Classical astrology in the text of the Voynich zodiac?

[MarcoP]

Thank you, Anton! The agenda you propose seems to me very useful. It will be fun to research this stuff!

Regarding the title post by Marco, I would suggest that for such kind of contextual analysis to be systematic, the following should be checked.

Let's say we have two sets of objects (A and B) and a set of contextually homogenous folios further subdivided into two folio subsets (I and II).

Just to be sure I understand, I will discuss a specific example:

• A Voynichese word(s) hypothetically denoting “warm” signs in classical astrology (Aries, Gemini, Leo, Libra, Sagittarius, Aquarius) shed-
  
• B  Voynicese word(s) hypothetically denotiing “cold” signs in classical astrology (Taurus, Cancer, Virgo, Scorpio, Capricorn, Pisces) ched-
  
• I f70v1 "Aries dark", You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. "Aries light", f72r2 Gemini, f72v3 Leo, f72v1 Libra, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Sagittarius
  
• II You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Taurus light, f72r1 Taurus dark, f72r3 Cancer, f72v2 Virgo, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Scorpio, f70v2 Pisces
  

1) Are the matches A to I and B to II unanimous? In other words, do objects of the A set not appear in the folio subset II, neither B in subset I?

Voynichese.com shows that this requisite is satisfied, but one has to ignore nymph labels. So, sets I and II are actually composed of uniformly organized sections of text (the circulate bands), not whole folios.

2) Do matches decribed in item 1) above appear consistently in all folios across subsets? Or there are any folios where the respective objects are absent?

This is not always the case and research for some kind of plausible spelling variation that could explain this will undoubtedly be useful. But see my reply to (5) below.

3) Are there any other objects beside those belonging to sets A and B that would exhibit similar behaviour in regard to folio subsets I and II?

If you are referring to other words showing unanimity with respect to A and B, in my intention, the words I selected are those with the largest “coverage” of folios. There likely are two words X and Y that respectively appear only in one folio of I and one folio of II.

On the other hand, there are other objects that could correspond to other similarly regular partitions of the zodiac (in classical astrology, associated with the elements, the seasons and other qualities). This is another interesting area of investigation (see “water” in the first post, as an example of what I am thinking of).

4) Do objects of the  A and B sets appear consistently in the same sub-context within a folio (e.g. in the same place of the folio, near similar objects in folios etc.)

Given that I am only considering the text in circles, there is some consistency in the organization of the text. Folios display a large degree of variation, but some folios look rather similar from the point of view of the general graphic organization (e.g. positioning of the nymphs). A detailed, word-by-word, comparison between the circular text in similar folios is something I am definitely interested in attempting.

5) Are object sets A and B really "sets" (i.e. are they homogenous in themselves), or they are rather artificial constructs by the subjective observer?

I guess you are here referring to the differences between EVA:chedal and chedy (for instance). This point is particularly interesting, because in order to search for (2) one has to introduce some lexical flexibility. It is good that (1) constraints the amount of flexibility that can be introduced without losing unanimity. Sticking to exact matches (no flexibility) would remove doubts about subjectivity, but it would also produce more limited consistency (point 2).

I guess I could work both ways:

• analyzing couples of exact words (e.g. chedy and Shedy)
  
• analyzing couples of patterns that could provide more consistency at the expense of some risk of being subjective (e.g. ched- and Shed-)
  

Thank you again for your helpful suggestions!
Please, let me know if I have misunderstood anything of what you wrote.