• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

Morten St George Theory

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Voynich Talk
  • Morten St George Theory
• Morten St George Theory

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  -JKP- > 06-03-2019, 06:25 AM

  (06-03-2019, 06:20 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (05-03-2019, 11:49 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Very good. Nice to see it in context.
  
  Publication date, sometime in the first half of the 14th century.  
  
  

  
  JP, the context as it relates to the drawing appears to be entirely generic: bad faith receiving its just punishment. In 1250 (the start of the original composition per Linda), the Montségur massacre of 1244 would have been fresh on their minds.

  
  The context is not entirely generic. If you read it, you'll see the context is a history of France (focusing on the nobility) and part of the agenda is establishing the legitimacy of the French as being an "elevated" line of peoples descending from the ancients.

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  Morten St. George > 06-03-2019, 06:33 AM

  (06-03-2019, 06:18 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So the illustration could be referring to Béziers or to Lastours, but is probably Lastours since a stake is explicitly drawn.

  
  I also see that Lastours has a mountaintop fortress, which is sufficient for me to concede that you are probably right. I congratulate you on excellent research.

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  Linda > 06-03-2019, 06:37 AM

  (06-03-2019, 05:30 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (06-03-2019, 01:47 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.But what i am saying is the original manuscript, the one made in 1250 to 1274, only went to 1223 in time. Therefore did not include anything about Montsegur massacre for anyone to copy.

  
  Linda, since you have expressed no desire to point out King Philip's crown or royal attire in that illustration, I looked into the matter myself and found:
  
  "Quand, en ce début d’année 1243, les quelques cinq mille hommes de l’armée du Sénéchal de Carcassonne Hugues des Arcis, accompagnés de l’archevêque de Narbonne, Pierre Amiel,..."
  
  
  
  That has to be the answer. The guy on the left is royal officer Hugues who led the attack on Montségur, and next to him is archbishop Amiel (note the bishop's staff in his right hand). Don't be put off by his sword: bishop's engaged in combat during medieval times.
  
  Years ago, I was naive like you, but I have since learned to be skeptical of the truthfulness of anything and everything that in any way relates to the demonic writings of Montségur.

  
  Read the part of mine you quoted again, that is still my answer, you didnt say anything against it, just told a new story about the illustration that cannot have been drawn by anyone who knew what anything looked like.
  
  I was not the one who said it was a king, and i gave you every smidge of reference i had to show where that came from. Meanwhile you dont post a link, but it is off a Montsegur site, no surprise. That is not the image that occurs, it is of Mountsegur ii, the one we are not supposed to know what it looks like. It doesnt matter regardless. Your image is of noone alive at the time it was created, it is a fantasy. Putting names on them doesnt make it any more real, even if you got them completely right, they are drawn from the mind's eye, not reality. 
  
  Near as i can tell the manuscript just says barons and priests. I dont see an indication of specifics anywhere yet. 
  
  But the thing is, you post that like it is the first time you have seen it, and i think it is, or you would have said it long ago, to support your claim. just like you seemed to be oblivious to previous burnings of Cathars in a previous post. You are supposed to be the expert on this. But even though you just found this today, it has to be the answer, not a consideration or possibility?
  
  Why are you not skeptical of your own jumps to conclusion?

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  Morten St. George > 06-03-2019, 08:11 AM

  (06-03-2019, 06:37 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why are you not skeptical of your own jumps to conclusion?

  
  Linda, JP has done what I requested: he's found another mountaintop fortress where there was a mass burning of Cathars. I didn't think it possible. I read a lot about Béziers, Carcassonne, Montségur and the Cathar Crusade in general but never encountered the mass burning at Lastours. Not even the Wikipedia articles on Lastours and its Château mention it.
  
  None of this implies that the VMS does not depict Monstségur. I still maintain that it does. It only means that I cannot use that illustration as evidence except to say that it might not be coincidental that the towers depicted in that illustration and in the VMS look remarkably alike: they both depict Cathar mountaintop fortresses of the same epoch and therefore these fortresses (which lie in fairly close proximity to each other) may have been constructed to similar design.
  
  There is no need for us to continue discussion of that illustration. You've won. It seems I've been losing a lot of battles lately but I have not yet lost the war.

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  Morten St. George > 06-03-2019, 08:30 AM

  (06-03-2019, 06:25 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (06-03-2019, 06:20 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.JP, the context as it relates to the drawing appears to be entirely generic: bad faith receiving its just punishment. In 1250 (the start of the original composition per Linda), the Montségur massacre of 1244 would have been fresh on their minds.

  
  The context is not entirely generic. If you read it, you'll see the context is a history of France (focusing on the nobility) and part of the agenda is establishing the legitimacy of the French as being an "elevated" line of peoples descending from the ancients.

  
  JP, I was only referring the red writing immediately below the drawing which I presume is what describes the drawing.
  
  The towers of Lastours were apparently of the thick circular type which turns that skinny tower into a mystery. I was envisioning the bulge in the middle as the sling hanging by a rope from the top of the catapult pole, but in the context of Lastours, it has to be something else.

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  -JKP- > 06-03-2019, 08:44 AM

  (06-03-2019, 08:30 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
  
  JP, I was only referring the red writing immediately below the drawing which I presume is what describes the drawing.
  
  ...

  
  You "presume" it describes the drawing? Why don't you just read it?
  
  The red writing introduces the following section (Le premier chappitre, The first chapter) and expressly mentions King Philip (Du Roÿ Phelipe) and ends with "par bonne justice", but it is not a caption. It does not directly describe the scene above (which might be a summation-drawing that represents a number of burnings) and Philip does not appear to be in the picture. It is introductory to the general story that follows. The black text starts at Thebes and recounts the history from there.

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  Paris > 06-03-2019, 09:28 AM

  Quote:Do we know what it says about what we are looking at?

  
  Linda,
  I don't understand everything (it's old french).
  I translate in modern french first the red text :
  "Le premier chapitre du tiers livre des faits du Roy Philippe Dieudonné parle comme l'hérésie des amoniens fut ? ? par bonne justice."
  
  I translate in english :
  "The first chapter of the third book of the facts of the King Philip Dieudonne explains as the heresy of the amonians was ? ? by good justice."
  
  I don't explain all the black text but we can read the last word of the fourth line "en Egipte" = "in Egypt"
  
  
  Egypt, amonians (the worshipers of the cult of the God Amon) and french King Philip the second refer, for me, to the fifth crusade.
  The towers look like minarets and people on the left are dressed like muslims of Egypt during the 13th century.
  
  Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see anything about cathars on this painting.

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  -JKP- > 06-03-2019, 09:59 AM

  The black text says that philosophy flourished at this time and I believe the next part says that all the clergy studied for seven years [sigrant?], then mentions Thebes and an Egyptian named [Aro'nie?] and something about "In no part of the world can we not find passions/fires so [??] and so fervent."
  
  At the end it is,  Si nestoit pas seulement pour la desi tablete du lui?? or lie?? [text fades out] ne (If not but for the sake of the ... and then I'm not sure, it might be desire for the tablet ... etc.)

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  nablator > 06-03-2019, 10:24 AM

  (06-03-2019, 09:28 AM)Paris Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I don't understand everything (it's old french).
  I translate in modern french first the red text :
  "Le premier chapitre du tiers livre des faits du Roy Philippe Dieudonné parle comme l'hérésie des amoniens fut ? ? par bonne justice."
  
  I translate in english :
  "The first chapter of the third book of the facts of the King Philip Dieudonne explains as the heresy of the amonians was ? ? by good justice."

  Hello Paris,
  
  I am having trouble parsing some words too. Since I could not find anything about any "amonian" heresy, I figured it must be a spelling issue. Amonyens looks very much like amoriyens which sounds just like amauryens (after You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
  
  
  
  "Le premier chappitre du tiers livre des faiz du Roy phelipe dieudonne parle comment lerezie des amoryiens fu estaintte & punye par bonne justice."
  
  Modern French:
  "Le premier chapitre du troisième livre des faits du roi Philippe Dieudonné parle comment l'hérésie des Amauriciens fut éteinte et punie par bonne justice."
  
  English:
  "The first chapter of the third book of the facts of king Philip Dieudonne tells about how the heresy of the Almaricians was extinguished and punished by good justice."
  
  Different spelling here:
  
  
  "Le premier chapitre parle coment leresie fu attainte des amoriciens et pugnie."
  
  The preceding text is not linked to the illustration: "Le xxiiiie chappitre parle des barons et des prélas qui furent alobit du roi ph[ilipp]e aussi comme par miracle" = "The 24th chapter tells about the barons and the prelates that were (?) by king Philippe also as if by miracle".
  
  The following black text is much harder to read.

• RE: Morten St George Theory

  -JKP- > 06-03-2019, 11:23 AM

  According to Herbert Grundmann, some of the Amaurians were burned, others were imprisoned for life.
  
  I don't know much about them, but as far as I know, the Amaurian sect didn't have any direct relationship to Cathars.
  
  "In 1210 the Amalricians were arrested and tried. Nine of them refused to recant. They were publicly disgraced, and burned at the stake."
  
  The Amalricians were pantheistic (pagan roots?) and believed in free love (more pagan ideology). Doesn't sound like they and the Cathars would get along very well together.
  
  
  A.A. Davenport reported that the Amalricians were burned at Les Champeaux, outside of Paris, Nov. 20, 1210. That's probably what is in the drawing.
• Next Oldest Next Newest