RE: Two factor verification
R. Sale > 07-08-2020, 01:44 AM
Well, a factor is a factor, right? And there are two of them. Two is the doubling of one. And verification is identification. Knowing what's what. As opposed to not knowing what's what, and not knowing what you're not knowing.
Tradition exists in the VMs, but it is somewhat disguised by ambiguity, rather than being a straight-forward representation to other potential readers as contemporaries of that time and subsequently, from the VMs author's perspective. For more than a century of modern VMs investigation, traditional interpretations of VMs illustrations, such as the comparison of the VMs Creature (f79v) with a similar illustration in Harley 334 f. 57, and others were simply outside the realm of the then-current capability. That is no longer true. Melusine was a viable, mythical tradition among several, ruling families in Europe, for example, a medieval reality that quietly slipped away.
So, this is not the modern digitized system that verifies electronic codes. This is an old-fashioned process dependent on traditional information contained in visual images, and drawings in the VMs. It uses elements from disparate sources and forges them together in a combination which requires both elements to be recognized for a fuller understanding.
Suppose I have an old black-and-white photo of a blonde actress with black, bushy eyebrows, big black glasses, and a fat, black mustache. Who is it? Not a clue. If I were her, I'd get lasik and shave. This is the VMs cosmos. This is Newbold's folly. This is the VMs representation of Andromeda by Roger Bacon. This is not having a a clue as to what is being seen.
Now suppose some someone else sees that photo and says, 'I believe that the lady is Marilyn Monroe. I don't remember her as having that much facial hair. Maybe she was hiding the hair, or the hair was hiding her.' This is 2014 when E. Velinska compares the VMs cosmos with the Oresme and de Metz versions of the cosmos.
I take the photo to another person, who laughs and explains that all the black 'artwork' is a secondary addition. This is the representative iconography of Groucho Marx. It could be drawn on anyone. According to this source, it could be Jayne Mansfield, Phyllis Diller or who knows. This is the 2014 discovery of David Scheers to identify the Shirakatsi diagram of the Eight Phases of the Moon.
In either case, once the recovery of both traditional elements (or the double factor identification) occurs, the combined representation can be fully explained. That's how it works. Both items stand alone, independently, and when brought together they will mesh properly. Different systems but similar requirements in both situations.