Mindprint the subconscious art code

What is mindprint, the subconscious art code

An Australian Kimberley Gwion 'Sashes' area rock art image (Bradshaw Foundation) of dancers, one with a long-necked mask, with mindprint labels and axes by Edmond Furter.
An Australian Kimberley Gwion ‘Sashes’ area rock art image (Bradshaw Foundation) of dancers, one with a long-necked mask, with typology labels and axial grid by Edmond Furter.
Mindprint or stoneprint model of character types, in their peripheral sequence, as pairs of opposites forming an axial grid of eyes, with five polar points of limb joints or junctures.

Mindprint is sixteen recurrent character types, each expressing a cluster of optional archetypal features, and each feature at a specific fixed frequency globally; with the eyes or focal points of pairs of opposite forming an axial grid; surrounding five polar points of limb joints or junctures in specific sectors.

The eyes or focal points of typological characters are replaced by a heart and a womb, in adjacent positions; at type 12 and/or 13 Heart, and type 11 Womb. Characters form an irregular and ragged oval, at varied radii. The spatial structure is analogous to a flattened cosmic sphere of three planes (ecliptic, galactic and celestial), with polar features of the underside or ‘south’ visible as limb joints in certain positions.

One or both the ‘celestial’ poles is incidental with the position of the midsummer and midwinter solstices, as it was in one of the last three astrological Ages (or four mindprint Ages, since Age Taurus is doubled). Celestial poles move in an inward spiral arc around the ecliptic pole, analogous to precession, and the Age of the artist’s or builders’ culture, usually the Age before the work.

Four of the types are optionally doubled or single; types 1 and/or 2 Builder or Taurus, are opposite types 8/9 Healer or Scorpius; and types 5a/5b Priest or Aquarius, are opposite types 12/13 Heart or Leo. Type 5 repeats is number in the first magnitude series (some cultural media express two or three cycles of mindprint, where 5:20 and 5:21 are differentiated by their numbers). Thus the highest type number in the first magnitude is type 15 Maker or Gemini, however there are sixteen types, since label 5 is initially repeated.

Known magnitudes of the sixteen types are 0:15, 1:16, 2:17, 3:18, 4:19, 5:20, 5:21 (where the sequence changes to sequential numbers), 6:22, etc (from where the sequence is validated against atomic numbers in the periodic table, and against features of the I Ching, though not against the variant number sequences of divination sets).

The entire arrangement of five layers of structure, is subconscious and compulsive to artists, and independent of conscious and conventional attributes, design grids, perspective lines, and ‘conceptual’ meanings and conscious symbolism. Conscious ‘logic’ or rationalisation offers various layers of optionality to artists, builders and cultures, but the subconscious archetypal features remain standard in all cultures, areas and ages.

Mindprint was discovered in 2010, and its types, attributes, geometry, polar structure and correspondence with myth, emblems, the Tarot deck and astronomy (particularly hour decans or ‘lunar’ calendars) were assigned, numbered and tabulated by Edmond Furter, and published in the art analysis, anthropology and archaeo-astronomy book Mindprint, the subconscious art code, in August 2014 (

After Furter, ED, 2014. Mindprint, the subconscious art code.

Terminology and data has since been updated in Stoneprint, and in Stoneprint Journal editions.


Update of typology labels, features, and global average occurrence (January 2019)

This table also serves as a standard format for testing and reporting the identification of subconscious, archetypal features in artworks, rock art works, building sites, or other media.

Site /Artwork,,,, expresses ,,,,

This ,,,,, in ,,,,, is noted for ,,,,,.

General themes in the work include types ,,,,

In any artwork, building site, or sequential craft set (calendar, gods, divination list, alphabet, emblems), characters form an axial grid by their eyes or focal points, and express about 60% of these recurrent feature clusters, with each feature at a measurable universal average frequency

Type; Character (archetypal features with average frequencies):

01 /02 Builder; twist 44%, cluster 23%, bovid 19%, bird 19%, tower 18%, build 14%, sack 10%, hero 10%, book 8%, spring 8%, maze 8%, pit 8%,

02c Basket; weave 25%, container 20%, instrument 20%, shoulderhump 20%, hat 15%, weapon 15%, throne 10%, snake 10%, secret 10%, planet 7%;; armlink 50%, leglink 20%,

03 Queen; neckbend 31%, dragon 19%, sacrifice 17%, queen 13%,school 12%, spring 10%, fish 6%, ram 4%, pool,

04 King; squat 30%, rectangle 28%, king  22%, twins 13%, sun 12%, bird 10%, fish 8%, furnace 8%, field 5%,

04p Galactic South Pole; limbjoint 67%; juncture 17% (spout 12%, stream, speech, spit),

05a /05b Priest; varicoloured 37%, priest 34%, hyperactive 33%, tailcoathead 32%, assembly 30%, horizontal 28%, water 24%, heart 24%, large 24%, bovid 20%, reptile 10%, winged 14%, invert 12%, sash 8%, judgement 8%, weapon of opposite 7%, felid of opposite, equid, ascend,

05c Baskethead; weave 16%, tail 14%, U-shape 10%, container 8%, tree/herb 4%, oracle(maze), spirit (ka), spheres, route, horned (of 6), disc,

06 Exile; ingress/egress 58%, horned 44%, sacrifice 30%, small 14%, U-shape 13%, doublehead 12%, caprid 8%, reptile 6%, tree 4%, disarmed,

07 Child; rope 24%, juvenile 24%, bag 22%, unfold 13%, beheaded 10%, chariot 8%, mace 6%, off-grid,

07g Galactic Centre; limbjoint 38% (foot 26%); juncture 34% (throne, altar, line, spiral, tree, staff); path/gate 18%; water 16%,

08 /09 Healer; bent 28%, strong 28%, pillar 28%, heal 22%, disc 14%, smelt 8%, ritual 6%, bag 6%, head 4%, canid 4%, ram 4%, scorpion,

09c BasketLid; disc 27% (hat 15%, lid 12%); instrument? 25%, reveal 16%, hump 15%, planet 10%, weave 8%, enforce 7%, pillar  6%, snake 5%, metal 4%;; armlink 54%, leglink 20%,

10 Teacher; W-shape 44% (arm/s 28%), staff 36%, huntmaster 24%, guard 20%, metal 14%, market 14%, disc 12%, council 11%, snake 8%, ecology 8%, school 6%, carousel 4%, canid 4%, horns 4%, fish 4%,

11 Womb; womb 88%, wheat 15%, water 14%, tomb 11%, interior 8%, library 8%, law 5%, felid 5%.

11p Gal. Pole; limbjoint 64% (hand 12%, foot 12%, elbow 10%); juncture 24% (door 12%),

12/13 Heart; heart 83%, felid 42%, death 34%, round 21%, invert 14%, weapon 11%, war 9%, waterwork 8%, angel 4%,

13c BasketTail; oracle 14%, head 14%, hat/lid 10%, weave 8%, tree 6%, tail 4%,

14 Mixer; ingress/egress 43%, time 28%, tree 20%, angel 15%, bird 11%, antelope 10%, felid 8%, dancer 8%, reptile 4%, fish 4%, canid 4%,

15 Maker; churn 44%, rope 28%, order 27%, rampant 26%, bag 20%, mace 16% (weapon 12%), doubled 16%, canid 12%, face 12%, sceptre 11%, smiting 8%, reptile 8%, winged 8%,

15g Galactic Gate; juncture 30% (river 10%); limbjoint 12% (jaw 8%),

The axial centre or ‘Ecliptic pole’ is unmarked 59%, limb joint 24%, juncture 14%.

Midsummer or ‘Celestial pole’ is a limb joint 54%, juncture 24%.

Midwinter or ‘Celestial South Pole’ is a limb joint 46%, juncture 24%.

Solstice polar orientation is on the horizontal 50% /vertical 12% plane, or north-south meridian or east-west latitude.

Polar markers place ‘summer’ in Leo /Cancer /Gemini, thus ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Taurus /Aries /Pisces, confirmed by a prominence.

The general theme of dispersed features is type __

Structural layers of expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters, and members of any culture.

An analysis could be scored as __/75 archetypal features; __/16 axial points; _/5 polar markers; _/1 planar or cardinal orientation; _/1 correlation with the Age, or Age prior to the work; _/2 general themes; thus __/100, minus __ extra characters off the axial grid; total __%. The average analysis score is 60%, in a sigma range of about 0.4 (40% range), from 40% to 80% of known features. The scoring formula may change if more features are isolated.

Mindprint book summary

The introduction explains how to read the illustration labels (see a post and comments on, and reveals the types and structural features in art. It also notes some aspects of their disguise.

Chapter A demonstrates six examples of the typological sequence, and explains structural sets in nature, myth, grammar and our subconscious.

Chapter B demonstrates the structure in our iris and bodies, and explains our structural perception, inspiration, consciousness, psychology and disguise.

Chapter C demonstrates the structure in our hands, and explains the co-incidence of structure in our bodies, culture, events and literature.

Chapter D demonstrates cosmic structure and explains structural cosmology, astronomy and astrology.

Chapter E demonstrates cosmic polar structure and explains structural time, Ages, archaeo astronomy, planets and spherical doubling.

Chapter F demonstrates artistic structure in a famous painting by Pierro de Cosimo (see below), and explains structural symbolism, artistic functions, initiation and esoterica.

Chapter G demonstrates a rock art painting process, and explains structural inspiration and compulsive expression.

Chapter H tests mindprint in two Egyptian decanal sets [Narmer and Dendera; see below], and explains conscious aspects of expression, as well as the Tarot trump sequence numbering.

Chapter J lists the attributes and concepts of the sixteen types, reduces these to tables, offers a format for artistic typological data, formulates a statistical test, tests 170 artworks, lists and explains the results. It also demonstrates how to identify visual types and archetypal structure in art, speculates on the possibility of prior discovery, and lists the few inherent ambiguities among some types.

Chapter K compares scientific and esoteric paradigms, illustrates natural ‘art’, and speculates on the implications of the discovery of mindprint for some sciences and crafts.

Chapter L demonstrates mindprint in 200 artworks (the book contains 214 examples in total), grouped by their dominant themes, and ordered to compare rock art against schooled art. Some notable details are explained.

The postscript explains how the visual types and structure were found. (see below)

Mindprint index

  • How to read the illustration labels
  • The typological sequence and axial grid
  • The subconscious artefact and its disguise
  • [A] The figure sequence in our art
  • Comparing our semi-conscious sets
  • Animals, Myth, Grammar, Subconscious layers
  • [B] The structure in our eyes and bodies
  • Our eyes flash Boo; Oto-visual emissions
  • The vortex of visual inspiration
  • Gestalt and Occam
  • Psychological structure
  • [C] The structure in our hands
  • Our inner and outer structures converge
  • Archetype dressed as culture
  • Literate structure in a Mishnah
  • [D] The structure in our cosmos
  • Our astronomical sets
  • The galactic and polar cross
  • Astrological structure
  • 40 [E] The three poles of time
  • 42 Our calendric sets
  • 43 Ages in art
  • 46 Age Aries, Age Pisces, Age Aquarius
  • 50 The typological spiral chart
  • 52 [F] The structure in our art; Honey to mead
  • 54 Conscious and subconscious meaning in art
  • 57 Mystery and initiation
  • 58 Instant culture, art analysis, doubled spheres
  • 62 [G] The layers in our expression
  • 64 Digging through paint layers
  • 67 The double life of decans
  • 68 Decans on the Narmer palette
  • 70 Decans in the Dendera zodiac
  • 72 The Tarot trump sequence
  • 73 Compulsive inspiration and expression
  • 75 [J] Holistic types 1 to 15
  • 79 Typological tables
  • 82 Statistical test of artistic types
  • 84 Statistical test results
  • 87 How to identify types and structure in art
  • 88 Commission impossible
  • 88 Duplications and conventions
  • 89 Conscious recognition is elusive
  • 91 Ambiguous types
  • 93 Scientific and esoteric paradigms
  • 96 Nature is also an artist
  • 97 Esoteric structure
  • 98 Implications for sciences and crafts
  • 99 [L] Mindprint and sixteen themes illustrated
  • [Note; Type labels in the first edition used mythic constellation and hour decanal names, with the warning that typology is also in myth and strology, but does not arise from any media. Type labels have since been updated to generic social function labels; and the four half-types or Basket types have since been defined and demonstrated.]
  • 100  1 Taurus Auriga, Orion; Rain diviner
  • 110  2 Taurus Pleiades, Perseus; Rainmaker
  • 118  3 Aries Andromeda; Moon queen, dragons
  • 130  4 Pisces Pegasus; Sun king, Sun twins
  • 134  5a Aquarius Pegasus; World baptist
  • 148  5b Aquarius; World spirit
  • 160  6 Capricornus; Pan
  • 164  7 Sagittarius; Bag
  • 170  8 Scorpius Ophiuchus; Giant snake holder
  • 180  9 Scorpius; Giant in trance
  • 182  10 Libra Bootes; Lord of the forest
  • 188  11 Virgo; Womb
  • 198  12 Leo Crater; King inverted
  • 212  13 Leo Ursa; King’s heart
  • 224  14 Cancer Ursa Minor; Time angel
  • 232  15 Gemini; Creator and rope churner
  • 240  15 Gemini Canis; Creator wounded
  • 250 How mindprint was discovered
  • 253 Acknowledgements, About the author
  • 254 Terminology
  • 257 Index of rock art tested, Index of art tested
  • 265 Graphics sources, Sources, References.

(Excerpt from Mindprint, the subconscious art code, by Edmond Furter, 2014,


==== Comment from David Allen April 2015;

Thank you for the opportunity to meet you and to listen to your talk. What you said has sent me back to the drawing board concerning my knowledge of archetypes.

What had the most impact for me was your reference to the fact that archetypes, and even culture itself, are not some artificial “construction” born of this reality, but come from a pre-existent reality that “was” before the “big bang”.

The way you supported this contention by showing how virtually one single visual pattern is repeated (with some minor variations) through all works of inspired art (I think your use of the distinction “inspired” was essential here) stretching from as far back as the Ice Age into the modern era, across many nations, cultures, religions, belief systems, continents, and throughout history, and how it can be traced in the heavens, served to emphasise this point particularly strongly for me.

Although the idea of a “pre-existent reality” is not new to me, I have found almost no support for it. If anything I have come across only deep and virulent criticism of it and so have kept an open mind on the subject. Maybe it is a sign that I need to hang out with a better class of reading material.

I found your support of this notion very pleasing because it confirmed something that always made intuitive sense to me. It will give me much food for thought and reflection in the coming weeks and months because it will feed into, and influence to some extent, much else that I am interested in.

But probably the most important revelation was that your talk has shown me how much I still have to learn and how much work awaits me in terms of now having to unpack and discard much of what I have taken to be “true”, and then to refresh my conceptual foundation and belief system concerning a number of important topics.

I begin the task of reading and absorbing your book today. -David Allen.

How to identify mindprint types and structure in art

How to identify archetypes and structure in art

Finding mindprint in a work of art is as simple as finding correspondences to any archetypally complete set or sets of about sixteen (twelve to twenty) items, such as pantheons (lists of gods), myth cycles, epics, emblems, lunar mansions, trumps, historic or fictional characters, constellations, heraldic devices, lyrics, or animals.

Researchers should tack characters in art to sets that they are familiar with, and use the mindprint axial grid and tables for confirmation (see the post What is mindprint, on this website. See Mindprint, the subconscious art code, by Edmond Furter, 2014, Here is a shortcut method to finding the basics of the five layers of the archetypal art code;

[] Identify a likely periphery of figures in a roughly elliptical arrangement.

[] List the figures in their circular sequence, by any distinctive attribute, such as a posture, season, function, species, or device.

[] Provisionally tag the list or the artwork, with likely type numbers, such as 10 Teacher  for a figure with arms up or a staff, 12 or 13 Heart for a felid, 1 or 2 Builder for a bovid or tower, 5 Priest for varicoloured, skin paint or a hyperactive posture.

[] Tag figures notably ingressed or egressed towards or away from the centre, as 6 Exile or 14 Mixer.

[] Tag a pregnant figure as 11 Womb; and an adjacent major figure as 12 or 13 Heart (usually with an exposed chest), and the adjacent figure on the other side as 10 Teacher.

[] Infer a clockwise or anticlocwise sequence, and provisionally complete the labellling.

[] Count the number of eyes (for example 17), assume the lower even number (for example 16), subtract two (for example 14), skip half of this number (for example 7) between eyes, and draw tentative axes between each pair of likely opposing eyes.

[] If three or more axes cross at the same point, find the likely 11 Womb, and a likely 12 or 13 Heart, and redraw errant axes by not using their eyes (unless their eyes also find counterparts across the axial centre).

[] If three or more peripheral figures remain unaccounted for, assume a higher equal number (for example 18), and repeat the test with higher numbers.

[] Resolve the sequence by splitting up or combining the major doubles (1 /2 Builder, 5a/5b Priest, 8/9 Healer, 12/13 Heart).

[] Complete all the possible axes. Connect the equator from eye to eye (with the two exceptions).

[] Find one or two polar markers between 11 Womb and 12 Heart, or between 4 King and 5 Priest, near the equator (not near the centre). These poles are often on limb joints.

[] Find a polar marker nearer the axial pole, on or near the 15 Maker, 14 Mixer, or 13 Heart axis; which is often a limb joint, perhaps a jaw, vertical or horizontal from the axial centre or from one of the galactic poles. Connect this marker to the galactic pole to form a polar triangle (or if there is a marker on the opposite side, connect it to the galactic south pole).

[] Mirror the polar triangle on the other side of the ecliptic pole. Polar markers are not always expressed. Infer the inspirational date (spring) from the type that precedes the polar axle (midsummer) by an ideal 90 degrees (approximate, not measured on the distorted grid).

[] Apply the set of labels, one to each figure, and the four structural points, in sequence. Note that there is a choice of two labels (/) at the four major types if they are represented by only one figure (typical if the total is only twelve or fourteen);

1Builder 2Builder 2cBasket 3Queen 4King 4p
8Healer 9Healer 9cLid 10Teacher 11Womb 11p


5aPriest 5bPriest 5cTail 6Exile 7Child 7g
12Heart 13Heart 13cHead 14Mixer 15Maker 15g


cp csp ? ?

The axial centre or ‘Ecliptic Pole’ is unlabelled to avoid clutter.

[] Half-types (2c Basket v 9c Lid, 5c Tail v 13c Head) are usually off the axial grid, but within their sectors, designated by the axes of the two types that flank each of them.

[] On a separate page, list the type numbers, with basic distinctive features or characters found in the artwork, to compare to other artworks, mindprint statistics, stories, myths or typological sets.

This structure applies to all artworks, in all cultures, in all ages, due to the structure of nature, perception, expression, and cultural media. Mindprint also applies to myths and legends, but it is difficult to extract to a subtext, due to typical fluctuation between characters, places, episodes, and time. In art, the time-slice of the story stands still, and the composition could be verified against the original, or reproductions in catalogues, books and electronic galleries, such as tourist image sites.

See a standard format for testing and reporting structural art or building site analysis, in the post on ;What is mindprint’ on this website.


Mindprint art examples

Mindprint on the Narmer palette front

The Narmer palette front demonstrates subconscious expression of archetypal structure in a decanal set, in stock Sumerian and Egyptian pre-dynastic style. Here is the standard list of the types, with the characters in this artwork, in seasonal sequence from the former spring point, with its analogous hour decan (after Furter 2014; Mindprint).

Type label; Character, (archetypal feature); Decan

  • 03 Queen or Aries; Spouted pot (bent neck); Cetus Tail.
  • 02 Builder or Taurus; Large star (spring?); Pleiades.
  • 01 Builder or Taurus; Sandal-bearer (twisted); Orion.
  • 15 Maker or Gemini; Hathor cow frontal (face); Ursa Minor.
  • 14 Mixer or Cancer; Catfish hammer and chisel, far from the centre (egress), Y-shaped (tree); Ursa on Cancer on Hydra head.
  • 13 Heart or Leo; Horus falcon (raptor); Leo Minor?
  • 11p Galactic Pole; Horus hand (limb-joint); Coma Berenices.
  • 11 Womb or Virgo; Horus abdomen (womb). And an Asiatic marsh subject; Crater?
  • 10 Teacher or Libra; King’s brother’s genitals and hand (bent neck, of 3 opposite); Bootes.
  • 09 Healer or Scorpius; Defeated enemy (twisted, of 2 opposite); Corvus?
  • 08 Healer or Scorpius; Ribbon (snake); Serpens.
  • 07 Child or Sagittarius; Prisoners’ hands (rope); Cygnus?
  • 06 Exile or Capricornus; Prisoner (sacrifice), near the centre (ingress); Piscis Austrinus?
  • 05 Priest or Aquarius; Pond (water); Pegasus Square.
  • 04p Gal.S.Pole; Heel (limb joint) of twin (typical of 4); Cetus?
  • 04 King or Pisces; Heel (typical of 4p) of king (king).
  • The celestial pole marker is on the king’s genitals or shoulder (limb joint), confirmed by the vertical plane of the work. These markers place ‘midsummer’ in Cancer, thus ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Aries or just prior.
  • The general theme on the reverse of the palette is type 3 Queen or Aries, typical of dragons.

The palette carries the same figures, and nearly the same sequence of features, on both sides. On the front, the characters are in a court or festival context, centered on type 15 Maker or Gemini as a smiting, ordering, re-creating pharaoh. Several optional links flip the sequence between the two sides, in the ‘transparent’ method also used in some Egyptian murals.

On the palette’s reverse side, type 13 Heart or Leo is a dwarf, symbol of a client culture paying homage. The dwarf resembles a figure in Queen Hatshepsut’s Punt colonnade, perhaps a Khoe Queen of Sheba.

Mindprint types and structure on the Narmer palette rear (Edmond Furter). The artefact is discussed in more detail among illustrations themed on type t3 t18 Aries in the book.
Narmer palette rear, with standard structuralist labels and axial grid. The artefact is discussed in more detail among other illustrations themed on type 3 Queen or Aries in the book.

The dwarf’s function and conceptual role is as important as the tribe he or she represents. On the subconscious level, the royal figure and heart of type 12/13 Heart or Leo are expressed in a foreign but compliant leader from the interior that feeds the Nile. Some dwarfs are seen as rainmakers (Tressider; Watkins Dictionary of symbols). Empire needs flattery by tribes with apparently semi-human features or languages, considered more in touch with animals and nature, and thus used as rainmakers, herbalists, and fertility or defensive spell casters.

Bushmen and Khoe or Nama (born of occasional pre-Bantu and pre-colonial admixtures) fulfilled these functions to migrating Iron Age African Bantu tribes, and to emergent mixed Korana, Griekwa and Amatola bands in South Africa. They served white settlers even during the systematic genocide and cultural extinction of Bushmen by regional masters such as the Zulu, Dutch and British.

Mindprint art examples

Mindprint in De Cosimo’s Discovery of honey

Types 8 Healer as a giant tree stump face, hosting a bee colony, with satyrs and people collecting honey and brewing mead (Pierro De Cosimo; Discovery of honey. Typology labels and axial grid by Edmond Furter).

Most characters in the artwork, as in all artworks, are identified by some archetypal features (gender, posture, function, implements or relative position), confirmed by the position of their eyes on an axial grid of opposite pairs.

Type label; Character (noting archetypal features); analogous hour decan:

1 Builder or Taurus; A satyr kid below an adult hand, recalling the goat kids of Artemis; decan Auriga.

2 Builder or Taurus; Crouching (twisted) leader, with a mirror or ladle (rainmaker); decan Orion.

3 Queen or Aries; Wielder of bellows or hammer, instruments of sacrifice (sacrifice); decan Triangulum.

4 King or Pisces; A male, with hive cakes or an implement of two rectangles (rectangle); decan Pegasus.

5 Priest or Aquarius; Priest (priest), prominent (large), with a tuning fork (U-shape, of type 6). Of human appearance, positioned between satyrs and women with human items; decan ?

6 Exile or Capricornus; Boy (child, of type 7), with only lower legs of a goat (Pan); decan Capricornus tail knot.

7 Child or Sagittarius; A centaur, more animal than human; decan Sagittarius.

7g Galactic Centre; Spring or pool (water, juncture); decan ,,,,

8 Healer or Scorpius; Trunk (pillar) mouth, hive of honey (healer, and trance induced by lowered blood pressure and buzzing bees); decan Ophiuchus, Snake Holder.

10 Teacher or Libra; Arm in V-posture (arm/s up), with herbs (staff?); decan Bootes.

11 Womb or Virgo; A midriff (womb); decan Spica.

12 and 13 Heart or Leo; Two chests (heart, heart); decan Ursa and Leo.

14 Mixer or Cancer; Eyes of the types 12 Heart and 11 Womb characters (mixture); decan Hydra head? This type is one of the general themes in the work, of satyrs or goat-people (mixture), mead (brew, transform), and supposed evolution (time).

15 Maker or Gemini; Bacchus (churn of bodies or souls), carrying a passenger (doubled). Axis 15 continues to another doubled figure, a satyr carrying a companion (doubled. See a jackal abducting a sheep in a paradise parody by Cyril Coetzee; T’Kama Adamastor).

Characters in all artworks express optional features, with some minor structuralist imperfections. Here type 7 Child or Sagittarius has his back turned, more usual of adjacent 8 Healer, decan Ophiuchus (which here is combined with type 9 Healer or Scorpius). Type 3 Queen or Aries has it axis not on its eye, but on its hand holding a bellows or hammer, which is a kind of bag or formling, more typical of the types flanking the four galactic corners. The overall sequence and structure remains clear.

‘Cosmic’ equators

The ragged oval or characters is analogous to the Ecliptic Equator in cosmology. The outline in complex works often includes some line economy, uding a continuous line, as here between the eyes of types 1, 15 and 14.

The two ‘Galactic’ Poles (4p and 11p), imply two ‘galactic’ equators, usually on a series of limb joints (here marked by thin, oblique semi-ovals), always crossing the typology outline or ‘ecliptic’ equato between 1-15 and between 7-g. The two ‘galactic’ equators overlap in the interior, and continue around two different ‘hemispheres’ as two exterior lobes. These two equators often divide compositional groups, as here they divide the culture group of people, v the nature group of satyrs.

Subconscious inspiration and conscious composition always overlap, yet artists are not aware of using attributes, postures, a figure sequence, eyes or limbs in the service of any detailed or standard structure. The five layers of cultural expression is inherent in the materials, themes, perceptions and ‘grammar’ or ‘DNA’ of human nature.

Polar triangles in art

The galactic pole (type 11p, or pG) is always near the equator, between types 12 and 11 (decan Crater, Grail); usually on a limb joint, here on the shoulder of a crawling figure, perhaps drunk with mead and thus relevant to grail and elixir themes.

The celestial pole (pC) is usually on a limb joint near the axial centre, and on or near the axis of the current or recent summer solstice, thus near axis 13, 12, 14 or 15. Here the celestial pole is on the shoulder of a satyr mother, between 14 and 15, where the celestial pole was in Age Aries late; but her elbow marks an earlier Age (of a perceived natural and cultural paradise) and her jaw (often a polar point) marks Cosimo’s forthcoming (now current) Age Pisces-Aquarius.

The ‘galactic south’ pole, 4p or pGs, is always between axes 4 and 5, but not always marked. Here it is on the jaw (limb joint) of an extra character (identified on an eye in error, before the role of limb joints was statistically confirmed).

The ‘celestial south’ pole on the hip of type 3 Queen or Aries tags the inspiration as Age Aries late, or Age Pisces early, at the time of the perceived formation of De Cosimo’s Christian culture.

Inspirational dating is a subtle geometric, mythical, conceptual and iconographic aspect of cultural expression, demonstrating the depth of the holographic structure in artistic inspiration. Even gifted nature spirits such as De Cosimo, on par with the best artists and rock artists in the world by any definition, did not consciously know mindprint, and could not fake it.

Both sides of a flat sphere

Mindprint structure is analogous to a sphere, imagined from above the sun, and simultaneously from above the earth. Armillary spheres, the basis of time and navigation instruments such as astrolabes, also express space and time by these two apparently contradictory perspectives. In addition to the dual ‘angelic’ perspective from infinitely far above (which is north in archetype, as it is in convention), the mirrored perspective from the south is included in cultural media and expressions. A model of perception requires parts of two armillary spheres, the northern one flared out and cut generously around its equator to retain zodiac and southern decan asterisms (see the cosmology image in another post); as well as the complete southern galactic equator. The southern hemisphere is cut stingily to avoid zodiac duplication, but its mirrored view of the galaxy is retained partly inside the ‘squashed’ centre, and partly on the flared rim outside the equator of characters.

Thus artworks contain two armillary sets, of three poles and five equators each. The central poles appear as one point, since they are viewed or ‘squashed’ along their own axle, revealing that culture is spatially ‘projected’ on the ecliptic plane, leaving the celestial and galactic equators oblique. Celestial equators are not shown in structuralist analyses, for the sake of simplicity.

There are no degrees of difficulty in the miracles of nature, perception and cultural expression. The resulting myth map differs from astronomical maps in reducing the celestial pole (of daily rotation) to a minor role; to focus on the ecliptic plane (of yearly orbit).

Mindprint art examples

Mindprint and decans in the Dendera zodiac

The Dendera round zodiac ceiling demonstrates the subconscious imprint in a quadruple concentric set of constellations, signs, decans and determinants (Louvre, and in a plaster cast replacement at Dendera in Egypt. Typology labels and axial grid by Edmond Furter). The four sets each follow the eye positions of the sixteen types as usual. These sets are uniquely vortexed relative to one another. The spring and polar section is inset for clarity.

A spring equinox baboon marker sits back-to-back with type 3 Queen or Aries or decan Triangulum, as a slaughtered quarry. Their tails or entrails together reach down to the Aries ram tail, which in turn hangs down to the type 4 King or Pisces ribbons (where the Cetus Whale tail is figured in myth, and in the sky).

A baboon is a movable spring feature, expressing precession (as noted in an obscure Greek tradition) among the types, thus not a type itself, nor a constellation or decan. It marks one or both of the equinoxes, and also finds expression in one of Thoth’s manifestations, resolving some of his emblematic ambiguities.

The spring sun or moon is under the baboon, displaced from 3 Aries to just on the 4 King or Pisces side of the tails, which also extend the Pisces latter ribbon, or forms a third ribbon (see the Cosmic myth map in another post). The spring sun or moon determinant (pictorial sign) is repeated at 4 Pisces constellation, as a character holding a spring sacrifice, formerly a feature of type 3 Queen or Aries, subconsciously dragged into the Age Pisces position in this work of dynamic subconscious structure.

The opposite sun or moon or lunar node is at type 9 Healer or Scorpius, but pictured in type 10 or decan Libra, confirming the usual ambiguity among precession markers and decans (Furter 2014; Mindprint, chapter on hour decans, noting how the night hour markers starting point change through the year, and their emblematic ambiguity).

The four major constellations are doubled in the Dendera round zodiac, as they are in all complex artworks and building sites (Furter 2016) worldwide. All sixteen typology axes are uniquely, subconsciously vortexed in order to link the eyes of northern, ecliptic and southern decans, to galactic or determinant characters in the border (see similar but linearly regimented decans in the Dendera crypt lotus bulb carving, in the book Mindprint).

Stereotypical zodiacs usually do not express the archetypal sequence, nor the axial ocular (eye to eye) structure. The elegant vortex here indicates inspired structuralist detail, beyond the needs of astrology or astronomy (see a vortex in rock art in the book Mindprint, Chapter 7).

This ceiling is useless to astronomical observation or calibration, but a timeless record of our collective need to imprint and review subconscious structuralist calibration, enabling the collective therapy of expressing who, what, where, when and how we fit into nature, and ultimately into archetype. Thus mindprint is revealed as subconscoius ‘graffiti’ behavioru, largely independent of our conscious motives, and of our semi-conscious mechanisms for using cultural goods to bond, appropriate spiritual goods, and exploit rival polities. All cultures use the same core content in their apparently ‘different’ ethnography (this theme is expanded in the 2019 paper Blueprint, on

Some authors read the Dendera zodiac as having been partially re-carved to add Greek and Roman constellations to Babylonian and Egyptian constellations, and to update the poles to precession, thus accounting for ‘generally misplaced’ features. But all these sets are now revealed as subconsciously but rigorously placed on a vortexed axial grid. The solution here indicates a single, inspired design, matched to nearly all the constellations. The only slightly displaced characters, probably due to design constraints, are type 13 Heart or Leo; the polar Ursa bull foreleg, 7g-15g and 4p-11p axes, and polar Draco Hercules Taweret hippo (the latter perhaps just differently constituted, an issue unresolved in Egyptology).

Spherical grid distortion arises from moving the perspective, or projection point of an axial grid, without moving the grid. However projectional distortion is seldom symmetrical or uniformly rotated, as this grid is.

There is no hint in archaeology, art history or esoterica of the conscious use of a vortex axial grid elsewhere. The stroke of inspired genius to express precession by dragging either the peripheral sequence backward, or the polar sequence forward, is probably subconscious, as all 100 known features on the five layers of structure are.

The sets of poles are expressed by the position of certain limb joints, as usual. The axial centre or ecliptic pole is on the jaw (limb-joint) of the Whippet jackal on a plough (Ursa Minor); itself on a bull foreleg (part of Draco, more often also Ursa Minor, or Ursa in older artworks).

11p Galactic Pole is on a staff foot (limb-joint). 4p Galactic South Pole is on an extra fish jaw (limb-joint), figuring constellation Pisces prior fish on conscious iconic level, but expressing type 4p decan Cetus (Whale) Spout on the subconscious level.

Midsummer or Celestial Pole is on type 15 Maker, Gemini, or decan Ursa Minor, as the jaw (limb-joint) of a tiny rear-facing canid, reclining on the other side of the bull foreleg, which is a slightly misplaced type 13 Heart, Leo, or decan Ursa Major (continuing its earlier structuralist function in Age Taurus as celestial polar calibrator).

Midwinter or Celestial South Pole or autumn axis is on the jaw (limb-joint) of the Taweret hippo (who more usually figures the axial centre or Ecliptic Pole). Her polar womb is on the type 10 Teacher or Libra axis, a potential precessional ambiguity in this transitional expression; however the type 10 decan is Bootes, and its genital star Arcturus is on the eternal ecliptic grid directly above the Virgo womb star Spica. Subconscious behaviour has no need to resolve apparent conscious ambiguities.

The celestial pole or midsummer over Gemini, tags ‘spring’ and the time-frame of the inspiration to Age Pisces. Most artworks express a previous time-frame. The Celestial South Pole or midwinter over 6-7, places spring in Age Aries-Pisces, confirming the spring sun or moon entering Pisces, and the archaeological dating as Ptolemaic, in the early centuries AD.

  • After a chapter in Mindprint, the subconscious art code, by Edmond Furter, 2014, Updated January 2019.
How to identify mindprint types and structure in art

How mindprint, the subconscious art code, was discovered

Themes, moods, rhythms, styles and fads in poetry and lyrics could each be reduced to a distinctive format among a limited range of modes or ‘grooves’, and compared across a gulf of millennia to identify the character of the inspiration.

So it seemed to a literature student raised on Homer and art rock. My first thesis, Urban poets and prophets, directly compared some poems and ‘art rock’ lyrics. “Once tuned in to a particular inspiration, a poem writes itself”, I announced to a literature lecturer, who in return rattled off a list of authors, such as Mallarme, who have already said that.

“We should study poem cycles for their mythic structures, and study writing techniques only for how they support thematic structure,” I announced to a poetry lecturer, who suggested that I should study philosophy or psychology instead.

My next thesis explored the structure of phonemes (speech sounds) and the limits of meaning as revealed by their artistic use in what I took to be lyrical ‘modes’, bent to similar structural rules as parts of speech. Each phoneme’s pronunciation and perception is influenced by the succession it occurs within.

We perceive the distribution and succession as a whole, a kind of auditory speed-reading that support some meanings and obscure others. The grammar lecturer replied that I should consider an anthropology or psychology course.

From a combination of Freudian psychology and myth, including Fraser’s apparently fragmented Golden Bough, emerged vague but persistent impressions that some elements of the human psyche and culture were structured, compulsive and somewhat mechanistic, but partly subconscious and expressing spiritual logic beyond conscious definition. Jung’s depth psychology I had to read in my own time, it was not part of the psychology course.

An eventual career in journalism taught me that living myth and legend, or myth in the making, dictates which news, history and even technical magazine content would sell. No story is as difficult to write and to read as one containing new thought patterns or new assumptions. News gradually revealed itself as the sceptic’s definition of history; a set of fictions we agree to tell one another.

Invisible structure dogged my writing, and my hobby as a musician. Underneath conscious behaviour and even small talk, lie elements of a bigger conversation that I sought out in Egyptology, archaeology, astronomy, sacred sites, Theosophy and art.

Archaeology Society field trips and aerial photography flips over extensive kraal (cattle corral) cities in South Africa offered me a visual framework for interpreting cultural artefacts as shaped by individual and collective economy (paths of least resistance), using ready physical material and symbolic spacing. Culture seemed also to ‘write itself’.

The idea that visual art express stock themes, just as poems, lyrics, phonemes, huts and music do, gradually rose to prominence as I studied supposed astronomical artefacts, to find archetypes instead.

Rock art images often include swallow mud nest forms, swifts in half-human shape, water and a vortex in the sky. These birds, sometimes half-fish and mistaken as ‘mermaids’, are what archaeologists label ‘swift people’ (see theme 1 Taurus16), but archaeological literature fails to address the rest of the ensemble, or visual ‘mode’, resembling predictions of the 9/11 2001 New York terror attack.

An alchemical emblem by Basil Valentine of the 1300s (type 1:16 Builder/Sacker or Taurus) contain the same features that I had linked to swift people in rock art, and in Tarot trump 16 (Tower struck by lightning), several years before the iconic event of November 2001. Valentine’s alchemical emblem shows a high-rise city, on an island across a bridge, on fire, with a tract above it being torn up or struck by lightning. The medieval caption speaks of national pride, meddling in foreign affairs and mixed messages coming home to roost, in the same terms and tone used by critics of former USA president George W Bush.

Illustrations to the modern tale of the Wizard of Oz, with the related theme of a towering city and a yellow brick road, and the synonymous song by Bernie Tauplin and Elton John, closely fit the type or mode. Lyrics to Yellow brick road (“When are you gonna come down, when are you going to land… I bet that’ll shoot down your plane”) below an image of the fallen World Trade centre, came as a shock of recognition to the informal class of archaeo astronomers that I teach each midwinter holiday in June-July.

I gradually came to understand that the subject of my short course in archaeo astronomy was a misnomer, since it revealed structures in supposed astronomical artefacts that do not require archaeology or astronomy to express or to read.

Type t16 in an image dictated by Hildegard of Bingen, and woven by ecstatic nums. Compare Tarot trump 16, and swift people in art, and citadels struck by lightning or discord in alchemical emblems. The type is explained in detail in the book Mindprint, the archetypal art code (Edmond Furter, 2014,
Type 1 Builder/Sacker or Taurus in an image dictated by Hildegard of Bingen, and woven by ecstatic nums. Compare to Tarot trump 16, and swift people in art, and citadels struck by lightning or discord in alchemical emblems. The type is explained in detail in the book Mindprint, the archetypal art code (Edmond Furter, 2014,

If the Tower of Babel had a type number (1:16), and a cluster of features (build, sack, rain, etc), and came with a standard set of supporting icons and themes, such as language, diplomacy and trade tracts; then other icons in art, rock art, poetry, supposed prophecy and even historic events, could carry similar heraldic and emblematic markers. If archetypal events tend to be well recorded and reported, and less archetypal events selectively recorded, then visual art could reveal a visual grammar, and in turn crack the archetypal code.

While following this approach in research, I chanced on an image of the Lamb of God (Agnus Dei) in a Papal seal imprint in ash-laden wax, posed as a query in an archaeological magazine (Voyage of the Planet, now defunct). I recognised the image from a Babylonian cylinder seal and the Egyptian Narmer palette that I had already tentatively identified with myths and features related to dragons and to Aries.

Since Agnus Dei was universally known in Judaeo-Christian iconography as well as astrology, it offered an anchor point for the underlying structure of myth. The Lamb of God also appears in alchemical emblems and Tarot trump 18 (Moon), anchoring a camouflaged sequence of correspondences, affinities, or ‘tacking’ between several esoteric sets.

Conventional logic that tags the Tarot’s crayfish to Cancer had to be wrong. The creature had to be Cetus or its tail, expressing the concept of a Kraken-type sea monster, the scaly component of a dragon, by definition a composite beast. Conventional astrology that cast Aries as a ram and ram only, had to be wrong.

Yet another clue to the sequence of types emerged from my own archaeo astronomy course material; a music DVD including an interview with rock icon Ian Anderson, genius of the band Jethro Tull, explaining how he eventually discovered that his chromatic, lilting, riffed music, and one-legged stance, resembled Krishna and Kokopelli (Jethro Tull, Living with the past, Eagle Vision DVD). Anderson does not mention Pan, but I already had his number from mythology, since forests, goats, and Capricornus ‘tacked’ to Trump 6 (Lovers) in the Tarot deck.

Combining these and other anchor points and filling in the gaps, I cracked the sequence of attributes that populate myth, alchemy, art, astrology and Tarot trumps. The little list (actually a semi-spiral with four expandable parts) soon became a lens with which to read rock art, which emerged as identical to myth and schooled art in inspiration, compulsion and structure, across the gulf of millennia and continents.

t16 tarot tower

Art history and archaeology are prone to exaggerating diffusion and conventions, despite examples of independent development of similar pantheons, rituals, pyramids, temples, monuments and the entire repertoire of culture in the Americas and elsewhere. All have characters near identical to Perseus, Hercules and the rest, and modes similar to ode, sonnet, gloria, blues and hero epic.

The concept of cultural elements, such as half-humans, as idiosyncratic developments, prompted and ‘framed’ by their own cultures, had to be wrong.

Comparing ancient Egyptian rock art and Egyptian formal (dynastic) art with Zimbabwean rock art, allowed a series of breakthroughs beyond the broadest thesis or imagination of my earlier research in lyrics, speech sounds and emblems. Many figures include standard attributes in implicit elements such as a staff, a long or craned neck, certain postures, relatively larger or smaller size, pregnancy, position relative to the approximate centre, species, attire, skin paint, status or apparent social function.

The frequent distinctive attributes appear in the periphery, in a standard sequence, and as axial opposites, which in turn reveal the standard geometric structure.

The more I tested, the simpler the sequence and structure became to identify. If academia was right, archetypes should be scattered at random in art, and every region or culture should have a unique set of figures, and display different stages of development in different eras. Yet artists all sing the same hymn to an archetypal tune, over the same set of polar ‘chords’.

If art history was right, there should be no axial structure in art. Iconographic analysis of large political art panels at Wits University (see T’Kama Adamastor), Brenthurst Library (see Leonard French’s Bridge), and the Voortrekker Monument (see Hennie Potgieter’s marble friezes), confirmed the same ‘rock art sequence’ in schooled art. Only some stylistic elements differ.

Learned artists, and supposedly primitive rock artists whose visionary figurative and geometric engravings I had puzzled over on field trips, share subconscious recourse to archetypal structure. The universal structure also appears in myth and wisdom literature. A deceptively simple little list of seasonal evening stars in the Mishnah confirmed astrology as just another layer or medium, and not the origin of structure (see the Literature section).

From years of searching for a ‘unified field theory’ in esoteric literature, I knew that lists appeared in hundreds of guises, but were nowhere reduced to a universal set, except in the stereotype of astrology, and these do not explain the more ‘rounded’ halo’s of meanings that I found in emblems and art.

Could there be more than conceptual symmetry between the sixteen types that were emerging? When I had casually asked sculptor Danie de Jager about geometric ratios in art, he explained that artists had “geometry built in”.

To find these ‘built-in’ structures on a larger scale, I developed a template from what I had thought at first to be a re-construction of a ‘Babylonian’ division of the cosmos and constellations, keyed to galactic features, mythic figures of various relative sizes and extent, as well as star lore.

Once I understood this structure as archetypal, not an ‘oral tradition’, legacy or secret source, but re-invented by every culture, and innately understood by artists and viewers, healers and patients, it became obvious that the sequence and the structure were part and parcel of perception.

Most artists do not study astronomy, and would have to invest some months of conscious effort to become familiar with the interplay between the forces, positions, observation and background texture of the sky. Yet the innate structure of perception, as revealed in artistic expression, could be super-imposed on a cosmogram or star map, or on any sufficiently complex natural or cultural set.

I systematically super-imposed astrological, alchemical, emblematic, mythic and conceptual elements on the sequence revealed by my affinitive ‘tacking’, then on a multi-cultural armillary projection of the sky developed for an educational installation in a theme park (not yet built). I tested the sequence and its structure on rock art, then on famous artworks, then on amateur art.

The structure hinges on the eyes of each figure (or in frontal faces on the eyes nearest to the geometric focal point), and on axes to the eyes of each opposite but complementary types (with two constant exceptions; a heart and a womb, corresponding to type 13 Heart or Leo, and type 11 Womb or Virgo). These axes always cross in one point.

One of the first rock art works to confirm the test in all its complexity was a group of goat people (half human figures) in Turkey, in a small shelter at Mount Latmos near Ephesus. Perhaps it was an informal oracle site, or just the haunt of an inspired goatherd that may have been a candidate for a temporary appointment at one of the earlier ‘Amazonian’ oracles, or the later formal temples. Perhaps by an aristocrat ordained for religious service as a Vestal virgin or priest, or a poet such as Aesop.

As I compared the ‘primitive’ figures to sophisticated, ritualised, formulaic, programmatic art depicting Artemis and her goats, it became clear that the elaborate oracular rock art of the Matobo range in Zimbabwe was no different in impulse, core content, structure, impact or style.

Panel after panel of rock art reproductions (particularly in the book by Elspeth Parry), as well as a range of works by classical and modern masters, chosen for their apparent differences, cracked under the lens of what I eventually named mindprint.

Another strand in the braid of archetypal expression came from the order of painting. Archaeologists carefully label strata, often paper thin, as they dig down, leaving portions they name ‘witness sections’ stuck with an array of flagged pins to re-check their dig reports and subsequent seasons or other sites against. This method, named the Harris matrix, they also apply to rock painting, useful where many figures partially overlay one another (assuming that each figure is completed in a separate episode).

The method reveals likely episodes of painting, typically grouping three, four, five or six figures into three, four or five episodes. Comparison of a meticulous academic paper on stratigraphy in a Drakensberg rock art work, to mindprint analysis of the same work, revealed that the artist had painted pairs of opposite figures together. This may not apply to all artists (see stratigraphy problems in the ‘Three Magi’ rock art scene in examples Chapter 13), but the cloth of evidence was woven to demonstrate the collective subconscious inspiration, or at least expression in practice.

The evidence awaited only a statistical test, which added the final strand to the art code. Despite my habitual reluctance for quantitative grammar, the test and results ‘wrote themselves’, and revealed some visual and structural qualities that the new conceptual sequential and geometrical lenses did not initially detect.

This study traces the structure in visual expression back to the invisible structure of inspiration and perception, and thus to the structure of nature, as far as we could know her, ultimately to archetype, which existed before creation and time. Breaking through the layers of disguise and distraction that protect our conscious logic from subconscious logic, required following thousands of trails in a forest of scientific and esoteric mazes, locking out dead ends, and returning to unexplored turns.

The reputed skill of artists in translating inspiration into visual form, as a tool of individual spiritual transformation, is confirmed. Our conscious and scientific views of art, perception and ultimately identity, have to recognise that we are essentially re-creators of archetypal structure.

Since the sequence and structure of visual types are sufficiently demonstrated, as repeated and repeatable, it stands as an artefact requiring a theory, no longer a theory supported by artefacts. Relevant sciences, arts and crafts will probably find their own explanations for mindprint.

The book was written twice, first as 200 captions to art and rock art images, to demonstrate how artists express eternal archetypes in a mixture of consciously understood and subconscious, universal esoteric terms, then as a statistical research report.

[UPDATE 2019 January; Since Mindprint, the same structural features were demonstrated in building sites, in the book Stoneprint (2014). The list of isolated features, and their average features, was expanded there, and in six editions of Stoneprint Journal in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019.]

Together, the images and text place mindprint, our involuntary art code, in context with archaeology, anthropology, mythology, philosophy, psychology, art history and popular culture.

The two spheres of this book, theoretical and practical, hopefully enable conscious access to the vast array of subconscious meanings in art, in acclaimed individual works and seemingly different cultures across continents and millennia.

The revelations and conclusions enable a synthesis of our academic, artistic and esoteric views of culture. The three sides of the artistic, esoteric and scientific divide meet here on their own terms.

Mindprint leads several crafts, arts and sciences through their commonalities to the subtext in cultural and natural expressions of archetype.

To avoid the double risk of alienating scientists by esoteric terminology, or alienating esoteric readers by scientific terminology, technicalities are kept to a minimum. Concepts are demonstrated in terms of actual expressions of the archetypal attributes and structure in artworks, and multiplied by many references to the 200 illustrated examples.

Science and esoterica both operate on the principle of predictability and isolation (distinction), although science proceeds from measurables in theoretical context, and esoterica from intrinsic correspondences. This book describes and tests archetype in both contexts.

– Edmond Furter, Johannesburg, March 2014

(Extract from the Postscript in the book Mindprint, the subconscious art code, 2014,, 266 pages, 200 illustrations, $29 plus postage, or R250 at presentations in South Africa, or email edmondfurter at