Options

No text, but a visual code

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

Antonio García Jiménez > Yesterday, 07:55 PM

That there is an intention behind the Voynich Manuscript, a systematic plan, seems obvious simply by looking at the last section of the codex, the so-called recipe section. Why write so many pages without illustrations except for stars if not because there is a preconceived plan?

In this section, if I've counted correctly, there are 312 stars with their corresponding paragraphs. Since two folios that should be in the center of the quire are missing, it's safe to assume that the authors intended to include 360 stars with their paragraphs. That is, 360 stars, as in the zodiacal section where the 30 degrees of each sign are represented by a female figure holding a star. In fact, a majority of the stars in quire 20 have a tail that appears to have detached from the hands of the female figures. There is an evident correspondence between both sections and an affinity in completing the ecliptic circle, regardless of what the chains of symbols mean.

What can be stated from this observation is that astrology plays a fundamental role in the Voynich, and that, as I have mentioned on other occasions, this codex is a herbal, but not a conventional herbal, but an astrological herbal.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Jorge_Stolfi > Yesterday, 10:18 PM

(Yesterday, 07:55 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In this section, if I've counted correctly, there are 312 stars with their corresponding paragraphs.

The stars do not correspond perfectly with the parags. (They mostly do, but the starts sometimes are higher or lower by one or two lines, and a couple are missing. I went through the parag breaks in that section recently, and I will be posting the results soon.) But the number is basically correct.

Quote:Since two folios that should be in the center of the quire are missing, it's safe to assume that the authors intended to include 360 stars with their paragraphs.

That is my estimate too.

Quote:That is, 360 stars, as in the zodiacal section where the 30 degrees of each sign are represented by a female figure holding a star. ... There is an evident correspondence between both sections and an affinity in completing the ecliptic circle, regardless of what the chains of symbols mean.

It is a natural guess. However, the number "360" was so important, all over the world, that the fact that both sets have 360 items can be just a coincidence.

I guess that the Sumerian geometers/astronomers divided the circle into 360 degrees because it is almost the number of days in the year; but they picked 360 and not 365 because it is divisible by 2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,12,15,18,20,28,30,36,40,60,120,180... (Did I miss any?) And it meshed well with their base-60 number system. Or maybe it was the other way around. Dividing a circle into 6 parts is even easier than dividing it into 4 parts; and 360 = 6x60.

I have a theory about the contents of that section, backed by some good evidence; but I am afraid that I am not allowed to mention it here.

I will only say that it is not a herbal and not about astrology, but a materia medica: a list of medicines and tonics, with the diseases they cure or the benefits they bring. Most would be plants, but not all. Drawings were not needed because those remedies would normally be obtained from an apothecary, not by hunting them down in the fields. The number of recipes may have been originally motivated by astrology, but I believe that astrology is not mentioned in the list itself. The stars in the margin are just decoration -- fancy "bullets" -- like the nymphs and stars in the Zodiac.

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

Antonio García Jiménez > Today, 10:20 AM

That Voynich is a herbal with a great astrological influence is self-evident if we rely on what our eyes see. To say otherwise is closer to a boutade than an empirical approach to an object of knowledge. Reading what you say and what I read from you in other threads, I get the impression that we're talking about different documents, said with the utmost respect.

The biggest problem I find with Voynich research is that there are many people who add layers and layers of speculation without any real basis. The authors of the Voynich manuscript drew hundreds and hundreds of stars. It's obvious they wanted to convey something. To say that the stars are mere decoration is, to put it mildly, rather unserious.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Jorge_Stolfi > 11 hours ago

(Today, 10:20 AM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.That Voynich is a herbal with a great astrological influence is self-evident if we rely on what our eyes see. ... Reading what you say and what I read from you in other threads, I get the impression that we're talking about different documents

Indeed, because I don't see any connection whatsoever, anywhere, between the herbal and astrological contents. The only "connection" I see between the herbal and astrological/cosmological sections is that their text is written with the same script, and they are bound together in one volume. But we know that the binding is a late (and incorrect) job, and the words of the two sections do not seem to have a significant overlap...

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

Rafal > 11 hours ago

Quote:Indeed, because I don't see any connection whatsoever, anywhere, between the herbal and astrological contents.

I think we have are two distinct things here:
1) general relationship between medicine and astrology in Medieval Ages
2) relationship between herbal and astrological section in VM

I hope we agree that 1) esisted while 2) is hard to spot.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Jorge_Stolfi > 10 hours ago

(11 hours ago)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think we have are two distinct things here:
1) general relationship between medicine and astrology in Medieval Ages
2) relationship between herbal and astrological section in VM
I hope we agree that 1) existed while 2) is hard to spot.

Yes, I agree.

Is there anything that could be a hint of a relationship between the Zodiac section and any other section? Including Cosmo?

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

Antonio García Jiménez > 6 hours ago

Perhaps to understand each other we should start with the basics. The manuscript contains a herbal, but it's not a conventional one. We can't identify the plants with certainty, and there's no text in Latin or any other known language that tells us about the properties and characteristics of those herbs.

  This unusual herbal is bound in a book to a set of folios with cosmological, astrological and zodiacal drawings with female figures that we also see in another section with tubes. In the same book we see another section with roots and leaves next to luxurious containers, roots and leaves that sometimes replicate the plants in the herbal.

  There's a theory that all of this was bound together without any connection between the parts. The fact that the entire book has the same undecipherable script is merely circumstantial. Is this possible? Yes, it is. Is it probable? No, it's highly unlikely.

  History has bequeathed this book to us as a whole, in a single piece. It is a fact that its authors intended to transmit it to us in this way, regardless of the various bindings it has undergone. The fact that we have not found that peculiar script anywhere else is the greatest proof that it was conceived for the entire book as a unit.
RE: No text, but a visual code

Jorge_Stolfi > 5 hours ago

(6 hours ago)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This unusual herbal is bound in a book to a set of folios with cosmological, astrological and zodiacal drawings with female figures that we also see in another section with tubes. ... [The] theory that all of this was bound together without any connection between the parts. ... [is] highly unlikely. History has bequeathed this book to us as a whole, in a single piece. It is a fact that its authors intended to transmit it to us in this way, regardless of the various bindings it has undergone.

But, again, it is almost certain now that the VMS existed for a time as a stack of loose bifolios or unbound quires, which were bound together when the Author was no longer around.

So the connection between the sections is not there, it only should be there...

The shared details between Herbal and Pharma suggest that the former is sort of an "expanded version" of the latter. Apart form that, to me each section of the VMS looks like a transcription (or summary, re-elaboration, imitation, ...) of a separate source book, probably by a different ur-author, with its own distinctive theme and format. Possibly even with a distinctive dialect...

Collections of disparate texts copied and bound together are not at all uncommon. I have seen examples in many online libraries. In the case of copies made for personal use, joint binding saved money, and possibly weight and space...

The shared script only shows that all sections were compiled by the same Author. The similar illustration styles between Zodiac, Bio, and Cosmo only say that they were probably penned by the same Scribe.

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

Antonio García Jiménez > 3 hours ago

Okay, this is your way of seeing it, which differs completely from mine.

I've worked in a library with manuscripts, so I'm used to seeing bound codices with different themes. To think that the Voynich Manuscript is something like that seems like a big mistake to me, regardless of the fact that several scribes worked on loose bifolios.

There's a preconceived plan, an idea that guides the entire book. I hope that with time I won't be the only one to see it.
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