06-06-2020, 09:29 PM
There are two discussions going on here, that are to some extent interwoven.
One is about terminology, i.e. how should one call a series of pages that shows emblems of the zodiac signs. This has both very relevant aspects and completely trivial ones. The trivial (even incorrect) part is that one should only call it a zodiac if all signs are in one and the same illustration.
The much more important distinction related to terminology is about 'constellations' and 'signs'. These are two completely different things. The aspects that we would now call astrological are related to the signs, not the constellations.
In ancient star catalogues, there are no signs but there are constellations. These are often subdivided in three groups: north of the zodiac, along the zodiac, and south of the zodiac. The middle group is usually the set of of twelve that overlap with the twelve sign of the zodiac.
(All this is greatly simplified).
The second discussion is about what we are (probably or perhaps) seeing in the Voynich MS.
Is it astrological? Is it a zodiac? Is it a calendar?
These options are not mutually exclusive. Quite the contrary. A calendar may or may not include zodiac illustrations, and may or may not have astrological information.
[ It is like asking: is this a banana or is this a fruit. These are not mutually exclusive, but some combinations are valid and some or not. ]
While the Voynich MS is unusual, there exist a grat number of manuscripts that include zodiac sequences and calendars, and these may help in trying to figure it out.
Calendars always (essentially always, I guess) have months names. These we also have in the Voynich MS, but they have almost certainly been added afterwards, so are not part of the original design.
Calendars essentially always have events listed by numbered dates, in tables, and this we do not see at all in the Voynich MS.
The months in medieval calendars have different number of days. The only thing we see in the Voynich MS is 30 items per sign, which fits perfectly with an astrological interpretation of 30 degrees per zodiac sign.
The odds are very, very strongly in favour of an astrological (in modern terms), or zodiacal interpretation of these diagrams, and against any form of a calendar.
One is about terminology, i.e. how should one call a series of pages that shows emblems of the zodiac signs. This has both very relevant aspects and completely trivial ones. The trivial (even incorrect) part is that one should only call it a zodiac if all signs are in one and the same illustration.
The much more important distinction related to terminology is about 'constellations' and 'signs'. These are two completely different things. The aspects that we would now call astrological are related to the signs, not the constellations.
In ancient star catalogues, there are no signs but there are constellations. These are often subdivided in three groups: north of the zodiac, along the zodiac, and south of the zodiac. The middle group is usually the set of of twelve that overlap with the twelve sign of the zodiac.
(All this is greatly simplified).
The second discussion is about what we are (probably or perhaps) seeing in the Voynich MS.
Is it astrological? Is it a zodiac? Is it a calendar?
These options are not mutually exclusive. Quite the contrary. A calendar may or may not include zodiac illustrations, and may or may not have astrological information.
[ It is like asking: is this a banana or is this a fruit. These are not mutually exclusive, but some combinations are valid and some or not. ]
While the Voynich MS is unusual, there exist a grat number of manuscripts that include zodiac sequences and calendars, and these may help in trying to figure it out.
Calendars always (essentially always, I guess) have months names. These we also have in the Voynich MS, but they have almost certainly been added afterwards, so are not part of the original design.
Calendars essentially always have events listed by numbered dates, in tables, and this we do not see at all in the Voynich MS.
The months in medieval calendars have different number of days. The only thing we see in the Voynich MS is 30 items per sign, which fits perfectly with an astrological interpretation of 30 degrees per zodiac sign.
The odds are very, very strongly in favour of an astrological (in modern terms), or zodiacal interpretation of these diagrams, and against any form of a calendar.