+- 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: Recovery of traditional terminology (/thread-2798.html)
Recovery of traditional terminology - R. Sale - 28-05-2019
Investigation of the VMs balneological section (Quire 13) will discover many potential distractions before, if ever, reaching the point of examining the traditional aspects of lines and line structure. Nevertheless, there is a type of line, patterned in a certain way, that is repeated on various pages of the ‘bathing’ section. This is a type of line pattern that wanders back and forth in a regular repetition of a wavy design, where the crests and troughs have been rounded and fattened. The descriptive terminology that has long been applied to the interpretation of these lines has included words such as ‘undulating’ and ‘meandering’, both of which are good descriptive terms for this pattern. Not that long ago, a new term was introduced to this insignificant sliver of VMs investigation, as another way to describe this same line pattern, where the crests and troughs are defined as bulbous. This term, which is actually a small set of words from the various European languages, derives from the earliest era of heraldry and is based either on the Latin (nebula) for ‘cloud’ or the German (Wolke) which is also the word for ‘cloud.’
The line pattern may now be well designated by either of these terms: ‘undulating’, ‘meandering’ or the new ‘nebuly / gewolkt’ set of heraldic terms. If the three definitions are equivalent, what is the difference between these words? The difference is not in the denotation /definition, but in the connotation based of the etymologies of the three words. ‘Undulating’ derives from the Latin (unda) for ‘wave.’ “Meander’ is the name of a wandering river in Asia Minor. And the nebuly / gewolkt (just nebuly for short) interpretation derives from clouds, as mentioned above. Which interpretation works best in the VMs illustrations? It may seem that waves and rivers are well suited to bathing. However, in the interpretation of the VMs pangolin /armadillo creature, the cloud-based interpretation is also interesting. If the two horizontal nebuly lines represent clouds and the short vertical lines below represent rain, then this is an illustration of the cloud-based process of condensation. And since the medieval perspective requires that matter is inert, the creature represents the necessary, motive force.
Nebuly lines occur in a few other parts of the VMs, outside of Quire 13, and nebuly line variations are also found in the VMs rosettes. A nebuly line is required to be bulbous, but that does not limit examples of nebuly lines to a single possibility. The bulb may split into two protrusions (also found in heraldry), or into a three-part head and shoulders projection. The outer part of the bulb may have a series of small rounded bumps creating the elegant, artistic, scallop-shell pattern, or the nebuly line may be rendered with an engrailed / invected line pattern throughout. This last is the case in the example of the VMs Central Rosette. The artistic term for this this technique from the scallop-shell pattern to many other variations is Wolkenband or cloud band. So the cloud-based connotation clearly plays a useful part in the interpretation of these elements as well.
The third location for a nebuly line is in the VMs cosmos (f68v3), where the cloud-based interpretation of the nebuly line, along with the equivalent 43 undulations, makes strong connection with the historical illustration, BNF Fr. 565 fol.23. This comparison is a separate topic.
Nebuly lines are found in a fourth location. Three examples occur where a distinctive undulating line is found as a leaf margin for the representations of several plants in the initial, botanical section of the VMs. Contrary to the previous three examples where a cloud-based connotation helped to clarify the interpretation, here none of the possible connotations seem to make much contribution. Besides which, real botanical specimens don’t do well in confirming this trait in plant physiognomy. So, there’s a problem. Just another in the list of VMs problems.
What has been lacking is not an enthusiastic investigation of the VMs. Every couple of months someone finds *the* solution. It’s like slow motion popcorn. What has been lacking is an understanding of the VMs. And by necessity this must be an understanding on our part that is commensurate with the information that the VMs presents. And in this example, that is provided by the recovery of traditional terminology from heraldic sources that now informs our interpretation, where it wasn’t informed before. The traditional set of heraldic terms, using the cloud-based interpretation, provides the most useful explanation and understanding in three of the four examples above. What’s up with the fourth example?
The fourth example of nebuly lines is really the first example sequentially, starting from the front pages of the VMs botanical section. For a long time, from the origins of modern VMs investigation, before the recovery of traditional terminology, the working interpretations did not make good sense, either as leaf margins or as anything else. The cloud-based interpretation does not help with the leaf margins, but it does lend significant clarity in the three other examples. These illustrations provide, and by extension the creator of these illustrations also provides, these demonstrations that rely on the use of the cloud-based connotation that was derived from earlier heraldic tradition, which was well established at the time of VMs creation and subsequently. Correct interpretation of these illustrations depends on the traditional knowledge of the cloud-based connotation.
Consider how attention might be drawn toward certain artistic elements in an illustration. If they are included with other similar and related elements, if they are shown where they belong, it is less likely that they will be given special notice. On the other hand, if those elements are placed where they clearly do not belong, then they will stand out. These three examples in the botanical section are nebuly lines first and leaf margins second, but only after traditional terminology has been recovered. They are not leaf margins first and wobbly lines of some kind as they have been misunderstood. An educated person in Europe in the 1400’s would not need to have all of this explained. Such a person, upon noticing the three examples scattered among the leaves, knowing the name and the origin of this design element, and thus being more alert to other occurances and aware of the proper cloud-based interpretations involved in the other three examples, would have a better understanding of these examples, an understanding that ostensibly possesses a greater similarity to what the person who created these images intended, than what it would be otherwise, without the cloud-based interpretation. As it has been. This is the significance of the recovery of traditional terminology. When it can be shown that something was known and used by the VMs creator, it only makes sense to try to use this as part of the investigation. And when VMs research begins with the knowledge of the nebuly line and its cloud-based connotation, then the potential opportunity exists for investigation to follow these traditional lines of inquiry, which are belatedly *new* to VMs research, but would have been much clearer to scholars of the 1400s, because this information (the cloud-based connotation of heraldry) was their tradition, as represented in the use and interpretation of the nebuly lines.
This is not the whole VMs solution on a platter, but based on the historical evidence, it would seem to be a small part of it, a genuine part of it, and perhaps even a key part of it. Potentially it is a part that opens a new interpretation, and a set of new interpretations based on the recovery of traditional terminology and other relevant bits of information. The cloud-based interpretation ties in with the investigation of the VMs rosette cloud bands and, also, with the cosmic comparison.
At this point, only two examples of these odd, ‘Aristotelian’ type of geocentric, cosmic representations are known that will fit this description: An inverted T-O Earth at the center, surrounded by stars, contained in a Wolkenband. And the two available illustrations that fit this description are the VMs cosmos and BNF Fr. 565 fol 23 located to Paris about 1410. Despite this structural similarity, however, the visual comparison presents two very different visual representations.
The visual differences are immediately apparent. The inverted T-O earth of BNF Fr 565 fol. 23 is a pictorial representation as is common in other medieval illustrations, such as BNF Fr. 1082, which is from a different copy of the same book by Nicole Oresme. The VMs is cleanly not a visual copy. Instead of being pictorial, the VMs has gone with a linguistic presentation. This is a total change in methodology. This is a code shift. It cannot help but be a completely different image. The surrounding stars are also quite different. The verbs used in Latin and French make no distinction between ‘surrounded’ and ‘encircled’. The comparison between the scattered stars of BNF Fr. 565 fol. 233 and the encircling stars of the VMs that look like beads on a string clearly demonstrate that there is a visual difference. Yet the similarity is still stronger here compared to BNF Fr. 1082, which has no stars at all. The third comparison is between the scallop-shell cloud band of the BNF Fr. 565 fol. 23 illustration and the nebuly line of the VMs illustration. Both are interpreted using the cloud-based connotation. Both show 43 undulations. Again, it is the same structure, but with a clearly differing visual presentation. And BNF Fr. 1082, meanwhile, has an elaborate Wolkenband based on a different artistic technique.
Finally, in the VMs, the jig is up. The trick is revealed. The great outer circle and the curved spokes that connect it can be viewed as part of the medieval tradition concerning the representation of textual banners, meaning that their presence in the illustration is ephemeral, *not structural*. The banners have been put in place; they exist in the VMs cosmos for the purpose of creating visual difference. Visual difference, the alteration of appearance and the retention of basic structure seem to be the lessons of the cosmic comparison. The recovery of traditional terminology provides a solid basis for further investigation. It also provides a first glimpse at how deep the enigma might be. Heraldic patterns and the recovery of traditional terminology from heraldry continue to play a part in further VMs investigation. The recovery of traditional terminology redefines the investigational space.