Pond creatures (f79v)

[Linda]

Linda, I'm completely with you on this.

The possibility of there being geographical representations (or something else) coded into the way things are drawn (and possibly even into the text) seems quite possible to me and you used exactly the picture that made me wonder about it (the pond critter where I removed some of the green paint to show the "flower" tail that looks like a strange flowing shape).



After I You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., I remember looking at that for a long long time and thinking, "What is really going on here and why did they hide that (and other things) under the paint?"

• Was it because the painter was obscuring something that was too obvious to the casual viewer, that might give something away?
  
• Was it a change of mind?
  
• Was it a reference to something related to the critter in some proverb or myth (like a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., for example)?
  
• Or was it because the painter didn't understand the significance of the illustrator's shapes and covered it up as anomalous or "unimportant"?
  

It wasn't just one tail, it was two.


FWIW, I'm pretty certain these pond critters were drawn by the same illustrator who drew the zodiac symbols. The confusion in hind-leg anatomy is the same as the zodiac animals and it's quite uncommon for this particular anatomical error to be made in quite this way. I collected thousands of examples of medieval animals and only found a VERY small number that show this strange propensity (one of which was in the Lauber manuscript I referenced You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).


As for whether the painter and the illustrator were the same person, I'm still unsure. I'm pretty certain there were at least two painters and I don't get the feeling that the sloppy one could have made these careful drawings. They are not expert drawings, the artistry is not good, but they are still moderately careful, within the skills of the person doing them.

Well, let's see, free association again. The tail on the blue one reminds me of the tail on the river near the bottom right on f80v. 

I cant imagine what that would mean though, except another river to be denoted here? Like there used to be a river but it got covered up by sea?

Or is it like you mention a similarity with Scorpio? The age of Scorpio maybe? Circa 20000 BC. 

Hmmm. Evidently this is during the ice age and people clustered in these areas, possibly because of the volcanism for more warmth? The animals would cluster there too.



This is a DNA cluster map from about that time. They disappear from Arabia after the ice age ends. That seems like quite a coincidence.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

May be related to the stone gates in the volcano fields, although generally they say 7,000 to 10,000 b.c for that, but some have been reclaimed by the earth so maybe longer.

I guess they would have deified the volcanos? I dont really see anything familiar in the ancient stones though, at least not with respect to the manuscript page we are talking about.







  

Wow. Are these the finials that are meant to be volcanoes? Circle leading to a tunnel through the earth.

Maybe the paint is purposely on top because these are places that got covered up with water at a later time, like recording change. The island areas were mainland then. The pattern of that end of the sea in this pic looks a bit like that tail on the red animal.



I read something about there being not much in the way of fossils, or not as many as they would expect. It is probably all under water.

Also the yellow animal now reminds me of the Cerberes that Marco just posted, except of course it has only one head. 



The tail on that yellow animal seems similar to the Awash river 



Well, that is all i can think of for now. What do you think? Anything relevant?