|
|
Post by Daedalus on Dec 31, 2014 23:07:13 GMT
So I was admiring all of the symbolism we'd analyzed in today's Treatise panel, and I looked back at the others. They all have a multitude of symbols and foreshadowing involved. And while discussion pages exist analyzing most of them, as far as I know we've never really looked back at the old ones and seen what foreshadowing has been fulfilled and what hasn't. Treatise 1Treatise 2Treatise 3Treatise 4Treatise 5Treatise 6Treatise 7Anyone want to help and create a master list of elements in the Treatises with possible explanations, so we know which foreshadowing remains to be fulfilled? If so, PM me about logistics - it would be better to consolidate all of the information in one post so nothing is lost by accident, but we need to avoid another "IMPLYING IMPLICATIONS" scenario. I have an idea, but I want to run it by you guys first. |
|
|
|
Post by snipertom on Jan 1, 2015 9:32:14 GMT
Check out the tagging we did on the gunnerkrigg index as a starter. There's more there than that for sure in terms of interpretation
|
|
|
|
Post by matoyak on Jan 1, 2015 13:13:39 GMT
I sent you a PM of some stuff. Not certain if it's what you wanted or not, but I do hope it's somewhat helpful at least?
|
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Jan 1, 2015 19:20:42 GMT
I sent you a PM of some stuff. Not certain if it's what you wanted or not, but I do hope it's somewhat helpful at least? It was actually significantly more in-depth than I expected, haha. You did half of the job already! It was not quite what I wanted but it's great. |
|
|
|
Post by matoyak on Jan 1, 2015 22:29:58 GMT
I sent you a PM of some stuff. Not certain if it's what you wanted or not, but I do hope it's somewhat helpful at least? It was actually significantly more in-depth than I expected, haha. You did half of the job already! It was not quite what I wanted but it's great. Yay, I help!  (I actually cut a decent amount of stuff out due to second-guessing whether it was confirmed or not, and realizing they were just assumptions on my part. It was originally about 50% longer. And I was trying not to be too too wordy on specifics of why they were confirmed and whatnot...I dunno how well I succeeded in that aspect, though >.<; ). |
|
|
|
Post by louisxiv on Jan 2, 2015 15:42:15 GMT
Check out the tagging we did on the gunnerkrigg index as a starter. There's more there than that for sure in terms of interpretation Yep, still tagging away on the index page. |
|
|
|
Post by matoyak on Apr 8, 2015 6:18:13 GMT
Curious if anything ever came of this, Daedalus? (And apologies to all if thread necromancy is a no-no here. I believe this is the forum that prefers that over multiple new threads?) For anyone curious, here's the compilation I put together back in January. I'd personally like to see more discussion on the Treatises all in one place, rather than spread out across the individual treatise threads. Makes it easier to compare notes and cross-reference each one. So please do tell me where I am wrong and such . I think one thing to remember about the Treatises is that Tom uses them not only as hints at what is to come, but also as summaries of what has come before...and in his retrospective the way he talks about them (specifically in the Chapter 7 one) implies that the summary aspect is more important than the hinting of things to come aspect. This is something I didn't know when I read the comic - I always thought they were purely predictive. Treatise 1: (I... have a hard time with this one. It's filled with alchemy, mainly, and doesn't quite feel in a similar style with the other five Treatises. But things that seem to have been fulfilled, or at least clarified what they specifically mean) - Fire behind Antimony: Fire association with Annie - she's part Fire Elemental, and has a wicked temper if pressed.
- Water behind Kat: Kat is associated with water. I do not know if this symbolism has actually panned out in any real way, but it does continue to come up in Treatises, and it is a definite association.
- Annie's Hand Symbol: Friend, Annie has made her first real friend in Kat.
- Kat's Hand Symbol: The Crane, hinting at the coming relationship.
- Upwards triangle: Fire, associated with Annie.
- Downwards triangle: Water, associated with Kat.
- Combined/Overlayed triangles: All of creation.
- The alchemical phrase at the top: "Pray, read, reread, work, and you will find."
- The sun: Associated with the Forest.
- The moon: Associated with the Court.
(I'm not going to mention sun, moon, fire, and water associations with Court, Forest, Annie, and Kat multiple times unless it is a change from what was established before, in order to keep this post as being at least relatively not a book). Treatise 2: - Microsat 5: Sending information to Anthony via rocket.
- Creator Symbol: Used first by Diego, bestowed upon Kat by the Seraphs.
- Antimony Symbol: Well...used everywhere to represent Annie.
- The Crane: Kat's torrid affair (heh) with a boy who turns into a crane.
- Coyote and Renard circling: The constant back-and-forth between the two, with Coyote constantly trying to get Renard back.
- The Ghost of the Annan: Would this be counted as having come true? I mean, we know who she is, how she got there, why she is there, etc. Basically everything but the resolution has come around.
- The lights of the Bridge: Hard to say if this represents anything in particular. If so, possibly the falling-off-the-bridge-and-being-rescued-by-the-tictocs thing.
- Black and white humanoid figures: Glass Eyed Men, again related to the fall from the bridge, Coyote's continued attempts at godhood, as well as his attempts to get Renard back to the Forest.
- The sword: Jeanne's sword.
Treatise 3: - Flame hair (and hand): Antimony is part Fire Elemental, has fire-related powers, and is associated with fire.
- Coyote Eye: Coyote has his eye on Antimony, with all that implies.
- The sword: Jeanne's sword again.
- Visit the stars: The "holodeck" stories.
- Shadowy figure in the Court: Diego in his natural Creepy Watcher state of being.
- Antimony Symbol between Renard and the Forest on the Bridge: Annie being the main reason Renard doesn't go back to the Forest.
Treatise 4: - Robot: Robot's new body.
- Ysengrin with the trees: Confirmation over his control over trees, as well as hints about his feebleness in his "real" (non-etheric) body.
- Jeane and the Device: We have learned specifically how she is being kept down there, and why people cannot cross the waters.
- Sword into a heart: Jeanne has Issues with hidden love, and love is everything about why she is trapped.
- Robots watching Kat: Robots become pretty involved in Kat's life.
- Spider in Annie's hand: Jack and the Whitelegs
Treatise 5: (this one's a hard one. Mostly symbolism that has occurred in prior Treatises, or story summaries). - Inverse Shadow Man with Gear: Robots, the Court equivalent of Coyote's Glass Eyed Men.
- Bones in Annie's Hair: The horrific control Anthony has over Annie, in spite of everything. Also a summary of the Zimmy-going-into-Annie's-Dream chapter.
- Feather: Kat likes birds, yo.
Treatise 6: (this is, I suppose, mostly summaries of what has been said in the Treatise 6 thread. Any hints at future events can't really be confirmed, so it's basically just "Story summary" stuff). - The Little Fairy: Summary of the storyline with her. She and the other Forest inhabitants look to Annie as the bridge to the Court.
- Mort's Helmet: Mort passed to the Ether, ensuring the continuance of the world continuing. On the Forest side due to it being a Natural thing (as opposed to the way the Court looks at the Ether). [Also possible as a counterpoint to the Hetty doll, if that is what that turns out to be...unsure if that's what that doll is, so wouldn't say this is a guaranteed thing].
- Crown Symbol: Fire Elemental symbol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Apr 8, 2015 6:39:31 GMT
What came of this got banned by Mr. Siddell. I still wish I could have worked more on this, maybe we'll take your list and add anything the forum comes up with to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by matoyak on Apr 8, 2015 6:57:22 GMT
What came of this got banned by Mr. Siddell. I still wish I could have worked more on this, maybe we'll take your list and add anything the forum comes up with to it. Ah. That's unfortunate. Ah well. I'd still like to see discussion of them on the forums in one location, at least, if that doesn't violate any rules. |
|
|
|
Post by sapientcoffee on Apr 8, 2015 16:12:36 GMT
Wait what? When did discussing the treatises get banned?
|
|
|
|
Post by speedwell on Apr 8, 2015 16:34:36 GMT
Discussing them is not banned. There is a long discussion of Treatise 6, anyway, early in the thread for page 1496.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Apr 8, 2015 20:36:03 GMT
Wait what? When did discussing the treatises get banned? No no no! I tried an...unusual approach to compiling information about them (which involved making a secondary account), and Tom did not approve, and my second account was quietly banned. The problem was the method - a sort of social experiment involving a communal account - but the discussion itself is great. |
|
|
|
Post by sapientcoffee on Apr 8, 2015 20:42:08 GMT
Ah, I got'cha.
|
|
|
|
Post by Corvo on Apr 8, 2015 23:49:23 GMT
I tried an...unusual approach to compiling information about them (which involved making a secondary account), and Tom did not approve, and my second account was quietly banned. " How many eyes does Lord Bloodraven Siddel have?" |
|
vakri
New Member
Posts: 34 
|
Post by vakri on Apr 27, 2015 10:46:56 GMT
A creazy thing came to my mind.
Do you know that scheme :
strangers-->friends-->best friends-->lovers-->couple-->heartbreak-->strangers again
?
Now, look at those treatises again. There is one left...
(yeah, i know they are NOT lovers, but the way they look fits each phase)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2015 5:48:52 GMT
I was looking over the treatises today, and mainly focusing on the common elements and similarities between all of them.
Common contrastive elements:
left = Kat = Moon = court = Renard
right = Annie = Sun = forest = Ysengrin and/or Coyote
The 1st treatise lacks some of these features common in the later ones:
-No court and forest imagery
-No renard, coyote, ysengrin
However, Kat and Annie, the moon and sun imagery, and their respective sides are consistent throughout all 6 of the treatises.
Common central elements
-Globus cruciger (aka “holy hand grenade”): 1, 2
-Mercury sign: 1, 2, 6
-Bismuth sign: 2, 4, 6
-Sun/gold sign: 2, 4
-Caduceus: 1, (4?)
Common elements on Annie’s/the Forest's side:
-Antimony sign: 2, 3 (on Rey), 4, 5, 6
-Fire: 1, 3, 4 (in 6, may be on opposite side?)
-Ysengrin: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Common elements on Kat’s/the Court's side:
-Mark of the creator: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
-Gears: 2, 3, 4
-Renard:
--2nd treatise: Renard is paired with Coyote rather than his more common counterpart Ysengrin; they are both in the center rather than on their usual sides of the page
--3rd treatise: Renard is on the bridge rather than on the court side
--5th treatise: Renard is missing
|
|
|
|
Post by shaihulud on Sept 10, 2016 23:03:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Jelly Jellybean on Sept 11, 2016 2:49:02 GMT
Thanks for finding this. I think is it interesting that Tom flipped the sun and moon to follow his convention of the Court/Kat on the left and the Forest/Annie on the right. |
|
|
|
Post by keef on Sept 11, 2016 10:06:23 GMT
Great find, this book seems to be the source. Shame I can't read Latin. First page: |
|
|
|
Post by Storel on Oct 3, 2016 3:11:17 GMT
Great find, this book seems to be the source. Shame I can't read Latin. First page: Wow, that's interesting. The best info I've found about that book so far is here, which says the diagram shows "the three basic alchemical substances (Salt, Sulphur, Mercury)", which form an amalgam known to alchemists as azoth. Unfortunately, Google Translate has conniptions trying to translate Latin. It's giving me completely different (though equally incoherent) translations depending on whether or not the words are capitalized! So I can't tell you what that page says... |
|
|
|
Post by aline on Oct 4, 2016 11:29:57 GMT
Great find, this book seems to be the source. Shame I can't read Latin. First page: Wow, that's interesting. The best info I've found about that book so far is here, which says the diagram shows "the three basic alchemical substances (Salt, Sulphur, Mercury)", which form an amalgam known to alchemists as azoth. Unfortunately, Google Translate has conniptions trying to translate Latin. It's giving me completely different (though equally incoherent) translations depending on whether or not the words are capitalized! So I can't tell you what that page says... Well. I'm a bit rusty, and this stuff is heavily loaded with alchemy vocabulary which is not what you learn in latin classes. My dictionary has got not idea what "aurelia" is (aside from a lady's first name but it seems unlikely in that case) and insist that "decantatum" is a declination of "decantato" which means mostly singing, but I think in this case is decantation. Hermetis is Hermes, the greek god. Alchemists thought he was the founder of their art, hence the word "hermetic" which at one point was used to refer to everything achemical and then took other meanings. So yeah, try feeding that into google translation ^^ Approximate first try: "Azoth, or (aureliae occultae philosophum), the first matter, and the decantation of the philosopher's stone out of (solid Hermès??) , clearly and intelligibly explained." The rest I think are a list of other alchemic treatises presumably quoted as sources (the tabula smaragdina is among them and is a pretty well known book if you're interested in these things). So basically Azoth is "the first matter" and the main ingredient for the philosopher's stone. And I'll just quote Wikipedia here: |
|
|
|
Post by Jelly Jellybean on Oct 4, 2016 16:45:12 GMT
Wow, that's interesting. The best info I've found about that book so far is here, which says the diagram shows "the three basic alchemical substances (Salt, Sulphur, Mercury)", which form an amalgam known to alchemists as azoth. Unfortunately, Google Translate has conniptions trying to translate Latin. It's giving me completely different (though equally incoherent) translations depending on whether or not the words are capitalized! So I can't tell you what that page says... Well. I'm a bit rusty, and this stuff is heavily loaded with alchemy vocabulary which is not what you learn in latin classes. My dictionary has got not idea what "aurelia" is (aside from a lady's first name but it seems unlikely in that case) and insist that "decantatum" is a declination of "decantato" which means mostly singing, but I think in this case is decantation. Hermetis is Hermes, the greek god. Alchemists thought he was the founder of their art, hence the word "hermetic" which at one point was used to refer to everything achemical and then took other meanings. So yeah, try feeding that into google translation ^^ Approximate first try: "Azoth, or (aureliae occultae philosophum), the first matter, and the decantation of the philosopher's stone out of (solid Hermès??) , clearly and intelligibly explained." The rest I think are a list of other alchemic treatises presumably quoted as sources (the tabula smaragdina is among them and is a pretty well known book if you're interested in these things). So basically Azoth is "the first matter" and the main ingredient for the philosopher's stone. And I'll just quote Wikipedia here: The Philosopher's Stone is made from Hermes' poop? No wonder so many have failed all these years. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Oct 5, 2016 0:22:52 GMT
So basically Azoth is "the first matter" and the main ingredient for the philosopher's stone. And I'll just quote Wikipedia here: "Azoth" sounds disquietingly similar to "Azathoth". (Maybe that's what inspired Lovecraft.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2016 19:55:23 GMT
Well. I'm a bit rusty, and this stuff is heavily loaded with alchemy vocabulary which is not what you learn in latin classes. Besides which, the author appears to have committed a few mistakes in constructing Latin, or so I believe. Two guesses: a) erroneous variant of "aureae", likely from understanding a given name as an epithet (Marcus Aurelius etc.); b) a putative ancestor of English "aurelia", which seems to mean "cocoon"; the word is obscure enough that none of my dictionaries contain it, such as Albert Hornby's "Oxford Advanced English Learner's Dictionary", but it seems to occur in the unabridged Merriam-Webster. The problem is with "occultae": we obtain either "the golden secrets of the philosophers" in a construction that I find somewhat strange (namely, "occultae" acting as a nominalized adjective; but I am far from an expert on Latin), or "the hidden cocoons of the philosophers", which sits on the borderline between poesy and aphasia. Another syntactical oddity: Classical Latin most commonly sees an attribute in the genitive inserted between adjective and noun, e.g. "pulchras Syri fabulas" (the beautiful stories of Syrus); this is not the case here. I have two different suggestions (again): a) "decanto" also holds a more obscure meaning of "to list" (akin to "declaiming" in English), so the author might want to express that he gives reproducible instructions on obtaining the Philosophers' Stone; b) (grammatically more convincing) "decantatum", used as a passive participle, agrees with "illum" and "lapidem" in the masculine singular accusative, i.e. "the lauded Philosopher's Stone". This strikes me as another peculiar form, since the name regularly belongs to the masculine A-declension in the original Greek, and Latin should mimic this (genitive "Hermae"), yet it seems to have gone over to the consonant declension as early as in Classical times (indeed, you have already mentioned the "Tabula Smaragdina Hermetis"). Two possibilities (again) arise for "solide": a) adverb, i.e. "solidly" (unfortunately, I cannot determine what the adverb could actually modify), b) erroneous masc. sg. ablative assuming a base form *solid-is rather than solid-us, analogously to the correct lapis -> lapide; but this form would agree with neither "filiis" nor "Hermetis". On the other hand, "solidus" in the sense of "that which is not fluid" is certainly attested; perhaps the author did intend the ablative construction "from/with the children of an Hermetic solid" (whatever that is). Frankly, I cannot say. On that note, I am confused as to why "materiam primam" and "lapidem [philosophorum]" both appear in the accusative, but "aureliae occultae [philosophorum]" evidently does not. In fact, I would rather expect a construction with "de" followed by the ablative, such as "De materia prima". -- Perhaps someone other than the author was responsible for the title page. Since it has not been mentioned yet: the author of the book was noted especially for his research on antimony. On that note, I recall reading (years ago) that the association of a white wolf with antimony stems from scholars confusing "leukós" (white) with "lúkos" (wolf). Concerning the Sixth Treatise, I remember writing a post on New Year's Eve 2015 in which I had considered Ramón Llull (who features in Borges) and his "Tree of Science" to have inspired Tom (but this match is even closer; great find), and mentioned a few verses from a Byronic play ("Sorrow is knowledge; those who know the most / Must mourn the deepest o'er the fatal truth: / The Tree of Knowledge is not that of Life") which I still find fitting. |
|
|
|
Post by keef on Oct 5, 2016 22:23:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aline on Oct 6, 2016 10:14:33 GMT
Well. I'm a bit rusty, and this stuff is heavily loaded with alchemy vocabulary which is not what you learn in latin classes. Besides which, the author appears to have committed a few mistakes in constructing Latin, or so I believe. Two guesses: Third guess: this is a made up word. I found an Italian book where the author discussed the possibility in a footnote. Apparently, alchemists did this kind of things all the time. Their texts are full of symbolism. To describe concepts that are supposed to be alchemic secrets, they use made up words, or they use real words but give them hidden meanings rather than the normal one. Obviously mistakes are also possible. The text seems to be from the 17th century, they were hardly native speakers. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Oct 6, 2016 12:41:23 GMT
I know that "Aurelia" is related to the Latin "aurus" for "gold", and might therefore be some sort of variant on "gold" (an appropriate word to find in a book on alchemy, certainly).
|
|
|
|
Post by valkasar on Oct 10, 2016 20:26:28 GMT
Some stuff I picked up that I think weren't mentioned
Treatise 3:
*Ysegrin's cut ear is represented by the Bismuth symbol. I do not know what this could mean, but it's worth mentioning.
*Also, the moon poster works as a foil to the sun in the forest side. Anyone knows what the latin text says in the background?
Treatise 4:
*Annie's hair is binding Kat, but not the other way around. Maybe slowly Kat is being changed, perhaps for worse, by Annie?
*Also, the cranes in Kat's hands may represent love for her, since she is associated with birds (the boy crane, the dove in her head)
Treasite 5:
*There is a Wheel on the Court side. Wheels are angels that are very bizzare and I'm sure someone else could explain them better, but shortly they are like wheels with infinite eyes all around them. I do not know what they represent for christianism but interesting they're associated with the Court in the first place.
*Also, the symbol of the program used for binding Reynard, on the forest side. Could it imply that Reynard will have a return to the forest, in opposition to other treatises when he's in the Court side? Or perhaps the seal itself is very foresty in nature?
*Also, there are odd wavelenghts on the forest side, behind Reynard's seal symbol.
*Lastly, there are two "suns" in the sky, the usual forest sun and a middle one. Maybe it's meant to represent a third party, yet to be revealed?
Treatise 6:
*Annie's Coyote symbol in her chest represents her being the medium of the forest.
*Also, the symbol for Gold in Kat's side is odd, since it's commonly associated with the sun. It also represents perfection, so it might have to do with the Court's intentions.
Those are the ones I picked up on the go. I'll update if I find anything else.
|
|
|
|
Post by snowflake on Oct 11, 2016 15:29:31 GMT
T6: in the corners of the upper triangle are the letters Zeta, Gamma and Iota. Referring apparently to Zimmy, Gamma and Jack? Is there another interpretation?
|
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Oct 26, 2016 15:21:46 GMT
*BUMP*
|
|
(I actually cut a decent amount of stuff out due to second-guessing whether it was confirmed or not, and realizing they were just assumptions on my part. It was originally about 50% longer. And I was trying not to be too too wordy on specifics of why they were confirmed and whatnot...I dunno how well I succeeded in that aspect, though >.<; ).
