17-11-2020, 07:36 PM
bi3mw,
Yes, that needs to be the standard for identification. It isn't an illustration of Melusine, as a source for comparison, unless the source indicates that that it is intended to be an image of Melusine. Anonymous creatures need not apply, unless, like the dragon over the castle of Lusignan, the identification is implicit.
That being said, there is still a range of representative features for Melusine: full dragon, half-woman half-fish, half-woman half-snake, etc. Sometimes there are wings. Wings seem to be a fairly good indicator, in that there don't seem to be similar creatures having wings in other myths of this era. At the same time, a number of examples identified as Melusine do not have any wings.
Does VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. show an image of Melusine? Perhaps. And if so, which Melusine myth is it? Is there a companion creature in the VMs illustration that compares with the representation of the Golden Fleece? Perhaps.
These are not my discoveries. Surely they need to be questioned and discussed. The results, however, are too often ambiguous. And ambiguous results tend to be dismissed.
There is an alternative interpretation which I call provisional acceptance. If these identifications are valid, what does that tell us? As multiple identifications indicate a similar provenance, an area of interest develops.
Based on the similarities between VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and Harley 334 f57, the primary figure and four companion critters, what does Harley 334 have to say about the f57 illustration?
Yes, that needs to be the standard for identification. It isn't an illustration of Melusine, as a source for comparison, unless the source indicates that that it is intended to be an image of Melusine. Anonymous creatures need not apply, unless, like the dragon over the castle of Lusignan, the identification is implicit.
That being said, there is still a range of representative features for Melusine: full dragon, half-woman half-fish, half-woman half-snake, etc. Sometimes there are wings. Wings seem to be a fairly good indicator, in that there don't seem to be similar creatures having wings in other myths of this era. At the same time, a number of examples identified as Melusine do not have any wings.
Does VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. show an image of Melusine? Perhaps. And if so, which Melusine myth is it? Is there a companion creature in the VMs illustration that compares with the representation of the Golden Fleece? Perhaps.
These are not my discoveries. Surely they need to be questioned and discussed. The results, however, are too often ambiguous. And ambiguous results tend to be dismissed.
There is an alternative interpretation which I call provisional acceptance. If these identifications are valid, what does that tell us? As multiple identifications indicate a similar provenance, an area of interest develops.
Based on the similarities between VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and Harley 334 f57, the primary figure and four companion critters, what does Harley 334 have to say about the f57 illustration?
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)