Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?

[Koen G]

Come on guys, let's be real for a second. It's not a sheep and much less a ram. There are just too many arguments against that interpretation.

Come on Koen Gh., You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. that You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is explained by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Could you consider applying the same standards to your ideas as to those of other people?

 All kinds of things appeared with nebuly lines, and wavy lines appear also in other settings.

I see two possibilities:

1. You know of numerous other examples of animals with nebuly lines. Then you should share them for discussion.

2. You don't know of numerous other examples of animals with nebuly lines. Than the above hand-waving statement is unfounded, misleading and most likely wrong.

Marco, the standards I apply to my own work are much stricter than the ones I'm using here. I am consistent in the source of the imagery I select (preferably Hellenistic art, but when that is unavailable earlier examples, later Roman copies or other relevant sources) and provide an explanation as to how this could relate to the rest of the section: the mythological image is a pronunciation hint to Greeks for the foreign plant name. When an element doesn't match, I mention it, and keep looking to find a better explanation. For example, in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. I explain that the stance of Nike's wings can be better explained by a common image of her on Hellenistic coins, which seems to have influenced the way the plant was manipulated. In the same post I also explain why I think specifically Hellenistic imagery was used as a source of inspiration. Your hand-waving statement is unfounded, but if you have remarks about specific aspects of my work, I'll be very happy to address them.

I'm trying to uncover a symbolic layer in the plants in this specific foldout, and my methodology is consistent. What the sheep proponents are doing here is bring on images from different times and traditions to say that this scaled, green, hornless creature is a ram. Even the image you produced in the beginning shows how obviously this creature is not the same. The beast in your picture differs from the Voynich animal in all crucial aspects: it has a hairy pelt, curled horns, a straight back, longer legs, a different tail...

Edit: about other things appearing with nebuly lines, just going back to the previous page in this thread I see lions, a bird and a fire-breathing creature.