17-12-2016, 08:07 PM
Another interesting image from Linda, post #44. The varying representations of the Zodiac man are another area where a gallery of images would greatly help an investigation. However, the relevance to VMs research is little more than tenuous. The Aries to Pisces sequence is traditional, which contributes to the oddity of the heterodox version found in the VMs zodiac.
And then there was that illustration of a human figure bent over backward to align within a circular representation of the Zodiac signs. Ouch!
In this image, Sagittarius is strange - there was only enough room for the back end of the horse. Capricorn appears to be a normal animal. Does it look familiar? And Aquarius, partially appearing out of somewhere and pouring water somewhere else. And look, it's a cloud band, but not one that was based on a nebuly line.
Sam G.'s description of the VMs appearance in post #47 is a reasonable assessment. However, the assumption that the appearance gives us a genuine and valid interpretation of content and origin has lead to various difficulties. Trying to make an actual, factual interpretation of the illustrations does not work. Placing the VMs as an artifact of any known culture has not worked. And efforts that continue along these lines remain problematic.
It is my opinion that the appearance of the VMs is not genuine. The appearance of the VMs is a false front, a constructed facade, intended to conceal the actual content of the manuscript. The evidence for this is the cleverly disguised representation dealing with the origins of the tradition of the red galero as an historical event and the construction of the papelonny pun in the VMs Zodiac illustrations. Deception is at work. It has worked; it does work because recognition has failed. Yet these hidden representations are there to provide significant, historical grounding and also to designate specific text segments, as a covert way to initiate the linguistic investigations.
And then there was that illustration of a human figure bent over backward to align within a circular representation of the Zodiac signs. Ouch!
In this image, Sagittarius is strange - there was only enough room for the back end of the horse. Capricorn appears to be a normal animal. Does it look familiar? And Aquarius, partially appearing out of somewhere and pouring water somewhere else. And look, it's a cloud band, but not one that was based on a nebuly line.
Sam G.'s description of the VMs appearance in post #47 is a reasonable assessment. However, the assumption that the appearance gives us a genuine and valid interpretation of content and origin has lead to various difficulties. Trying to make an actual, factual interpretation of the illustrations does not work. Placing the VMs as an artifact of any known culture has not worked. And efforts that continue along these lines remain problematic.
It is my opinion that the appearance of the VMs is not genuine. The appearance of the VMs is a false front, a constructed facade, intended to conceal the actual content of the manuscript. The evidence for this is the cleverly disguised representation dealing with the origins of the tradition of the red galero as an historical event and the construction of the papelonny pun in the VMs Zodiac illustrations. Deception is at work. It has worked; it does work because recognition has failed. Yet these hidden representations are there to provide significant, historical grounding and also to designate specific text segments, as a covert way to initiate the linguistic investigations.