• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

Heraldry: The Prequel

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Imagery
  • Heraldry: The Prequel
• Heraldry: The Prequel

• Heraldry: The Prequel

  R. Sale > 30-06-2016, 01:06 AM

  The recent observation that the dots were misaligned got me thinking about how one should evaluate visual details. When are such details decisive, when are they confirming, when can they be ignored. One option that opens the possibility of interpretation is the comparison with a known system. Heraldry is a known system, well established and far less changeable than the more glamorous fields of alchemy and astrology have been shown to be.
  
  In order to use the system, the proper images must be included in the illustrations. But the VMs is not an instructional text. It is a text for those who already know and therefore can recognize what the illustrations present. But what happens when the dots are not aligned? What happens when the standard example doesn't have as many blue lines as the VMs illustration? Does that invalidate the comparison? What happens if there are problems with the presumed standard. There were a number of years, way back when, when the Wiki representation of the Fieschi armorial insignia had the colors reversed.
  
  Here is the current Wiki version:
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  
  And here is the representation found on the tomb of Pope Adrian V.
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  
  And they are not the same. The difference is whether the top line is divided into thirds or into quarters. Quarters is a better arrangement because it conforms with the standard heraldic rule for primary tincture placement. But the real matter of significance is to determine the correct version of the standard example before it can be compared with the VMs illustration. Otherwise, those, who have already made this superficial comparison, will find it wanting. That determination is made with the blazon. And in this case, the blazon of the Genoese popes, is, 'bendy, argent et azur'. That is diagonally striped, and striped in pairs, with silver and blue. But it does not say how many pairs, it could be three pairs, which is shown in both examples above. This is called a bendy in six parts, but it could be a bendy in eight parts, or ten parts or twelve parts. The counting of parts was instituted in the 1800s to clarify matters, but obviously cannot be applied retroactively. So the VMs does not exceed the blazon definition, though one might expect with a tub, that the decoration goes all the way around.
  
  The thing about the illustrations is not that they are exact copies of armorial insignia. They are evocative representations of a particular, heraldic, armorial insignia and a particular ecclesiastical heraldic hat. A simple combination of two heraldic markers in a unique historical event. It is of course necessary to get the VMs patterns to a proper orientation. And this is done by removal of the radial distractions and viewing the orientation of the two blue-striped patterns as they exist on the page!
  
  Once the innate pairing of the striped patterns and the red galero come together, the historic identification should come into play. Numerous members of the Catholic ecclesiastical hierarchy would certainly have the potential to posit this identification and immediately see that the characters are in their proper hierarchical places in the celestial spheres shown in the illustration. Placement is objective, not subjective. The problem is that in modern investigation, these images are only seen as generic. Their evocative identities have been lost and a list of objective positional confirmations, including the papelonny pun somehow still fails the test of historically grounded identification even though its been intentionally placed in the illustrations. But what happens when we don't know papelonny?
  
  May the prequel expand your identifications.

• RE: Heraldry: The Prequel

  R. Sale > 30-06-2016, 11:05 PM

  There is a certain tendency in all of us, when comparing visual images, to try to have them match as closely as possible. What if the images compared are not identical? What if it's only sort of close? And the second issue is close to what? What source provides the standard example for the critical comparison?
  
  In the heraldic patterns of paly, bendy and barry, from the medieval perspective, there is no particular limit on the number of parts - though always an even number. It's just a practical limit. What matters in medieval heraldry is the choice of pattern and the application of tincture. The number of pairs of stripes does not have a decisive effect on the prospective identification for any 'pre-modern' time of VMs creation.
   
  What does have a decisive effect from the heraldic perspective is orientation. As the eye is naturally drawn to the radial orientation of the White Aries diagram, the blue striped patterns are also oriented within the radial perspective. And any investigator pursuing potential identities for these two patterns will probably come up empty handed. But the illustration clearly allows, though it is presented in a more subtle manner, that there is a second pathway of interpretation for the orientation of the stripes as they sit on the page with the radial influences all taken away. This is, in effect, a sort of optical illusion built into the illustration.
  
  If there is an investigation of the historic connections of this alternative version of pattern orientation, then a significant historical identification is possible. And the details found in the White Aries illustration and in other folios of the VMs Zodiac clearly offer further evidence to affirm this historical identification: hierarchical positioning, heraldic placement, page choice and the papelonny pun. What is also significant to note is that the interpretation with a significant historical grounding is the interpretation given this veiled, only subtly suggested, clearly secondary position. In other words, the author shows that deception is in play. A disguise has been created.
  
  There is still one aspect of comparison that may be apparent to keen observers, and that is a sort of line use that is not a necessary part of the identified, heraldic insignia. In one example the unpainted lines are divided into a row of little rectangles, giving the effect of a ladder, in the other case, a long, irregular streamer runs the length of the unpainted lines' interior. The representation in the first example is a good visual match for standard heraldic use of hatching lines, while the second doesn't have a good heraldic equivalent. What is their purpose? Clearly they make the patterns appear different, divergent.
  
  The author expects the reader to know what is in the illustration. And if such is not the case, then the patterns are disguised well enough to pass as generic. Identification has been made and confirmed. Visual distinctions are no longer of prime importance once an ideological identification has been established. From the heraldic perspective, it might look as though the details of these patterns were a combination of hatching lines and paint. How to make sense of that?
  
  What heraldry shows is that different methods of tincture designation are *not* used together. They need to be separated, and once this is done, the historical grounding should be clear. The veils of disguise have been lifted.
  .

• RE: Heraldry: The Prequel

  coded > 10-05-2017, 10:54 PM

  @R-Sale You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  

  Quote:What heraldry shows is that different methods of tincture designation are *not* used together. They need to be separated, and once this is done, the historical grounding should be clear. The veils of disguise have been lifted.

  You are completely right about this statement R-Sale and I have shown this in my book.  Another reason why I'm not posting this secret file is because if someone else figures it out from the, "Jupiter rising out of Aries" then it would add greater credence for what I have done.  A sort of confirmation of sorts.  The tubs is the key and Koen was on to something, but that is all the clues I will give.  Just focus a bit on Jupiter rising over Aries and look to the Heavens.
  
  I have to spill the beans this is the key right here in your statement below.  Your brilliant R-Sale you will figure it out I just know it.
  
  

  Quote:Numerous members of the Catholic ecclesiastical hierarchy would certainly have the potential to posit this identification and immediately see that the characters are in their proper hierarchical places in the celestial spheres shown in the illustration

  
  
  
  
  
• Next Oldest Next Newest