10-03-2026, 01:53 AM
Thanks.
Since we can't yet read the lables or the circular texts on the Zodiac charts, any argument for their being meant to be read or written clockwise (or not) would be speculative. That is probably the most fundamenal difference between our methods.
I am not caring about text deciphering for my own reasons currently, since I believe the visuals are in fact interpretations of the text the author(s) have tried to share. Of course, that may be diametrically opposite to your approach (since you see the visuals as mere decorations), leading me to understand why you (and some others) have been pursuing a text-based strategy for decades.
I think if there is a counterclockwise order to the nymph degrees order, which is my suggestion based on comaprative example of the Lapidary, the labels and circular texts should follow the same order as far as the Zodiac charts go, if they are each associated specifically with the nymph degrees rather than being narratives.
If not associated with the nymph degrees (which I doubt), perhaps somthing clockwise may be happening with the text, but I doubt it and I don't really care to find out about it now. These Zodiac charts serve only to organize in a specific counterclockwise order the degree figures (with their insignia and gestures) starting at 9/10 in the rings.
The visuals are plenty rich and meaningful for me to study, and I am sorry to see so much time has been spent on the text that has taken away from understanding the visuals better in the context of the mindset of its time. The Lapidary's order of reading the degrees should have been noticed and learned a long, long, time ago.
As far as what was written first or not, implicating how the page was drawn by the author(s)/scribe(s), it is anybody's guess, and does not matter to me. It does not matter where they started drawing them, at 12 or anywhere else. We can argue about secondary incidentals for another 600s years, but it makes more sense to focus first on essentials and those incidentals that may have essential significance. I don't plan on being around this VM research for decades, even a year, sorry—whatever the results.
I have now more reason to believe that the counterclockwise counting is going from outer to inner rings (and then to top, if needed for those two Zodiac charts) and they start at around 9 o’clock but will explain it later. I am still not fully decided on it.
Since we can't yet read the lables or the circular texts on the Zodiac charts, any argument for their being meant to be read or written clockwise (or not) would be speculative. That is probably the most fundamenal difference between our methods.
I am not caring about text deciphering for my own reasons currently, since I believe the visuals are in fact interpretations of the text the author(s) have tried to share. Of course, that may be diametrically opposite to your approach (since you see the visuals as mere decorations), leading me to understand why you (and some others) have been pursuing a text-based strategy for decades.
I think if there is a counterclockwise order to the nymph degrees order, which is my suggestion based on comaprative example of the Lapidary, the labels and circular texts should follow the same order as far as the Zodiac charts go, if they are each associated specifically with the nymph degrees rather than being narratives.
If not associated with the nymph degrees (which I doubt), perhaps somthing clockwise may be happening with the text, but I doubt it and I don't really care to find out about it now. These Zodiac charts serve only to organize in a specific counterclockwise order the degree figures (with their insignia and gestures) starting at 9/10 in the rings.
The visuals are plenty rich and meaningful for me to study, and I am sorry to see so much time has been spent on the text that has taken away from understanding the visuals better in the context of the mindset of its time. The Lapidary's order of reading the degrees should have been noticed and learned a long, long, time ago.
As far as what was written first or not, implicating how the page was drawn by the author(s)/scribe(s), it is anybody's guess, and does not matter to me. It does not matter where they started drawing them, at 12 or anywhere else. We can argue about secondary incidentals for another 600s years, but it makes more sense to focus first on essentials and those incidentals that may have essential significance. I don't plan on being around this VM research for decades, even a year, sorry—whatever the results.
I have now more reason to believe that the counterclockwise counting is going from outer to inner rings (and then to top, if needed for those two Zodiac charts) and they start at around 9 o’clock but will explain it later. I am still not fully decided on it.