All difference that happens by nature in herbs, in plants, in animals, happens through the celestial power that God gave to the stars when he first formed the world
RE: No text, but a visual code - Linda - 02-01-2022
So why in quire 13 would there be such scant plantlife if it is about stars and plants? You say they travel in tubes, and yet they don't actually seem to get to anywhere a plant might be, nor do all of them do so. I think you have to show what exactly is going on with each drawing, whereas yours is an overall assessment that to me does not pan out.
(27-12-2021, 11:03 AM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Can you give me an alternative iconographic reading to the one I do, a reading that is consistent with the rest of the book and with the culture of its time?
In terms of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. i still think it is the Caspian sea, part of a trip around the world by following the many bodies of water. The tent appearing thing is the variety of river deltas that flow into the sea from the north, with the main rivers pianted blue to indicate fresh water replenishment, the top left iconography explains the mountain runoff which occurs towards the northwest shore, the nymphs in the water show depth, the nymphs along the shore identify other interesting hydrological features, like on the right side where the river diverted at the time to the Caspian intead of the Aral, which was also dry in that time and yet was drawn full, but lower, to show where the water went, and the Gorgan gulf at the southeast corner which is drawn as a protected port by use of tub-like iconography. The iconography is repeated in various places in the quire and in the rosettes and mean the same things, mountains, rivers, gulfs, freshwater, seawater, etc.
Plants need water more than they need stars, so i think my interpretation works just as well in that regard. The culture at the time was seafaring and colonizing, and portolan maps were well established, so i think that fits too.
RE: No text, but a visual code - R. Sale - 02-01-2022
Here's how I see it. We know that the sympathetic 'sidereal-botanical' connection was presumed to be a "fact", even though it is a load of bunk. The fact is that these assumptions were presumed to be valid.
We also have these quotes from early experts, commenting on the apparent presence of the presumed 'sidereal-botanical' connections as being represented in the VMs. Other investigators have agreed with this interpretation of the VMs. The VMs presents that "appearance". The VMs is a masquerade. This is the mask that it wears. There is a facade of false appearance, behind which a few glimpses of a C-14 relevant history can be found.
One of the first indications of trickery is the written text. The fact that VMs text remains unintelligible is seriously problematic to the assumption that the VMs is 'genuine'. Genuine meaning that it is an authentic product of some historical culture or civilization. It's not! So being "genuine" is out. Being something other, is in. Being genuine here is to be considered as an 'ordinary' text with no ulterior purpose. And in being "something other", please note that the current condition of the VMs is in a severely wounded and otherwise rearranged version of its original state.
There is no access to intelligible language through the written text, but there is information potentially available in the VMs illustrations. A long history of investigations has not produced very many worthy examples. Consider Newbold's interpretation of the VMs cosmos. This is not useful investigation. The devil is in the details, and so is the relevant information. Which of the important early investigators took an adequate look at the VMs cosmos? It is generally agreed to represent the medieval cosmos, yet it has none of the standard structure of the planetary spheres that was typical of that time. The VMs cosmos is something other. And the investigation of the cosmic details turns up an inverted T-O Earth, a nebuly line as a 'wolkenband' / cosmic boundary and much more.
The use of disguise is problematic in two ways. Important information is not shown plainly. Historical connections are more subtle and ambiguous. That makes them harder to find. But significantly, the greatest difficulty occurs if the image represented is unknown to the investigator.
Passing the VMs off as a gloss, produces very little. Digging into the details that show a relevance to history opens the possibility of further discovery. And the best of those discoveries, IMHO, are those that would seem to match and cluster with the C-14 dating.
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 02-01-2022
I insist that I only follow the iconographic interpretation made by great researchers of the Voynich in the 20th century, such as Panofsky and Father Petersen.
I can also add Mary d 'Imperio, who in some brilliant observations saw the parallelism between the rigid drawings of the herbs and the plumbing of pipes in Quire 13.
My only contribution is to suggest that the images in the book are intimately related to the script and that the script is so absurd to the modern mind that the only way to understand it is to first understand the iconographic message.
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 06-01-2022
In her work, The Voynich Manuscript: An Elegant Enigma, Mary d' Imperio did a wonderful summary of the research of the book until 1978, something similar to what René Zandbergen has done in the Internet age.
But she also gave her own opinions, some of great value. For example, her description of the drawing of herbs, roots, stems and leaves, as if they were molded from plastic. The almost mechanical rigidity of the plant drawing has been later noticed by other researchers as a distinctive sign of the herbarium.
But Mary d' Imperio went further. She saw the connection of the tubes, pipes, pods and structures that support the female figures in Quire 13 with the way the herbs are drawn.
These objects are drawn in the same chunky, blocky style of architectonic solidity as was noted in connection with the plants
And she gave some examples that relate the two sections and that give unity of meaning to the book.
For example, the two striking spherical objetcs in folios 83v and 90r1
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 11-01-2022
I want to insist on the observations that Mary D'Imperio made because I have not seen them anywhere else and for me they are of great insight. She gives some examples that relate the tubes of the female figures on Quire 13 with the drawing of the herbs.
I put one before, and now I put this:
A structure on folio 79v of three pipes surrounding a larger central tube resembles the root crown of the plant on folio 90r1
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
And this other observation from D'Imperio
The pipe-like structures that coil around the figures (and into which, or from which, thev appear to be transmitting some mysterious vapor or liquid) could well represent plant parts such as roots or stems in schematic form