Linda > 12-07-2016, 11:17 AM
Koen G > 12-07-2016, 02:00 PM
Sam G > 12-07-2016, 02:59 PM
Linda > 12-07-2016, 09:35 PM
(12-07-2016, 02:59 PM)Sam G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's easy to find comparisons between images in the VMS and virtually anything you want if you take things entirely out of context. In this case you've got a number of these pools of water in this section of the VMS and whatever they are supposed to represent they all seem to form a related class of objects, so if they are not all depictions of large bodies of water then probably none of them are. It seems pretty unlikely to me that all of the pools are intended to depict large bodies of water, and since the comparison with the Caspian Sea you've shown isn't all that precise, and since there are many bodies of water in the world with various shapes making it likely that at least one of them will be at least roughly similar to a pool in the VMS, probably the similarity you've noted here is simply a coincidence.
Wladimir D > 18-07-2016, 09:17 AM
Linda > 22-07-2016, 08:50 AM
(18-07-2016, 09:17 AM)Wladimir D Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I must according to my version to support this idea. However, during the reign of Ivan IV (the Terrible) traders - travelers have reported the king that the Caspian Sea and the Aral Sea is form a single body of water.
Over the past 50 years, the Aral Sea has decreased by 5 times.
Thus, it is possible for the past century due to earthquakes has disappeared an underground replenishment of the seas out of the world ocean.
The Caspian Sea is 28 meters below sea level.
Linda > 26-07-2016, 03:55 PM
Koen Gh. Wrote:Linda
I have not yet looked for an explanation for this folio myself, so I can look at your proposal in a relatively neutral way. I also know very little about this sea, its history and the peoples surrounding it.
Well, at first sight I'd say that yes, the Caspian Sea and the surrounding area do offer a possible way to explain this image. I also like your observation that the nymphs appear to imply that the water becomes deeper; I hadn't looked at it that way.
Quote:I see some problems though:
1) The most frequent remark about any Voynich analysis: much of it seems a bit random. Why include these areas around the sea and not others? Why all the different ways the areas are represented by? I've also received this comment at times, and it makes me think "Hey, I didn't write the Voynich, it's not my fault that they drew things like this!" Still, too much "randomness" undermines the credibility of an argument, and the more you can eliminate, the better.
Quote:Related to this: you say that the nymphs imply that the sea becomes deeper, but wouldn't that be more useful information for a river? Why would anybody want to know how deep the Caspian sea is at various points?
Quote:2) In my opinion, for an analysis like this, historical context is absolutely required. Who mapped this sea first? When? What did the map look like? Who had knowledge about this massive area in the early 15th (!) century or before? Keep in mind that Beinecke 408 is three hundred years older than the map you present here. Was anyone at that time able to draw up a map like this? Did they know how deep the sea was a various points? Are the areas that are marked by nymphs or other means the most important ones? Who would have had use for this?
Quote:Like I said, I don't know much about the history of this sea and the surrounding area, so I just took this from wikipedia:
"In the 18th century, during the rule of Peter I the Great, Fedor I. Soimonov, hydrographer and pioneering explorer of the Caspian Sea charted the until then little known body of water. Soimonov drew a set of four maps and wrote the 'Pilot of the Caspian Sea', the first report and modern maps of the Caspian, that were published in 1720 by the Russian Academy of Sciences."
This is why, at the moment, your interpretation seems problematic to me - but do correct me if I'm wrong.
Linda > 04-01-2022, 08:49 AM