ROS - does the bottom left echo the centre?

[Koen G]

Has it been mentioned before that the bottom left rosette looks like a scaled down diagram of the central one? I just noticed this, but many people have spent much more time on this folio than I have so far so I'm probably re-inventing the wheel.

Anyway, this is what I mean:

   

Similarities are:
* Six in the centre (green)
* Oval shape with asterisk stars, also centre (blue)
* Outward scallops like mountains, topped by rays (orange). There are more tiers in the central one.
* Four "pyramids" (pink), each touching tips with another cone shape (red).

[Anton]

I don't remember this mentioned. Yes, the match is interesting.

These pyramids look like volcanoes. If what you show to the right is the heavenly Jerusalem, I wonder what's the meaning of the four volcanoes?

The green is seven to the left, not six.

[-JKP-]

Koen, I've spent a lot of time looking at the rosettes folio, and writing about it, and I haven't seen anyone mention this before.

If you are right, if they are different versions of the same thing, then it's a huge insight into how the illustrator chose to represent certain abstractions.

[Mark Knowles]

I would be inclined to think that you are reading too much into the different numbers of things.

On this page there are a lot of things that one can count and compare. "6" is a very common number, if it was for example "23" then I think you could have a point. "*" symbols are found all over the page and in different kinds of context, so I tend to regard them as just graphical filler and so any parallel with the central rosette seems incidental. Overall on the page there is to some extent a common structure consistent with how the page is designed, but I think it is easy to see structure or patterns that are really just there by chance rather than deliberate design.

[-JKP-]

Maps (assuming this is a map) generally add structures according to design.

It's not uncommon for maps to include a closeup of something and a longer view of the same thing. It was not so common in medieval maps, but the VMS is not exactly common.

[RobGea]

Interesting, however the obvious non-match is, in the Centre the 'green' surrounds the 'blue' whereas in the bottom left it is the other way around.

[Anton]

I don't think the greens do correspond to each other. Koen seems to have established that supposed correspondence according to the count of six, but the count does not match, it's seven in one case and six in the other.

What's green in the centre are the towers or certain pillars of the heavenly Jerusalem (?), while the shape of the bottom left used to represent the Sun in medieval diagrams, if I remember correctly.

EDIT: Hmm, I counted once again, and the count indeed is six. Strange, it was seven yesterday :-)

[Koen G]

Anton: heheh, I thought for some reason you were counting the dot as well. I meant to reply and explain but you beat me to it
So yeah, it's a number of little things that start adding up.

Rob: correct, I also wondered about this. I have no idea what either roundel means, or why they should be connected. But let's say that they are, then how can we explain this discrepancy? 

Well, it might be a matter of perspective. In the central roundel, they wanted to draw six towers and they wanted the towers to be visible. But they also wanted to draw a "roof" of stars over them. Because we get kind of a three-quarter view and the towers take up a lot of space, it's all rather cramped.

The bottom-left roundel might represent a more minimap-like top-view of the same, where the location of the towers is at the centre of a large sky-dome. This might also explain why two depictions were necessary - different perspectives. But I don't know.. it's something I'm keeping in mind.

[davidjackson]

EDIT: Hmm, I counted once again, and the count indeed is six. Strange, it was seven yesterday :-)

Well, Jerusalem is famously built upon seven hills. But new Jerusalem is built upon six. You are obviously being transported between the modern and ancient versions of the Holy City

Never mind the hills. Has anybody ever noticed the Screaming King?

[Mark Knowles]

An interesting theoretical question is how can we say on the basis of those drawings whether any similarities, in so far as there are any, are real or merely incidental. It makes me think of a Rorschach test. Is one seeing patterns where there are none or are there genuine patterns? I have preconceived ideas of the page, so that could be seen as a bias. Nevertheless I think without those I would have some scepticism as to whether there is really anything tangible in common with the 2 drawings that couldn't be put down to a very slight coincidence.