22-03-2017, 09:53 PM
First I see this as an ongoing process subject to revision and expansion, not the final report on a fait acompli. The evidence continues to trickle in. Data collection promotes a fact based investigation. And when enough evidence accumulates, for some more so than for others, there are conclusions to be drawn and opinions to be stated. The next matter is to consider the standards of evidence and, other than to put in a suggestion for Deuteronomy, that is a matter that has generally been honest and mostly accurate.
And I certainly agree with Diane''s comment: "But if we don't already think we know what a picture is intended to say, and intended to represent, it is impossible to ask the data base to return us the matches we want it to"
And my example is the years of - albeit casual - VMs investigation *before* I discovered the name and the pattern identity of the traditional heraldic fur known as papelonny. It was the difference between night and day to discover its existence and to understand the intentional placement in VMs Pisces and Dark Aries.
Group data collection appears to provide a helpful set of examples in the investigation of cloud bands. Setting the florid, scallop-shell patterned cloud bands of the Apocalypse tapestry and the works of de Pizan aside, for a moment, it appears that the types of patterns used to compose these cloud bands where they occur in medieval illustrations, have been shown to be highly individualistic. However, there is this scallop-shell group and among them, there is this single example in the illustration of the cosmos from Oresme.
The comparison of the Oresme cosmos with the VMs illustration of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. was made back in 2014 (E. Velinska). This identification relies mostly on the similarity of the earthly sphere and the starry surroundings and less on the circular boundary line, which in the Oresme illustration is an elaborate blue and white scallop-shell design, while in the VMs it is only a plain ink line.
Later investigations by Don of Tallahassee pointed out an interesting banded pattern in the VMs central rosette, just outside the circular band of text. This is a design very much in accord with the scallop-shell pattern. The similarities are so strong, IMO, that putting this cloud band pattern around the central image of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. would enhance the original comparison to being second to no other cosmic illustration as a potential reproduction of this Oresme model.
But, in the VMs of course, these items are separated, not united. One thing it does show is that the artist did not lack the knowledge or the talent or the choice to do this. Is separation viable? Does strong similarity in the details go unnoticed and count for nothing? And what is the reason for separation? Can Oresme's cosmos be rebuilt with VMs parts?
Separation is disguise and it is also obfuscation. And despite compelling appearances, the VMs is also a text that has been formulated as a cultural artifact but is not the artifact of an actual, historical cultural entity like a tribe or a civilization of some type. Culture V* does not exist. An amalgamated text has been created as a facade behind which the parts of the cosmos, paired papelonny insignia and the origins of church tradition have been hidden. Intentional disguise reveals purpose, IMO. Data collection helps build interesting theories.
It is my theory, that the person who created the VMs, was well attuned to the relevant details of that time, so closely that the details of the Oresme cosmos could be recognized. And this person had the sophisticated knowledge of heraldry sufficient to do heraldic canting. But among the educated of that time and place, such would not be any sort of unusual information. Whereas, presently the details escape comparison because their sources have not been acknowledged. Maybe that will start to change. Let the data speak for itself.
And I certainly agree with Diane''s comment: "But if we don't already think we know what a picture is intended to say, and intended to represent, it is impossible to ask the data base to return us the matches we want it to"
And my example is the years of - albeit casual - VMs investigation *before* I discovered the name and the pattern identity of the traditional heraldic fur known as papelonny. It was the difference between night and day to discover its existence and to understand the intentional placement in VMs Pisces and Dark Aries.
Group data collection appears to provide a helpful set of examples in the investigation of cloud bands. Setting the florid, scallop-shell patterned cloud bands of the Apocalypse tapestry and the works of de Pizan aside, for a moment, it appears that the types of patterns used to compose these cloud bands where they occur in medieval illustrations, have been shown to be highly individualistic. However, there is this scallop-shell group and among them, there is this single example in the illustration of the cosmos from Oresme.
The comparison of the Oresme cosmos with the VMs illustration of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. was made back in 2014 (E. Velinska). This identification relies mostly on the similarity of the earthly sphere and the starry surroundings and less on the circular boundary line, which in the Oresme illustration is an elaborate blue and white scallop-shell design, while in the VMs it is only a plain ink line.
Later investigations by Don of Tallahassee pointed out an interesting banded pattern in the VMs central rosette, just outside the circular band of text. This is a design very much in accord with the scallop-shell pattern. The similarities are so strong, IMO, that putting this cloud band pattern around the central image of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. would enhance the original comparison to being second to no other cosmic illustration as a potential reproduction of this Oresme model.
But, in the VMs of course, these items are separated, not united. One thing it does show is that the artist did not lack the knowledge or the talent or the choice to do this. Is separation viable? Does strong similarity in the details go unnoticed and count for nothing? And what is the reason for separation? Can Oresme's cosmos be rebuilt with VMs parts?
Separation is disguise and it is also obfuscation. And despite compelling appearances, the VMs is also a text that has been formulated as a cultural artifact but is not the artifact of an actual, historical cultural entity like a tribe or a civilization of some type. Culture V* does not exist. An amalgamated text has been created as a facade behind which the parts of the cosmos, paired papelonny insignia and the origins of church tradition have been hidden. Intentional disguise reveals purpose, IMO. Data collection helps build interesting theories.
It is my theory, that the person who created the VMs, was well attuned to the relevant details of that time, so closely that the details of the Oresme cosmos could be recognized. And this person had the sophisticated knowledge of heraldry sufficient to do heraldic canting. But among the educated of that time and place, such would not be any sort of unusual information. Whereas, presently the details escape comparison because their sources have not been acknowledged. Maybe that will start to change. Let the data speak for itself.