22-09-2015, 10:17 PM
Let me reply with a response that is just as rambling 
The stars on f68v2 are arranged in blocks of 1(4), 9 (3 of them) and 8 (1 of them). 8 segments in the wheel.
On f68v3, they are arranged in blocks of 9(2), 8(2), 7 (3). 7 segments in the wheel.
v3 has "asterisks", drawn in a different manner from the main stars, radiating out between the "spokes" from the sun, which could also be the moon, although the moon is probably depicted on the reverse side.
Both v2 and v3 have the same number of spokes, if you interpret the lines with words in them on v2 as spokes - 16 each.
As to what this means, your guess is as good as mine.
Another irritation to the VM is that it doesn't seem to have any sign of the elements in these star maps. There just aren't 16 elements to the Ptomelaic scheme of the universe. In the Middle Ages there were usually the following in any sky map, usually in concentric rings with the element of Earth at the centre:
14 is the magic number, not 16.
Let's go back to constellations as depicted in sky maps. In general, when constellations were specifically depicted in "star maps" they were depicted in their correct configuration as you see them in the sky. If you don't depict the representation of the constellation, you're just drawing random points on a page. I've never seen a sky map that just shows dots with a name - what would be the point, if you can't locate the constellation later? The whole point of constellations was to identify iconography in the random mass of stars.
An interesting thought is that the stars in the VM appear to be drawn as fixed patterns, which is the medieval depiction of stars - they were assumed to be laid out as fixed points in the sky by God. It's not until you get past the Kepler revolution that people star depicting stars as random masses with no particular order to them, fixing only the ones that were interesting to them.
V1 is obviously the Earth (note the T/O map in the centre). We have the stars in the firmament and then the nebuly line, which most probably represents the exterior sphere beyond which is the celestial Divine realm (primum mobile). Whatever the "spokes" are, we have four that extend down to Earth, and four that only get to the nebuly line. I suppose that these could be interpretations of the four elements as they interact with the upper and lower boundaries of Earth.
And therein lies a major problem
If we accept that the centre of these diagrams is the sun or the moon or anything not the Earth then we've shot past the Middle Ages and out into the Copernican revolution. The Earth was at the centre of the universe, full stop, until the 1543 publication of De revolutionibus.... And heliocentralism didn't take off in the public imagination until the end of the 16th century. It makes no sense to say "these are the constellations or stars around the Sun".
The Aristotelian-Ptolemaic system of an earth-centred universe worked, with some minor quibbles that weren't picked up really until telescopes came into play. For the naked eye, it was a very complicated system, but it was one that allowed you to predict most of what was going on. In fact, the only real question that bought the system into disrepute was planetary regression, when it seemed as though planets were going backwards (the reason this happens is because the Earth is moving fast at that point than the planet in question, and speeds past it in space - for a few weeks it may seem as if Mars is going backwards every night).
So I don't think we're looking at maps of stars or constellations. Instead we're looking at some sort of astral attributes, or even something mad like stones linked to the different astral bodies. If we look at the faces over these pages they do start to resemble one another, making it possible to suggest that we're looking at the Earth, the Moon and the Sun in different phases. There certainly doesn't seem to be any suggestion that other planets known to antiquity are trying to get a lookin.
The stars on f68v2 are arranged in blocks of 1(4), 9 (3 of them) and 8 (1 of them). 8 segments in the wheel.
On f68v3, they are arranged in blocks of 9(2), 8(2), 7 (3). 7 segments in the wheel.
v3 has "asterisks", drawn in a different manner from the main stars, radiating out between the "spokes" from the sun, which could also be the moon, although the moon is probably depicted on the reverse side.
Both v2 and v3 have the same number of spokes, if you interpret the lines with words in them on v2 as spokes - 16 each.
As to what this means, your guess is as good as mine.
Another irritation to the VM is that it doesn't seem to have any sign of the elements in these star maps. There just aren't 16 elements to the Ptomelaic scheme of the universe. In the Middle Ages there were usually the following in any sky map, usually in concentric rings with the element of Earth at the centre:
- four elements (earth, water, fire, air)
seven planets,
the constellations,
the crystalline heavens
and the primum mobile (God), although the last two were sometimes merged into one.
14 is the magic number, not 16.
Let's go back to constellations as depicted in sky maps. In general, when constellations were specifically depicted in "star maps" they were depicted in their correct configuration as you see them in the sky. If you don't depict the representation of the constellation, you're just drawing random points on a page. I've never seen a sky map that just shows dots with a name - what would be the point, if you can't locate the constellation later? The whole point of constellations was to identify iconography in the random mass of stars.
An interesting thought is that the stars in the VM appear to be drawn as fixed patterns, which is the medieval depiction of stars - they were assumed to be laid out as fixed points in the sky by God. It's not until you get past the Kepler revolution that people star depicting stars as random masses with no particular order to them, fixing only the ones that were interesting to them.
V1 is obviously the Earth (note the T/O map in the centre). We have the stars in the firmament and then the nebuly line, which most probably represents the exterior sphere beyond which is the celestial Divine realm (primum mobile). Whatever the "spokes" are, we have four that extend down to Earth, and four that only get to the nebuly line. I suppose that these could be interpretations of the four elements as they interact with the upper and lower boundaries of Earth.
And therein lies a major problem
If we accept that the centre of these diagrams is the sun or the moon or anything not the Earth then we've shot past the Middle Ages and out into the Copernican revolution. The Earth was at the centre of the universe, full stop, until the 1543 publication of De revolutionibus.... And heliocentralism didn't take off in the public imagination until the end of the 16th century. It makes no sense to say "these are the constellations or stars around the Sun".
The Aristotelian-Ptolemaic system of an earth-centred universe worked, with some minor quibbles that weren't picked up really until telescopes came into play. For the naked eye, it was a very complicated system, but it was one that allowed you to predict most of what was going on. In fact, the only real question that bought the system into disrepute was planetary regression, when it seemed as though planets were going backwards (the reason this happens is because the Earth is moving fast at that point than the planet in question, and speeds past it in space - for a few weeks it may seem as if Mars is going backwards every night).
So I don't think we're looking at maps of stars or constellations. Instead we're looking at some sort of astral attributes, or even something mad like stones linked to the different astral bodies. If we look at the faces over these pages they do start to resemble one another, making it possible to suggest that we're looking at the Earth, the Moon and the Sun in different phases. There certainly doesn't seem to be any suggestion that other planets known to antiquity are trying to get a lookin.