- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
- Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
-
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Philipp Harland > 23-11-2025, 12:02 AM
WARNING! STUPIDITY FROM A LAYMAN INBOUND.The VMS is very light on granular anatomical detail so I'm guessing actually identifying an animal of any sort will be almost impossible without quite a LOT of information we know beyond a shadow of a doubt working together and interlocking, some of which we might even not have adequate access to. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Bluetoes101 > 23-11-2025, 12:12 AM
No image in the manuscript will be identified without the writing. (This is a lie.. we have suns and moons etc, but I think you get the point
)
But I sit in between those who think this animal can be identified and those who think we must link it all. If we linked the pattern on the animal to the page, it is flowing water. Its the same pattern on the right. So linking this didn't really help. But if we consider it just like a marginal drawing, like in books of hours etc, the animal, the band, the lines and the woman with the ring might make up that drawing / story. It could have nothing at all to do with anything else. So while we don't know, we must just pick a path that seems sensible. To me that is "these things that seem together" rather than everything, because that is nothing... because we don't know, and will never really know until someone cracks the writing. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Koen G > 23-11-2025, 12:53 AM
(22-11-2025, 11:55 PM)Bluetoes101 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Right - Lamb of god (I think..) with ring and lady with ring. Do you know what this is about Koen?
Yeah, the image take some of Revelation 19 and 21. Keep in mind that Revelation is a very symbolic text that was written for a very specific group of early followers of Jesus, who would have effortlessly understood its symbolism. It was never meant for the Middle Ages, let alone today, but history decided differently about that
You can look for bride of the lamb, marriage of the lamb... Basically, the lady is Ecclesia, the Church, i.e. the faithful followers of Jesus. She is the same one that triumphs over the whore of Babylon, which was understood to be Rome. Revelation 21 also likens the New Jerusalem to the bride, so Church, Bride and City are all one and the same. Your image is a reflection of this text. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Bluetoes101 > 23-11-2025, 02:22 AM
Thank you Koen,
While GPT was smoking some sort of herbs on the lambs part, I think it was right for once on the woman going by your message. It also stated Ecclesia - and that Ecclesia represents the church, giving offering to the lamb, in this case a gold ring.
I shouldn't have been playing Pokemon Red rather than listening in religious studies, it seems I might have to go back and read some
-
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
R. Sale > 23-11-2025, 04:10 AM
Interpretation based on appearance (the "looks like" investigation) is subjective. It can be seen in other VMs examples (cosmos, White Aries) that the artist makes an effort to thwart this sort of direct correspondence. Structure, by comparison, is objective. What is on top is on top. What is in the middle is in the middle. What is on the bottom is on the bottom. It's not a "looks like" subjective interpretation. It is a structural, objective determination. Therefore, the question arises: What sort of evidence is needed to confirm an interpretation if objective evidence is insufficient?
=
Isn't the union of Christ and the Church referred to as a 'marriage'? Hence the ring.
On the other hand, hasn't the nymph in the upper left, holding the spindle, been interpreted as Ananke, Lady Necessity, with her attribute - the cosmic spindle? Such a mix of classical and Christian imagery would make a simple, unified narrative derived from just the illustration look a bit difficult. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Aga Tentakulus > 23-11-2025, 07:35 AM
Just look at the animals.
f116 the sheep/goat, Sterneichen bull and ram. Then there's the lion. And the animals by the water f79v.
The artist knew which animals have paws and which have hooves or claws. Even in the smallest drawing, f116, it can be seen clearly.
Whose feet are those on the cushion? Certainly not a sheep's. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Antonio García Jiménez > 23-11-2025, 09:45 AM
Thank you, Linda, for making the images I posted visible. I see we agree that this iconographic element should be considered in relation to similar ones in the same section of the Voynich Manuscript, although we may not agree on the ultimate meaning of it all.
To seek a religious meaning in that image, such as seeing an animal in it, seems to me an unfounded exercise in imagination. In a codex as extensive as the Voynich, there is nothing that suggests a religious interpretation, and besides, when we see an animal in the book, it is well drawn, not that kind of tangled mess that only serves to deceive the eye.
I don't want to repeat myself too much, I just want to emphasize that this iconographic element has a cosmological meaning for me. After all, a good part of the Voynich manuscript has cosmological content. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Jorge_Stolfi > 23-11-2025, 10:22 AM
(23-11-2025, 07:35 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The artist knew which animals have paws and which have hooves or claws.
Just a question: about Medieval manuscripts on vellum in general, how do you think that figures of people, animals, plants, objects, etc. were usually drawn by the scribes: (1) by looking at the thing itself, (2) from memory, (3) from imagination, or (4) by copying from some other drawing?
And about the VMS, in particular?
-- all the best, stolfi -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Aga Tentakulus > 23-11-2025, 11:44 AM
Since we are in the Middle Ages, the word ‘pet’ had a completely different meaning.
People had chickens, goats, sheep and many other animals in their own gardens or right next door. Today in Paris, Berlin, London, but also in smaller towns, you have to move around a bit to see them. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Koen G > 23-11-2025, 11:55 AM
(23-11-2025, 04:10 AM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Isn't the union of Christ and the Church referred to as a 'marriage'? Hence the ring.
On the other hand, hasn't the nymph in the upper left, holding the spindle, been interpreted as Ananke, Lady Necessity, with her attribute - the cosmic spindle? Such a mix of classical and Christian imagery would make a simple, unified narrative derived from just the illustration look a bit difficult.
Yes, it's about marriage. In the Christian Middle Ages, it was common to think of Christ as the groom. Even pious men would imagine their soul as a bride to Christ. (There are regional variations in the prevalence of such thought).
It's essential to understand that medieval Europeans were trained much more than we are to deal with sustained metaphors. When the bestiary author describes the behavior of some animal, he is actually talking about Jesus or morality. The Jewish bible is actually about Jesus (it isn't at all, but it's how Christians saw it, and still see it). The soul = ecclesia = a female figure = bride of Christ = Heavenly Jerusalem and so on.
One of the most popular medieval books was the Speculum Humanae Salvationis (countless examples survive), which has only one purpose: to show how things that are not about Jesus are actually about Jesus. Bestiaries: animals are actually about Christian morality. Ovide Moralisé: Greco-Roman myths are actually about Christian morality.
Of course, things could still be described for their practical purpose (plants, bathing, times of the year...) but we are still looking at the product of a society that would be considered religious extremists today. Jesus is always lurking in the background.
Just to name a recent example, the book about measuring land Marco posted in the other thread: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.