04-12-2017, 08:17 AM
Koen, sorry, but no.
The discussion is almost surreal.
The people whose opinions tend to be most referred to and valued in this forum are Erwin Panofsky and Alain Touwaide.
Panofsky, who was an art historian, saw a zodiac and compared it with the astrological drawings in the manuscripts of Alfonso "El Sabio".
Touwaide, a science historian specialised in medical manuscripts, wrote in 2016:
Also, two authorities on astronomical/astrological MSs have looked at the Voynich MS. Their opinions are well known.
Prof. Stolot:
Prof. Blume wrote in a private E-mail to me that he confirmed her opinion. He added that his books concern manuscripts with all constellations, while the Voynich MS only includes the zodiac.
We can add the Yale facsimile where Ray Clemens (curator for early books and manuscripts) mentions the zodiac illustrations in his Preface, and Zyats et al in Section 3.
One can hardly get a better set of references.
I cannot understand why one would insist on ignoring all that. It's like detaching oneself from reality.
The discussion is almost surreal.
The people whose opinions tend to be most referred to and valued in this forum are Erwin Panofsky and Alain Touwaide.
Panofsky, who was an art historian, saw a zodiac and compared it with the astrological drawings in the manuscripts of Alfonso "El Sabio".
Touwaide, a science historian specialised in medical manuscripts, wrote in 2016:
Quote:Questa parte del manoscritto è seguita da un'altra, fatta di tabelle, ruote astrali e asltri dati zodiacali che evocano l'astrologia e di consequenza l'astronomia e i meccanismi imperscrutabili delle sfere eteree,....
Also, two authorities on astronomical/astrological MSs have looked at the Voynich MS. Their opinions are well known.
Prof. Stolot:
Quote:I have inspected the VMS at Beinecke. The signs of the Zodiac do not present problems - they are simply not of the Arateia type but were modernized.
Prof. Blume wrote in a private E-mail to me that he confirmed her opinion. He added that his books concern manuscripts with all constellations, while the Voynich MS only includes the zodiac.
We can add the Yale facsimile where Ray Clemens (curator for early books and manuscripts) mentions the zodiac illustrations in his Preface, and Zyats et al in Section 3.
One can hardly get a better set of references.
I cannot understand why one would insist on ignoring all that. It's like detaching oneself from reality.