Options

No text, but a visual code

Index
No text, but a visual code
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 14-07-2024, 03:02 PM

One of the biggest difficulties encountered by those who think that the VM script is a language, that is, a sound system, is the large number of characters that we see in the script. Except for the 20 or 30 most frequent, there are more than a hundred rare characters. How can this be explained? We may think that when writing by hand there are variations, but there seem to be too many for that to be a correct explanation.

There are glyphs that are very illustrative that we are dealing with a system of graphic representation rather than sounds. For example, those gallows whose only leg rests on the glyph [c], or the benched gallows that have another [c] inserted in the middle. Not to mention the gallows with their legs separated by several glyphs in the middle and resting on benches.

For me all this is an attempt to represent the movement and positions of the sun and the moon on the sphere as they travel through the ecliptic. This game between the sun and the moon has been brought to a notation system using pictograms that, as there are several scribes, allows for differences in interpretation. Hence the number of symbols is so large.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 27-07-2024, 03:20 PM

Naturally, like anyone who has a theory, I believe I am right. But I know well that my script solution is difficult to accept, since there is no known precedent. For this reason, I have always thought that the solution to the Voynich mystery must begin with its imagery, which is something that with study and dedication can be solved.

I have said on many occasions that I share the ideas of Panofsky, a great historian of iconology. Only exact knowledge of the iconology of the VM can put an end to its mystery. Within the imagery of the codex, perhaps the most attractive and difficult to resolve are the multitude of female figures in pipes. I would say that the interpretation of this is the key to the mystery.

For me it is the personification of the astral influences that Panofsky spoke of. They are a representation of the zodiacal stars, as the same figures on the zodiacal pages corroborate. They are represented leaving their place and descending to Earth through these pipes. They are the ones that create those strange herbs that we see.

If one day this interpretation gains a certain consensus, it will be clearer what the script is.
RE: No text, but a visual code

HermesRevived > 27-07-2024, 11:44 PM

(27-07-2024, 03:20 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Naturally, like anyone who has a theory, I believe I am right. But I know well that my script solution is difficult to accept, since there is no known precedent. For this reason, I have always thought that the solution to the Voynich mystery must begin with its imagery, which is something that with study and dedication can be solved.

I have said on many occasions that I share the ideas of Panofsky, a great historian of iconology. Only exact knowledge of the iconology of the VM can put an end to its mystery. Within the imagery of the codex, perhaps the most attractive and difficult to resolve are the multitude of female figures in pipes. I would say that the interpretation of this is the key to the mystery.

For me it is the personification of the astral influences that Panofsky spoke of. They are a representation of the zodiacal stars, as the same figures on the zodiacal pages corroborate. They are represented leaving their place and descending to Earth through these pipes. They are the ones that create those strange herbs that we see.

If one day this interpretation gains a certain consensus, it will be clearer what the script is.

I agree that the best approach is to view the work as a Mutus Liber, in the first instance. It is abundant in illustrations. It can be read textless. This provides some internal context, at least. It helps us to understand the purpose for which the text has been crafted. (I assume text and illustrations go together and the text serves the illustrations by some relationship.)

You and I largely agree, Antonio, on the nature of the work, as evident from the illustrations. It is an astrological herbal - or a work of astrological botany - fashioned on the model of medieval lapidaries and a stellar astrology of 360 fixed stars. (It is not at all clear from the illustrations, by the way, that it is a medical work.) We can be confident that the text (or notation or script, call it what you will) has been designed for this purpose.

Turning to the text, it becomes clear that it is not linguistic, despite first appearances. It is, rather, some eccentric development of astrological notation from the period before such notation was standardized by printed books (and the reception of the Hermetica in the Renaissance.)

This conclusion is not at all outlandish and shouldn't be hard to accept, but many researchers have a strong investment in linguistic or cryptological solutions. To some degree I feel this is technology driven and a product of our times. Many people in this game are not really interested in the VM - their interest (not unreasonable in itself) is in a knotty problem to which they can apply their favorite software. Since there are lots of resources for linguistic and cryptological computer analysis, it predisposes research along those lines. Such studies do reveal patterns and properties in the notation, but ultimately are fruitless because the problem is neither linguistic nor cryptological. It's a (very deep) cul de sac.

We can no doubt apply computer power to the astrological notation solution, but we need to do a lot of footwork before we are in that position, I think.

On my reading of the illustrations, I make a distinction between the celestial and terrestrial (mountain) nymphs, and I take it that the tubes and what not - in context - depict subterranean rivers and waters in a mountainous (alpine) landscape, not conduits through which the nymphs move from sky to earth as you are suggesting. I think the illustrations rest upon traditional cosmological parallels between the celestial and subterranean waters.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 28-07-2024, 04:17 PM

I agree with you Hermes that Voynich has always been colonized by people interested in linguistics, cryptology or computers. There have been few serious, academic iconological studies, which is where, in my opinion, the solution to this mystery lies.

I do not agree with you on the interpretation of the female figures, which I never call nymphs, because for me that is a serious error. In reality, the interpretation of Quire 13 would be extraordinarily difficult if we did not have the zodiacal pages, where we see the same female figures.

I am convinced that one day the interpretation will be so obvious that there will be surprise that it has not been resolved before. If each of these female figures holds a star, what else could they be?
RE: No text, but a visual code

Koen G > 28-07-2024, 05:30 PM

How common is it for an allegorical figure to hold the exact object it represents? Does lady Justice represent scales?
RE: No text, but a visual code

R. Sale > 28-07-2024, 06:46 PM

AGJ says:
"In reality, the interpretation of Quire 13 would be extraordinarily difficult if we did not have the zodiacal pages, where we see the same female figures."

Can you provide examples to show they are the same?
RE: No text, but a visual code

Bluetoes101 > 29-07-2024, 12:19 AM

(28-07-2024, 04:17 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I am convinced that one day the interpretation will be so obvious that there will be surprise that it has not been resolved before.

I have an interpretation. I shelved it because I'm not sure how I can show others without finding another exact example, and I'm not sure that is possible without finding another copy of the VM.

So, I'd be interested in what you and others would consider to be an acceptable interpretation, or at least a good one, without a "Rosetta stone" to reference (so to speak)?
RE: No text, but a visual code

ReneZ > 29-07-2024, 02:15 AM

(28-07-2024, 04:17 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I agree with you Hermes that Voynich has always been colonized by people interested in linguistics, cryptology or computers. There have been few serious, academic iconological studies, which is where, in my opinion, the solution to this mystery lies.

Here's a historical perspective of that idea.

In the 1990's the then Beinecke curator responsible for the MS basically said (paraphrasing here):
Leave the analysis of the book and the illustrations to the experts (medievalists, historians of art and science).
Where the amateur community can really help is by analysing the text using software, statistics etc.

Now this is not really what happened after that, but at least it is a sensible point of view.
(And I fully agree that everyone is free to pursue his own favourite interests).

I agree with the viewpoint that, what the text means (and implicitly whether it is meaningful or not), has to come from detailed, specific, concrete analyses. Here we have data that can be processed in an objective manner.
There is not much need for 'feelings' or 'suspicions' or 'expert opinion' to decide whether there is meaning or not.

Now, unfortunately, there is no such thing as a test for 'meaning'. Progress has been gradual, and indications are pointing either way.
It is true that some of the easy cases, where it would be clear that the text is meaningful, have not materialised.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 29-07-2024, 01:04 PM

There is no Rosetta Stone to interpret the VM but there are enough contemporary parallels to make claims with a high degree of probability. Apart from the lapidary of King Alfonso X, there is, for example, this illustration in which we see the personification of the planets holding stars.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

What we see in the VM is an obvious parallel: the female figures holding stars in their hands cannot be anything other than the personification of the fixed stars of the zodiac.

It is true that the Voynich codex is extremely complex and difficult to understand, but I have always had the feeling that there is a certain desire to obscure it further. Anyone who has been studying it seriously for years will surely come to the conclusion that it is a work that fits perfectly into its time.

Regarding whether the VM has any meaning, it seems like a pointless debate to me. How can a codex that has required sacrificing so many animals to obtain vellum not have meaning, whatever it may be? How can a codex that has required so much work on the illustrations and script not mean something?
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 06-08-2024, 08:18 AM

I like to remember from time to time that this forum is developed in English, a language that lacks grammatical gender. Does this have any relevance to the Voynich investigation? I believe that it does have one in relation to the iconographic reading of the multitude of female figures.

In the codex, made by people surely educated in Latin, we see that the drawings of the sun and the moon are characterized with the masculine and feminine gender. This is something that a native English speaker may miss. But this is because the noun sun is masculine and the noun moon is feminine in Latin, in languages derived from Latin and in other languages, but not in English.

The reason we see such a multitude of female figures in the VM is because they are a representation of the stars, which is a feminine name. On the zodiacal pages each of the female figures also holds the drawing of a star to reinforce the representation of its meaning.

This iconographic reading, which is so simple, is the first step to understanding the Voynich.
Next Oldest Next Newest

No text, but a visual code

Index

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code

RE: No text, but a visual code