Options

No text, but a visual code

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

Antonio García Jiménez > 27-01-2026, 11:52 AM

The Voynich Manuscript was conceived as a book to be seen, not to be read. And I am absolutely certain that not only its authors, but any educated person in Europe at that time would have perfectly understood what the book meant. Just like us, those educated people wouldn't know what the script means, but that wouldn't be a problem in understanding the underlying idea.

The central idea of the entire book is the power of the stars, astrology, a common practice at the time. It makes absolutely no difference whether the herbs we see are real or imagined. The stars have power over them, to create them or to bestow upon them their virtues.

Assuming this, which is most likely given the imagery in the codex, the script cannot be a language because its purpose is not to describe anything—neither the herbs nor the cosmological diagrams nor anything else. The script's purpose is simply to show. What the authors see as they are writing is the sun and the moon moving among the fixed stars. They see icons, icons they have created to accompany the central idea.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 14-02-2026, 09:02 AM

It is often said that the Voynich manuscript is much studied, but this is only partially true. The script has been and continues to be extensively studied, but not the imagery. In fact, since Panofsky, that is, for decades, no in-depth and extensive study of the iconography has been undertaken.

I know that partial images have been investigated, such as the castle on the Rosettes page, or the figures of the zodiac signs, and every attempt has been made to identify the herbs, but there is still no general awareness that everything is related, that it is a cohesive document. Indifference towards the images has reached the point where some claim they are merely decorative, when in reality, images were of paramount importance in the Middle Ages, as is the case with the Voynich.

A key element of the manuscript is the boundary of the medieval universe, the sphere where the fixed stars reside. To understand the images, it's necessary to consider how medieval people conceived of this sphere. It can be represented as a ball covered with tacks or holes from which the stars cast their light. In the Voynich manuscript, the sphere of fixed stars is represented by that wavy line that everyone will have seen in countless medieval manuscripts, and also (and this is the original part) by small bumps.

We see these small bumps in f68v3, f70r1, on several pages of Quire 13, in f86v3, f86v4 and of course on the Rosettes pages, which is the most fascinating representation of the medieval universe that History has bequeathed to us.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 20-02-2026, 04:14 PM

I'm going to try to explain the Rosettes page because almost all the images in the book, except the herbal one, depend on the interpretation of its images. This is a representation of the medieval universe from an astrological, not an astronomical, perspective. What the authors aim to show is not the universe in concentric circles, a common viewpoint in many manuscripts, but rather how the spheres that make up the universe are interconnected and transmit their influence, reaching all the way to Earth.

What we see are the sphere of fixed stars in the center, the top of the universe, the seven planetary spheres displayed on the page, and the sphere of the Earth in the upper right corner. That this last sphere is the Earth is clear from the representation of the castle and the walls and from its connection to the T-O map. Surrounding the circle are some strange shapes that could represent the movement of air and, to the right of the castle, some spear-like shapes ending in sinuous yellow points that most likely represent the sphere of fire, the one that separates the sublunar world from the celestial spheres, according to the Aristotelian universe.

I already talked in the previous post about the wavy line that marked the limit of the medieval universe and how the place where the stars are located is represented by those small bumps that run throughout the sphere. Those points we see in the bumps are the mouths of the tubes, some of which we see protruding from the central sphere and one of the other spheres. They represent the channels through which the stars transmit their influence. That's why it's an astrological representation, not an astronomical one.

Finally, in the central sphere, we see some of the luxurious containers found in the pharmaceutical section of the Voynich Manuscript. This is a symbolic way of representing that the essences of herbs have a celestial origin. There are some other things that reinforce the interpretation, but I think what has been said is enough to see that the Rosettes are an astrological representation of the medieval universe.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Koen G > 20-02-2026, 05:03 PM

In any representation of the medieal world or universe, it matters what is at the center. The earth is not in anything's orbit or perifery. It is the center of all things. Why would " a symbolic way of representing that the essences of herbs have a celestial origin" be in the middle instead?
RE: No text, but a visual code

Jorge_Stolfi > 21-02-2026, 12:30 AM

(20-02-2026, 04:14 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm going to try to explain the Rosettes page ... This is a representation of the medieval universe from an astrological, not an astronomical, perspective.

I agree only to the extent that it is a map of an imaginary place. Not necessarily the whole universe. It could be some imaginary archipelago like Atlantis or St. Brendan's islands. It could be even a sci-fi scenario like that of Lucian's You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (or of the stories that he was spoofing)

Quote:the sphere of the Earth in the upper right corner. That this last sphere is the Earth is clear from the representation of the castle and the walls and from its connection to the T-O map.

But the T-O map being outside of the NE rosette rather says to me that the rosette is not the Earth. At best, it would be the one of the nine "things" that is nearest to Earth. Maybe the first one that one reaches when coming from the Earth.

And perhaps the most direct way to do that trip is a stairway(?) from whatever continent is represented by the SW quadrant of the T-O map?

Quote:I already talked in the previous post about the wavy line that marked the limit of the medieval universe and how the place where the stars are located is represented by those small bumps that run throughout the sphere.

I agree that the central rosette includes a well-formed cloud-band. Between f68v3 and this fold-out the Scribe evidently learned to draw one properly, and learned what it meant. So the stuff inside that cloud-band is presumably located in the Heavens, while the stuff outside it (including the other eight rosettes) is not in Heavens ... but also not on Earth.

Quote:Finally, in the central sphere, we see some of the luxurious containers found in the pharmaceutical section of the Voynich Manuscript.

I still strongly disagree that those six things are meant to be containers.

Sometimes things totally resemble other things without being those other things. Just because the figure on f68v3 resembles a spiral galaxy, it does not follow that it is a spiral galaxy. Just because the animal in the margin of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. resembles an armadillo, it does not follow that it is an armadillo.   Just because some of the things in the margins of Pharma resemble Russian church towers, it does not follow that they are Russian church towers.

One argument for those six things in the central rosette being towers is that everything that is recognizable in that fold-out is drawn at a "building" scale, at least 1:100 (for the baldachins in the SE rosette) to 1:1000 or more for the castles, ramparts, volcanoes, etc. There is no indication that the those six things are in a radically different "vessel" scale. Quite the opposite: they are drawn as if they are planted on that plaza and reach up to and beyond the "starry sky".

It seems that one argument for the "vessels" theory is that the bodies of the leftmost and rightmost ones are too narrow in proportion to the roof to be towers. But, first, that argument can be reversed: the bodies of the two ones in the middle are too wide in proportion to the top to be stems of ciborium-like vessels, which are meant to be handles for the round part.

Second, there is a simple explanation for those narrow towers, namely (again) the "Artist's" inability to plan. He drew the two middle towers first, with "tower" proportions. But when he got to the two on the sides, he found that there was no space on the "plaza" for towers with the same width as the first two. Their position was constrained by the starry canopy, and the domes had to be of the same size. So he had to make their bodies narrower -- and even so the base of the rightmost one had to be tilted, and ended up extending a bit outside the rim of the "plaza".

Finally, reading them as six towers requires no stretched interpretation as symbolic vessels holding mystical plant essences or whatever. They are just six towers...

All the best, --stolfi
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 21-02-2026, 09:20 AM

You certainly have a prodigious imagination. The towers you see must be from a Star Wars movie, and the whole page, as you say, is a science fiction setting. The fact that there are vessels in the Rosettes that are similar to those we see in the pharmaceutical section is self-evident. Denying the evidence leads to a debate that ends in melancholy. I think your theory that the Voynich has an oriental origin conditions your perception and leads you to not see reality as it is.

Everything on this page has symbolic meaning. What you call the baldachin of the SE Rosette represents a roof, just like the canopy of the Rosette next to it. They are metaphors to represent what is above our heads, the celestial spheres.

The reason the Earth is in a corner and not in the center is that it's not an astronomical representation. We don't even see the zodiac signs. It's a representation of celestial influences and how they are transmitted from the outermost sphere, the sphere of the fixed stars, which is why it's in the center.

My interpretation of the Rosettes page is of everything we see, not just a few details. And it is connected to the rest of the codex.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Jorge_Stolfi > 21-02-2026, 03:12 PM

(21-02-2026, 09:20 AM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The fact that there are vessels in the Rosettes that are similar to those we see in the pharmaceutical section is self-evident.

Rather, there are "things" in the central rosette that resemble towers or drug vessels. Or the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. of Catholic lithurgy. Or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..   Or the upper part of the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..  Or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., particularly You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

AFAIK most people who looked at those things saw "towers". The theory that they are drug vessels seems to be quite recent.

Quote:I think your theory that the Voynich has an oriental origin conditions your perception and leads you to not see reality as it is.

Those onion roofs are totally not Chinese. They seem to be very characteristically Russian/Ukranian, a style of church towers that started in those bands some time before 1400, possibly by inspiration and exaggeration of Persian and Indian models.

One of the new results that I have seen emerge over the last year or so is that a large part of the VMS illustrations, perhaps most of them, were copied from a royal salad of European manuscripts that were somewhat popular at the lime. Like the Balneis Puteolanis, that Oresme book with the cloud-band and pea soup continent, that German almanac with the old lady with three olympic rings and the doctor examining urine in a perfume bottle, the Taccola waterworks, ... So I bet that those onion towers in the central rosette were copied from some random book too.

And perhaps even the originals were ciboria or bilboqets, but the Artist mis-interpreted them as towers...

And it seems that some people have happily accepted the "vessel" theory only because of their conviction that "it is obviously European" -- and "Russian" would not be European enough...

All the best, --stolfi
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 21-02-2026, 06:28 PM

There is no vessel theory, it is a fact, a piece of evidence. It's not just the comparison with the vessels in the pharmaceutical section; there's a technical study based on medieval ceramics. Bluetoes101 presented it in another thread with illustrative drawings. I trust he'll share it again here.

In any case, identifying every single detail isn't of great value. The point is to provide a coherent framework where all the images on a page or in the book fit together. I've provided that framework.

I have noted on other occasions that you discredit the originality of the Voynich Manuscript. Those who conceived it may have been inspired by some images seen in other manuscripts, but a simple glance through it is enough to perceive that we are dealing with a genuine and profoundly original work.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Jorge_Stolfi > 22-02-2026, 07:38 AM

(21-02-2026, 06:28 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There is no vessel theory, it is a fact, a piece of evidence.  It's not just the comparison with the vessels in the pharmaceutical section; there's a technical study based on medieval ceramics. Bluetoes101 presented it in another thread with illustrative drawings. I trust he'll share it again here.

Again, just because a drawing resembles some thing, we cannot say with certainty that the Artist intended to draw that thing. Especially when there are other things that also resemble the drawing. That will always be just a theory, not a fact.

A ceramic vessel can have any shape. Peruvian and other cultures produced thousands of vessels shaped like animals, people, and other things.

Quote:In any case, identifying every single detail isn't of great value. The point is to provide a coherent framework where all the images on a page or in the book fit together. I've provided that framework.

A coherent framework would interpret those six objects as towers. That interpretation would fit the scale and nature of all other recognizable objects on that fold-out, which are buildings, or large landforms like volcanoes and cliffs.  Interpreting them as Brobdignagian vessels for totally imaginary "celestial essences" would make them an incongruous detail.

Quote:I have noted on other occasions that you discredit the originality of the Voynich Manuscript. Those who conceived it may have been inspired by some images seen in other manuscripts, but a simple glance through it is enough to perceive that we are dealing with a genuine and profoundly original work.

The script is probably an original creation of the Author.

We cannot tell whether the text is original until we decipher it. And as you know, I believe I have got proof that the Starred Parags section, at least, is not original, but an almost word-for-word transcription of a much older book.

As for the images, there are two main types: (1) those that were clearly copied from other Medieval books, apparently with many basic mis-understandings; and (2) those for which we have not yet found a source.

The claim that type (2) are "profoundly original" is not objective, it is a statement of faith.

All the best, --stolfi
RE: No text, but a visual code

Antonio García Jiménez > 22-02-2026, 09:41 AM

This has become a dialogue of the deaf. It's not worth continuing the discussion. I have my ideas quite clear, as you seem to. Why not start your own thread instead of posting in every thread? That way you can share your ideas and see if many people follow and agree with you.
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