24-11-2025, 04:19 AM
My apologies regarding the jumbles. It's messy in here. I will try to be clearer and more ordered
OK. I understand the idea of laying out the spheres separately instead of concentrically, to have a better look.
Luxurious vessels of celestially induced essences, not towers, gotcha, I misinterpreted what you were equating with the chosen Villena page, it hit me that perhaps the whole page was to be compared since i saw the commonality of 6 items laid out in a circular format, and then the slabs were around that, which seemed analogous to the slab designs around the vessels. I do agree the vessels look similar to the ones in the pharmaceutical section. I sometimes think of them as towers as they poke into the realm of the field of asterisks, which I think of as starlike, so it gives the impression of height.
TO Fortress and Castle equated to the latitude origin of the respective manuscripts, cool, I understand that.
Do you know further what is being shown on on the 6 towered page you initially posted? That one is not marked as a TO map, but are we to understand the same reference of the architecture being shown in the Europe quarter, and do we know what the numbers represent? Just curious.
I did understand you were equating the slab designs in the corners with the circular slab designs in the central rosette, but I don't see enough similarity between how they are presented to equate them as you do. But you did say it was the closest you could find, so I can go with that, I can see enough similarity. I am, however, not convinced that Enrique de Villena meant them to be his field of fixed stars.
You said
I took issue with that, if you meant by margins, the corners around the circular diagrams. I did not and still do not see those as anything but decoration. Space filler, as in space in the corners, on the page, as opposed to a vision of the outer edge of space in the universe, is what i was trying to say. That is why I was showing that often these corners of squared circles are decorated in designs that don't necessary reflect anything upon their astronomical contents within the circles. But you have explained that it is your own deduction, so I am satisfied enough to understand it with that caveat with reference to your description of the page.
I would have thought that the outer sphere of stars would be represented by the seemingly floating field of asterisks between the vessels, which do not resemble the slab formations. The fancy nebulatory outer edge could imply we are seeing just a glimpse of it, and perhaps that it is heavenly, but as you say, it would be unbroken and everywhere, encompassing all that we see, which can't be shown in a representation with the inner spheres exploded out into their separate components, hence this seemed a way to accomplish this. How do you think of this asterisk field if the slab field represents the sphere of fixed stars? As what we see, but the slabs are behind it, offering cosmic influence in the background? It seems to me the asterisks resemble stars more than the slab designs, which is why I could think of it as what we see, as opposed to the slabs, as these are not reminding me of what I see on a clear starry night, or anywhere really, they seem more abstract than representative, if we are talking stars.
OK. I understand the idea of laying out the spheres separately instead of concentrically, to have a better look.
Luxurious vessels of celestially induced essences, not towers, gotcha, I misinterpreted what you were equating with the chosen Villena page, it hit me that perhaps the whole page was to be compared since i saw the commonality of 6 items laid out in a circular format, and then the slabs were around that, which seemed analogous to the slab designs around the vessels. I do agree the vessels look similar to the ones in the pharmaceutical section. I sometimes think of them as towers as they poke into the realm of the field of asterisks, which I think of as starlike, so it gives the impression of height.
TO Fortress and Castle equated to the latitude origin of the respective manuscripts, cool, I understand that.
Do you know further what is being shown on on the 6 towered page you initially posted? That one is not marked as a TO map, but are we to understand the same reference of the architecture being shown in the Europe quarter, and do we know what the numbers represent? Just curious.
I did understand you were equating the slab designs in the corners with the circular slab designs in the central rosette, but I don't see enough similarity between how they are presented to equate them as you do. But you did say it was the closest you could find, so I can go with that, I can see enough similarity. I am, however, not convinced that Enrique de Villena meant them to be his field of fixed stars.
You said
Quote:In the margins of these pages, one can see those dotted slabs that represent the sphere of fixed stars
I took issue with that, if you meant by margins, the corners around the circular diagrams. I did not and still do not see those as anything but decoration. Space filler, as in space in the corners, on the page, as opposed to a vision of the outer edge of space in the universe, is what i was trying to say. That is why I was showing that often these corners of squared circles are decorated in designs that don't necessary reflect anything upon their astronomical contents within the circles. But you have explained that it is your own deduction, so I am satisfied enough to understand it with that caveat with reference to your description of the page.
I would have thought that the outer sphere of stars would be represented by the seemingly floating field of asterisks between the vessels, which do not resemble the slab formations. The fancy nebulatory outer edge could imply we are seeing just a glimpse of it, and perhaps that it is heavenly, but as you say, it would be unbroken and everywhere, encompassing all that we see, which can't be shown in a representation with the inner spheres exploded out into their separate components, hence this seemed a way to accomplish this. How do you think of this asterisk field if the slab field represents the sphere of fixed stars? As what we see, but the slabs are behind it, offering cosmic influence in the background? It seems to me the asterisks resemble stars more than the slab designs, which is why I could think of it as what we see, as opposed to the slabs, as these are not reminding me of what I see on a clear starry night, or anywhere really, they seem more abstract than representative, if we are talking stars.