• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

f69r circle

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Imagery
  • f69r circle
• f69r circle

• f69r circle

  magnesium > 14-07-2025, 03:19 PM

  I'm not making any definitive claims here, but I wanted to point out a superficial resemblance between the 16-wedge circle on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and this circular diagram of the 16 geomantic figures in the following 15th-century divination/astrology manual:
  
  St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. Sang. 756: Composite manuscript on geomancy, chiromancy, iatromathematics, astronomy, alchemy and medicine (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
  
  
  
  The You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. circle, for reference:
  
  
  
  The 16-wedge subdivision of the circle and the central floral motif stood out to me. However, the most glaring difference between the two is obviously that the figures themselves are missing from f69r. It's piling speculation on speculation, but I have half a mind that one of the VMS authors saw something like the Cod. Sang. 756 figure, had no knowledge of geomancy, and then either tried to draw something similar from memory or verbally described the figure to the illustrator.

• RE: f69r circle

  Koen G > 14-07-2025, 04:17 PM

  It's not clear to me what the main division of this circle is though (in the VM). There are:
  
  

  •  the 16 outer segments (16= a circle halved 4 times)
    
  • some 45 outer circles 
    
  • 12 colored bars
    
  • 22 bars with text
    
  • 6 inner sections marked by 6 star points 
    

  
  
  And none of these layers mesh well with one another.

• RE: f69r circle

  magnesium > 14-07-2025, 04:48 PM

  (14-07-2025, 04:17 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's not clear to me what the main division of this circle is though (in the VM). There are:
  
  

  •  the 16 outer segments (16= a circle halved 4 times)
    
  • some 45 outer circles 
    
  • 12 colored bars
    
  • 22 bars with text
    
  • 6 inner sections marked by 6 star points 
    

  
  
  And none of these layers mesh well with one another.

  
  Totally fair. A few scattershot thoughts, in no particular order:
  
  

  • To your general point, the fact that the layers are so messy points to a loose at best resemblance between the two figures. This is one of the reasons why I speculate that the diagram was designed by someone with no knowledge of geomancy looking at something like the Cod. Sang. 756 figure and then modifying it to their own ends.
    
  • Given the signs that at least some parts of the VMS were colored in just before it was rebound (and seemingly some time after the original writing), I'm not putting too much weight on the coloration patterns here.
    
  • Among the internal bars, there is a uniquely dotted-and-dashed bar at approximately 2:00. I have to wonder whether that could serve as a marker for what constitutes the beginning/end of a single message interspersed among the 22 internal bars with text (e.g., start at the dotted-and-dashed bar and read clockwise).
    
  • Clockwise strikes me as the favorable reading direction because if read out clockwise from 12:00, the 6 inner sections' glyphs connect to form the grammatically reasonable VMS word type dolsedy, with the ed and y being the most helpful pair to distinguish direction.
    

• RE: f69r circle

  Gregor > 14-07-2025, 08:30 PM

  In my opinion, the circle in illustration You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is symbolically identical to the circle in the fortress at Sagres, which, as we know, was built by Henry the Navigator. What knowledge this symbol holds is another matter. The most important clue in all of this is the clue leading to the Templars and their knowledge...
  

• RE: f69r circle

  R. Sale > 14-07-2025, 09:51 PM

  Another example of the possibility of hidden text. Statistical analysis is good, but translation comes down to specific segments of text.

• RE: f69r circle

  ReneZ > 14-07-2025, 11:40 PM

  Many years ago, Ellie Velinska noticed a similarity of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. with a winds diagram. I found it highly interesting, and have preserved the comparison You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

• RE: f69r circle

  Koen G > Yesterday, 12:25 AM

  Ellie's comparison is exceptional. One of those things where you're almost certain there must be some connection.

• RE: f69r circle

  magnesium > Yesterday, 12:49 AM

  (14-07-2025, 11:40 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Many years ago, Ellie Velinska noticed a similarity of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. with a winds diagram. I found it highly interesting, and have preserved the comparison You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

  
  To echo Koen, this is an exceptional similarity—and far, far better than the geomantic figure to which I cited. Goodness me. Thank you for flagging!
  
  Given how compelling of a match this is, down to the coloration, might this diagram and perhaps others have implications for the sequencing of how the VMS was pigmented? As you have noted, Rene, at least some of the VMS pigment was applied just before it was rebound, presumably after some of the bifolia were originally created. But in this case, the wind diagram's particular coloration seems to match so well to f69r, is it possible that those colored bands date all the way back to the creation of f69r? If memory serves, Jorge Stolfi has suggested that there were two different instances of people who applied pigment to the VMS.

• RE: f69r circle

  Jorge_Stolfi > Yesterday, 04:52 PM

  (14-07-2025, 03:19 PM)magnesium Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The 16-wedge subdivision of the circle and the central floral motif stood out to me. 

  
  Just a bit of geometry:
  
  In theory, dividing a circle into N equal sectors with ruler and compass is possible only for certain values of N.  One can divide the whole circle once into 3 sectors (easy) or 5 sectors (harder; must look it up in Euclid).  By combining the two one can get N = 3x5 = 15.  Then one can easily divide any sector in half, even using only a ruler (if the center and circle are given).  So one can get any N that is 2^k x 3^r x 5^s, where k is any non-negative integer but r and s can be only 0 or 1.  Thus one can have 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 16, 20, 24, 30, 32, 40, 48, 60, 64, 80, ...  But not 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 21 etc.
  
  One cannot get 360; but one could get 120 = 2^3  x 3 x 5, and then one could divide each of those tiny sectors into 3 parts with a ruler.  It would not be exact but the error would be too small to see.
  
  In 1796 Gauss discovered that one can also divide the circle with ruler and compass into You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., 257, and 65537 sides, which allows other values of N like 34, 51, 95, etc.  But the construction for 17 already is devilishly complicated...
  
  In practice, dividing a circle into any number of equal parts can be done fairly quickly by trial and error.  But I suppose that someone who had studied Euclid would have found this approach distasteful.
  
  But all of this is irrelevant for the VMS, because the Scribe(s) who drew the diagrams did not bother (or know how) to divide them into equal parts.  In fact, they could not even get their circles to close properly, even though they seem to have used a compass to draw them.
  
  And anyway some (if not all) of the circular diagrams were probably copied by the VMS Author from some prior source.  Thus any preference for 16 or other special numbers is to be attributed to that source, not necessarily to the Author.
  
  All the best, --jorge

• RE: f69r circle

  R. Sale > Yesterday, 06:06 PM

  May I (once again) remark, concerning Ms. Velinska and her comparison of the VMs cosmos with the cosmic illustrations in BNF Fr 565 and Harley 334, that this was a major discovery which needs to be fully recognized.
• Next Oldest Next Newest