- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Morten St George Theory
- Morten St George Theory
-
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 27-11-2018, 09:45 PM
(27-11-2018, 03:06 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Are you 100% certain that your Photoshop is not enhancing a stalk reflecting through the page from f17v?
You could have answered this question yourself simply by looking at the scan for 17v.
If you look at the clip again...
you will see a curved green shape next to the lines that look like a straight stalk on 17r. It's on the lower-right quadrant. That's the bleed-through from the stalk on the obverse side, and it clearly reflects a curved viney slightly green stalk (with red berries, florets, or seeds attached), not a straight stalk with a flower on the end as is seen on this page.
I'm not 100% sure it's a flower on this side (f17r) because it's faint, but it certainly looks like one and is in the same drawing style as other flowers in the manuscript. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 28-11-2018, 12:01 AM
(27-11-2018, 09:37 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I did not know that there is no other instance where the page numbering comes into contact with page content. I have studied the shapes of the folio numbers quite extensively but I have not looked for overlaps. It's a big manuscript, there are zillions of details. It's impossible to study all of them, so I chose a few areas in which I am particularly interested and I focus on those. I've barely looked at the "biological" section compared to the plants and zodiac figures and I haven't really studied overlaps yet except for the text between the legs of the zodiac figures (there are many different kinds of overlaps in the VMS, some of them probably worth studying).
It looks like, when numbering the pages, great care was taken to avoid contact with the page contents. For example, when the page corner was occupied, they would move the number to the first free space on the left. The only exception is page You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. where we find contact with a shield or bulb (itself completely disconnected from the plant below) and where we also find genuine marginalia handwriting. Note that there was plenty of free space in the corner of 17r so contact could have been easily avoided. Pending further investigation, it is logical to suspect that the drawing is also marginalia. In fact, a possible motive for making contact could have been to draw attention to the importance of the shield. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 28-11-2018, 12:34 AM
There are other places where flowers appear to have been washed out or drawn over.
You're still trying to fit the data to your theory instead of observing and building a theory based on the data. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 28-11-2018, 03:55 AM
(27-11-2018, 09:45 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm not 100% sure it's a flower on this side (f17r) because it's faint, but it certainly looks like one and is in the same drawing style as other flowers in the manuscript.
I agree, your Photoshop did not enhance the wrong page, but I will not rule out the possibility that the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. stalk inspired the closely-parallel You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. stalk.
I was under the impression that Voynichese writing tried to avoid direct contact with the drawings. The fact that the shield (a flower that connects with a shield in the form of a fleur de lys) uniquely makes contact with the numbering is one thing, but how are you going to explain that the bottom of your stalk overwrites Voynichese writing? -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 28-11-2018, 04:28 AM
(28-11-2018, 12:34 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There are other places where flowers appear to have been washed out or drawn over.
You're still trying to fit the data to your theory instead of observing and building a theory based on the data.
JP, the flower at the top right hand corner of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is not connected to the plant below and is even separated from it by lots of text. On which plant page do you find another instance of that?
The only thing that can help my crazy theories (which are based on esoteric data) is breaking the VMS code. The shield, touching the number 17, allows us to infer that the solution to the decoding lies on the wheels of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and I plan to spend a lot of time on those wheels during the coming weeks. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
ReneZ > 28-11-2018, 05:55 AM
I really don't want to enter this discussion, but it would probably be almost devious to let (parts of) it run on without pointing out the long-known case of folio nr. 42. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 28-11-2018, 07:21 AM
(28-11-2018, 05:55 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I really don't want to enter this discussion, but it would probably be almost devious to let (parts of) it run on without pointing out the long-known case of folio nr. 42.
Unfortunately, it wasn't "long-known" to me but yes, we do have a precedent for a number overwriting page content though, unlike f17r, there seems not to have been much opportunity to evade contact. I guess I was looking for numbers touching something, not inside a plant. In any case, the general rule of evading contact where practical to do so remains valid.
On f42r, the number clearly overwrites the plant. So, since you are an expert in this field, please tell us, for f17r: Does the number 17 overwrite the plant or does the plant overwrite the number? The matter is important because it tells us which came first: the numbering or the marginalia. Thanks. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 28-11-2018, 08:28 AM
(27-11-2018, 08:24 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Quote: I provide evidence that it came into the possession of Viracocha Inca between 1410 and 1438.
A wonderful excuse to use one of my new emoticons
I got Google to define "fubar" for me.
I'm not so sure that you guys have a lot to brag about. A hundred years of massive research and investigation have resulted in a general failure to determine who wrote it or where and why it was written, never mind decoding it, leading some to conclude that the VMS has to be a modern-day forgery. The rational among us might suspect that you have been looking for answers in the wrong place. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 28-11-2018, 12:49 PM
I have found some information that I believe to be important. I am struggling to find the time to write it up properly. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 28-11-2018, 02:06 PM
(28-11-2018, 12:49 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have found some information that I believe to be important. I am struggling to find the time to write it up properly.
Thanks JP. We've been investigating and debating for a long time, so waiting a little longer to make some progress isn't a problem.