- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
[split] Darker ink, retracing of text and drawings
- [split] Darker ink, retracing of text and drawings
-
RE: [split] Darker ink, retracing of text and drawings
Aga Tentakulus > 24-10-2025, 03:31 PM
I agree with Koen.
Based on basic principles, drawings were made in lead or tin (sometimes also in silver).
I find it suspicious that changes or additions were usually made with the same ink used to write the text.
Examples: lead and tin.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -
RE: [split] Darker ink, retracing of text and drawings
Bluetoes101 > 24-10-2025, 11:10 PM
(24-10-2025, 10:34 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The line we see of the hidden arm is actually quite... good?
I mean, its the first forearm growing out a boob I've seen so far, so maybe, it's the best so far!
I have a few issues in general with the idea of difficulty drawing this, but its all just interpretation.
As an anonymous theorist I have the privilege of keeping my arms and legs out the cart at all times and being endlessly wrong, so with that in mind I like to indulge the retracer, though I wouldn't go as far as Jorge. I just think if we counted all the modifications and additions to the manuscript which are rock solid, they are quite a few and I think its entirely possible they ventured into the text and drawings, I could show examples where it is completely clear they did this but its not in a "retracer" way.. but maybe they did that too, I'm not sold, but not writing it off either. -
RE: [split] Darker ink, retracing of text and drawings
Koen G > 25-10-2025, 09:27 AM
To keep focusing on that one nymph for a moment. The idea seems to be that there were reasonable drawings first, and then the retracer messed everything up. I would like to see what the original version of that nymph looked like. There is just no way you can make it look like a normal drawing of a human being.
The image I see in the Voynich nymphs is not one of a retracer making things unclear. Rather, I see an artist seeking refuge to a few familiar poses and struggling whenever they needed to deviate.
The standard pose is: close leg straight, far leg bent. Close arm goes from sholder/neck behind the body, bent at the elbow to allow the hand to rest on the hips or hang down somewhat behind the body. Far arm variable but often stretched out in front.
You will find a hundred deviations from this, of course, but these are the places where you often see them struggle. Where they sometimes have to erase and try again. Maybe in some cases ask someone else for help? When it comes to the drawings, there is no evidence whatsoever that an unknowing person acted later, independent from the first person. -
RE: [split] Darker ink, retracing of text and drawings
Jorge_Stolfi > 25-10-2025, 03:36 PM
(25-10-2025, 09:27 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I would like to see what the original version of that nymph looked like.
Well, here is my guess:
Quote:There is just no way you can make it look like a normal drawing of a human being.
Well, that can be said of most most nymphs in the VMS...
Note that the actual drawing of that nymph is only ~18 mm tall. About 1/3 of the size you see on your computer screen.
The proposed original above has the features of many other nymphs, including the two other nymphs in that group:- The outline of the left breast is just a deviation of the torso outline
- Only one arm and shoulder are visible
The face is one part I am unsure about. It is quite possible that the original had a smaller chin, about where the mouth is now. Note that the original nose was a bit shorter than the current one. Maybe the Retracer mistook the mouth for the bottom of the nose, and the chin for the mouth...
All the best, --stolfi - The outline of the left breast is just a deviation of the torso outline