08-06-2021, 07:30 PM
Indeed, it is the 'Curse of the Voynich' - like a sort of intellectual fly-paper - one has a hard time letting go. I've been following VMs discussion since a couple years before the C-14 tests were conducted. Over that time, a number of theories have come and gone. Repeatedly. Over and over, these aspirational translations are proposed and under examination they fail. Thanks to the investigators who expose theoretical flaws, but here we are in the carnival arcade shooting at cloud bunnies again. The problem is that these aspirational solutions developed in isolation do not stand up under general investigation.
Each of us has our own theory, it is true. That is a problem, and that is a problem that needs to be overcome. I do not value all theories equally. Some proposals are interesting and well done, and others have been more akin to fantasy, take Newbold's folly, a telescopic representation of the Andromeda galaxy. My theory is a collation of theories, a selection of what I feel is the best of the ideas set forth by various investigators over recent years.
There is no text that makes any sense, there are the illustrations. How are the illustrations to be interpreted? Is the VMs cosmos really intended to represent Andromeda? Some years ago, one researcher suggest the the cosmic illustrations of BNF Fr. 565 and Harley 334 as a better comparison, another investigated the variations in Wolkenbands, several others enumerated the 43 undulations, and someone else discovered the diagrams of Shirakatsi. Then there is the matter of the VMs mermaid, there's a similar representation in Harley 334, the mermaids in Lauber, the question Melusine and the distinctions between the Melusine of Lusignan and the Melusine of Luxembourg. The actual manuscripts of the BNF and Harley were both produced in Paris in the first part of the 1400s. And even a 7th Century Armenian astronomer was contemporary in early 1400s Constantinople. Meanwhile European connections survived the fall of Constantinople - for a few years - until the capture of Trebizond.
Much of this fits quite well within the chronology provided by the single source interpretation of the C-14 tests, or a bit later. Then there are the various sources regarding interpretations of the Golden Fleece. While representation is ambiguous, chronology is clear and compatible with the parchment dates. And when it finally comes to the heraldic interpretation of the blue-striped patterns on White Aries, where it is clear that there are two ways to interpret the orientation of the designs - either radially or in isolation - then it becomes clear that this ambiguity is intentional. The historical interpretation is there *only* for those who know the history.
The VMs may deal with plants and stars. Surely plants and stars were thought to be connected in the 1400s. The VMs may reflect that connection or appear to reflect that connection. However, in reality, there is no such sympathetic connection. The VMs may also reflect historical information ambiguously, and here the representations reflect historical facts. This divides VMs content into two different types: the actual representation of ambiguous information and the ambiguous representation of actual information. The pursuit of meaning depends on the accurate interpretation of content even though that content has been intentionally disguised.
Each of us has our own theory, it is true. That is a problem, and that is a problem that needs to be overcome. I do not value all theories equally. Some proposals are interesting and well done, and others have been more akin to fantasy, take Newbold's folly, a telescopic representation of the Andromeda galaxy. My theory is a collation of theories, a selection of what I feel is the best of the ideas set forth by various investigators over recent years.
There is no text that makes any sense, there are the illustrations. How are the illustrations to be interpreted? Is the VMs cosmos really intended to represent Andromeda? Some years ago, one researcher suggest the the cosmic illustrations of BNF Fr. 565 and Harley 334 as a better comparison, another investigated the variations in Wolkenbands, several others enumerated the 43 undulations, and someone else discovered the diagrams of Shirakatsi. Then there is the matter of the VMs mermaid, there's a similar representation in Harley 334, the mermaids in Lauber, the question Melusine and the distinctions between the Melusine of Lusignan and the Melusine of Luxembourg. The actual manuscripts of the BNF and Harley were both produced in Paris in the first part of the 1400s. And even a 7th Century Armenian astronomer was contemporary in early 1400s Constantinople. Meanwhile European connections survived the fall of Constantinople - for a few years - until the capture of Trebizond.
Much of this fits quite well within the chronology provided by the single source interpretation of the C-14 tests, or a bit later. Then there are the various sources regarding interpretations of the Golden Fleece. While representation is ambiguous, chronology is clear and compatible with the parchment dates. And when it finally comes to the heraldic interpretation of the blue-striped patterns on White Aries, where it is clear that there are two ways to interpret the orientation of the designs - either radially or in isolation - then it becomes clear that this ambiguity is intentional. The historical interpretation is there *only* for those who know the history.
The VMs may deal with plants and stars. Surely plants and stars were thought to be connected in the 1400s. The VMs may reflect that connection or appear to reflect that connection. However, in reality, there is no such sympathetic connection. The VMs may also reflect historical information ambiguously, and here the representations reflect historical facts. This divides VMs content into two different types: the actual representation of ambiguous information and the ambiguous representation of actual information. The pursuit of meaning depends on the accurate interpretation of content even though that content has been intentionally disguised.