Chameleon is interesting choice. Looking at the bestiary illustrations, it really is a catch-all category. Everything from a serpent with two legs to a mostly camel, slightly lion hybrid. It variously states that the artist had never seen a chameleon, so pretty much anything goes. The only way to tell that it is a chameleon is that it is labeled as such.
Is that how it is in the VMs. Is this an "anything"? Is it that bad? - that ambiguous? = Viewer's choice.
Let's say that it is and go to part two. Long misnomered, the heraldic, nebuly line offers fewer choices. The interpretation is either valid or invalid. If it is valid, it is a cosmic boundary.
Taking the nebuly lines of the VMs as a version of a cloud-band type of cosmic boundary, the primary choice for the interpretation of the 'critter', from a 1400-1450 perspective, would be an Agnus Dei - or a chameleon. Despite the ambiguity-induced pareidolia, it does give off certain sheepish, headless fleece-ish sort of vibes.
Agnus Dei illustrations are frequently accompanied by artistic representations of cosmic boundaries of various designs. I did not see any chameleons associated nebuly lines, cloud bands, or cosmic boundaries.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
As may be noted in the perennial discussion, the purpose of the vertical markings remained unresolved until the discovery of BNF Fr. 13096 <JKP>. This example is chosen for its structure - having the cosmic boundary *between* the lamb and the droplets of blood. The unity of all three parts helps confirm the Agnus Dei interpretation.
It was further proposed <Koen> that if the Agnus Dei was a representation of Christ, the woman directly below might be seen as Ecclesia with a ring, representing Christ's marriage to the Church.
While the representation may look a bit weird [Anything goes.], the ideological perspective is certainly not out of place in a proposed medieval reconstruction. At the same time, the artist has also "hidden" a representation of the nine Muses in a half-arcaded tub. There's no problem seeing it. The problem is accepting it as *non-random*! In other words, it's been done on purpose by an artist familiar with the relevant information. And that is where the gap occurs, because to start with, we are generally not functionally familiar with that same, medieval information.
Is that how it is in the VMs. Is this an "anything"? Is it that bad? - that ambiguous? = Viewer's choice.
Let's say that it is and go to part two. Long misnomered, the heraldic, nebuly line offers fewer choices. The interpretation is either valid or invalid. If it is valid, it is a cosmic boundary.
Taking the nebuly lines of the VMs as a version of a cloud-band type of cosmic boundary, the primary choice for the interpretation of the 'critter', from a 1400-1450 perspective, would be an Agnus Dei - or a chameleon. Despite the ambiguity-induced pareidolia, it does give off certain sheepish, headless fleece-ish sort of vibes.
Agnus Dei illustrations are frequently accompanied by artistic representations of cosmic boundaries of various designs. I did not see any chameleons associated nebuly lines, cloud bands, or cosmic boundaries.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
As may be noted in the perennial discussion, the purpose of the vertical markings remained unresolved until the discovery of BNF Fr. 13096 <JKP>. This example is chosen for its structure - having the cosmic boundary *between* the lamb and the droplets of blood. The unity of all three parts helps confirm the Agnus Dei interpretation.
It was further proposed <Koen> that if the Agnus Dei was a representation of Christ, the woman directly below might be seen as Ecclesia with a ring, representing Christ's marriage to the Church.
While the representation may look a bit weird [Anything goes.], the ideological perspective is certainly not out of place in a proposed medieval reconstruction. At the same time, the artist has also "hidden" a representation of the nine Muses in a half-arcaded tub. There's no problem seeing it. The problem is accepting it as *non-random*! In other words, it's been done on purpose by an artist familiar with the relevant information. And that is where the gap occurs, because to start with, we are generally not functionally familiar with that same, medieval information.