+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Astrology (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-34.html)
+--- Thread: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't (/thread-535.html)
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Searcher - 10-09-2019
(10-09-2019, 01:49 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.They don't really look like spots to me either, it looks to me like a decorative fur texture, but maybe some of the people who say there are spots can explain what they mean (assuming they are still on the forum).Thanks JKP! "Fur texture" is the best definition. Some time ago you compared the VMs Leo image to the "felines" with spots of the Aberdeen bestiary. If that pattern doesn't mean spots, but lines or strokes, we can compare our Leo's fur texture to this one of "felines - Cats" of the Aberdeen Bestiary or of "Cats" of MS. Ashmole 1511.
Maybe it's the blue paint splotches that are being interpreted as spots.
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - -JKP- - 10-09-2019
I'm not sure that the lines on the VMS feline are connected. On the body, I see a series of slightly curved marks, slanting to the right, then another row of similar curved marks underneath them. Three rows on the narrow part and maybe? a fourth row on the thicker shoulder part.
The face is a little different. The lines are almost connected and they are more seagull shaped than the ones on the body.
The texture on the neck is definitely different from the rest of the body... messier. The way it was painted might be somewhat obscuring the mane. If that part were painted darker, it would look like a mane.
So then comes another question... was the illustrator drawing a lion (not a very good drawing but still a lion) and the painter coloring it as something else? The blue color is not unusual. Many medieval animals are colored blue, but it's daubed on in such an odd and light-handed way, maybe so it doesn't cover up the lines? or because the painter didn't quite know how to deal with it? Or maybe the blue was running out.
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Searcher - 10-09-2019
In general, I'd put the VMs Leo image into the category of images of lions shown below as little poorer example. The main indications - a short-haired head, wavy or curly mane around the neck (sometimes, feebly marked).
The info to the images is contained in their titles.
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Searcher - 10-09-2019
(10-09-2019, 10:50 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So then comes another question... was the illustrator drawing a lion (not a very good drawing but still a lion) and the painter coloring it as something else? The blue color is not unusual. Many medieval animals are colored blue, but it's daubed on in such an odd and light-handed way, maybe so it doesn't cover up the lines? or because the painter didn't quite know how to deal with it? Or maybe the blue was running out.I have absolutely the same impressions and questions. The colouring is a bit strange, but this problem also more or less appears on the Twins page (the clothes of the "twin sister"), on the Virgo and Libra pages, and even partially lasts in the quire 13 and some other pages of the VMs. From the one hand, I think, the author didn't want to overlay the initial patterns, from the other hand, he/she obviously had some problems with blue paint.
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Monica Yokubinas - 15-09-2019
It is an extinct species of puma in Europe. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
"Scientists believe these animals had protruding ears that were round, tufted tails, a primitive mane in the neck area, probably on males, and very faint stripes like a tiger would have. " You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. These legends go back over 1000 years, and claims of large black cats on the moor. There is a short film on this site where someone captured video. Who knows?
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Anton - 09-10-2022
I counted the number of nymphs/stars for each diagram. Assuming that each nymph holds a star (and only one), the number of stars would equal the number of nymphs plus the "extraneous" stars in the centre of the diagram (if any).
March/Pisces: 19 outer ring, 10 inner ring, 2 extraneous.
Total: 29 or 31
April:
Light Aries: 10 outer, 5 inner
Dark Aries: 10 outer, 5 inner
Total: 30
May:
Light Taurus: 10 outer, 5 inner
Dark Taurus: 10 outer, 5 inner
Total: 30
June/Gemini: 5 outer, 16 middle, 9 inner
Total: 30
July/Cancer: 12 outer, 11 middle, 7 inner
Total: 30
August/Leo: 18 outer, 12 inner
Total: 30
September/Virgo: 18 outer, 12 inner, 1 extraneous
Total: 30 or 31
October/Libra: 20 outer, 10 inner
Total: 30
November/Scorpio: 4 outer, 16 middle, 10 inner, 1 extraneous
Total: 30 or 31
December/Sagittarius: 4 outer, 16 middle, 10 inner
Total: 30
Over the ten "months" the running total is 299 (or 303 if we count extraneous stars in). Supposing the two missing months have also 30 nymphs each with no extraneous stars, the running total for the year would be 359 (or 363 if we count extraneous stars). Assuming each of the missing months could have had up to two extraneous stars, the running total could make it up to 367.
Judging by this number, and also by the fact that the "backbone" of the design is the 30-piece cycle (with the exception of Pisces), the whole stuff might be the author's own proposal of a lunisolar calendar. To the extent of my knowledge, historic lunisolar calendars were either alternating 29-day and 30-day months or were comprised of 30-day months exclusively. I'm not aware of lunisolar calendars featuring just one 29-day month with all other months being 30-days (this if we count only nymphs) or comprised of a mix of 30- and 31-day months (this if we count stars as well).
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Anton - 09-10-2022
On a closer look, there are some nymphs not holding stars. E.g. in June or in July. I will update the count shortly...
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Anton - 09-10-2022
OK, second attempt:
March/Pisces: 19 outer ring, 10 inner ring, 2 extraneous stars.
Total: 29 nymphs, 31 stars
April:
Light Aries: 10 outer, 5 inner
Dark Aries: 10 outer, 5 inner
Total: 30 nymphs/stars
May:
Light Taurus: 10 outer, 5 inner
Dark Taurus: 10 outer, 5 inner
Total: 30 nymphs/stars
June/Gemini: 5 outer, 16 middle, 9 inner. Two nymphs in the middle ring do not have stars
Total: 30 nymphs, 28 stars
July/Cancer: 12 outer, 11 middle, 7 inner. One nymph in the outer ring and one in the middle ring do not have stars
Total: 30 nymphs, 28 stars
August/Leo: 18 outer, 12 inner. One nymph in the inner ring does not have star
Total: 30 nymphs, 29 stars
September/Virgo: 18 outer, 12 inner, 1 extraneous
Total: 30 nymphs / 31 stars
October/Libra: 20 outer, 10 inner
Total: 30 nymphs/stars
November/Scorpio: 4 outer, 16 middle, 10 inner, 1 extraneous
Total: 30 nymphs, 31 stars
December/Sagittarius: 4 outer, 16 middle, 10 inner. One nymph in the middle ring does not have star
Total: 30 nymphs, 29 stars
Total over 10 months: 299 nymphs, 297 stars
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Anton - 09-10-2022
The fact that most nymphs hold one star each, coupled with the fact that sometimes they don't, suggest the concept of correction. If you have to subtract (negative correction), just deprive some nymphs of their stars. If you have to add (positive correction), just introduce additional stars in the centre.
RE: Why the Voynich Zodiac - isn't - Anton - 09-10-2022
Here's a reference to one curious historic calendar - the calendar of Dionysios (the article is not free, but the preview is enough):
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Quote:The year was divided into 12 parts named after the zodiacal signs, beginning with Cancer. The first eleven signs had 30 days each, and the last sign Gemini had 35 or 36 days
Who knows, maybe here we have a similar design. It's really a pity that two signs are missing!