The Castel del Monte is a well-known octagonal fortress in Apulia, constructed in the 13th century for Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II. However, it was never properly finished and ended up being used over the centuries as:
* a state prison;
* somewhere to loot nice bits of marble from; and
* a story location in Umberto Eco’s “The Name of the Rose” (he rechristened his version the ‘Aedificium’). 🙂

Derelict for many years, the Castel was bought by the state in 1876 and subsequently restored (though more or less all the tasty-looking marble bits had been robbed out and scavenged). Nowadays, it’s not really of much consequence unless you happen to be on holiday in South-Eastern Italy and want something nice to look at. It is what it is, which is actually not nearly as much as people once hoped that it was.

But now possibly a brand new (and perhaps architecturally esoteric) chapter in its life has begun. Giuseppe Fallacara and Ubaldo Occhinegro have just had a book published by Gangemi Editore SpA, with the title Manoscritto Voynich e Castel del Monte. Yes, it’s a brand new Voynich theory.

What they seem to be proposing is that some of the Voynich Manuscript’s more architectural-style drawings (particularly the nine-rosette fold-out page, but also various others in the astronomical section, as I understand it) encode sort-of-plans for building the Castel del Monte, and include all kinds of mysterious and little-known plumbing details – “pipes, tubes, channels, cisterns, showers and fireplaces” etc – once present or nearly-present in its construction.

Well… it is certainly true that the design of this little castle was constructed with water management strongly in mind: there was a large cistern sunk in the rock immediately beneath the central courtyard, and tanks for capturing rainwater in some of the eight towers. There was also a (presumably substantial, but now lost) octagonal basin in the middle of the courtyard, briefly mentioned in the Castel’s official webpage.

And so I can certainly see how someone looking at the Voynich Manuscript’s drawings afresh while tilting their head in just the right way might feel somehow compelled to tease out some kind of parallel between the twin themes of architecture and plumbing that apparently inform both artefacts. But in fact active, central water management was a key part of castle design throughout the Middle Ages – for if you find yourself besieged, you can last for a long time with only a little food, but without plenty of water you will soon die.

I have to say that this sounds like the Castel del Monte could be one of the slimmer resemblances or correlations I’ve seen used to construct a Voynich theory upon or around. But Fallacara’s and Ogginegro’s book includes an English version on facing pages, so hopefully I will get to see their argument in full for myself before very long. At 40 euros plus shipping from Italy, the whooshing sound you might also hear is the vacuum left when the money leaves your wallet. But it does look quite pretty, maybe that’s enough. 🙂

31 thoughts on “Voynich Manuscript and the Castel del Monte…

  1. So if we combine the architecture-based story-lines offered so far we end up with a Norman castle in southern Italy modelled on hypothetical women’s baths in Persia and/or the womens’ baths of old Italy, subsequently adopted for his own designs by Filarete, the resulting complex at some time transformed into some witch-house and world-class botanical garden ( posited by Steve Deveson et.al.) for their ‘Villa Voynichi’.

    I’ll be interested in explanations given for what is actually shown in the manuscript – such as the ‘bat-winged’ figure with its long pointed nose, or the small Hellenistic figure hidden in f.86v, the only realistic depiction of the human form, or indeed of any complete living thing, in the entire manuscript.

    Not that I’m complaining about reference to southern Italy and the Sicilian kingdom – where Sarkel castle appears to be our earliest remaining example of swallowtail merlons.

  2. bdid1dr on November 29, 2013 at 5:14 pm said:

    Diane, I inadvertently confused the discussion on the various pages of folio 86 because even Boenicke seemed uncertain when numbering the foldouts. So, I looked at all of the pictures which appeared in the four corners and found the story of Alcyone and Ceyx: A kingfisher sailing down a waterfall, a figure huddled behind the stem of a mushroom (which writing identified the mushroom being coprinacae), and another human figure apparently in distress in a stream of water. Three “living things” of which the human figures were phantoms.

  3. Bdid1dr
    The Beinecke has 86v as one unit. Seems reasonable to me. Unless someone sees evidence for it being later than the rest I don’t see why it should be defined differently – but am willing to consider different views. btw – who first mentions ” coprinacae”?

  4. bdid1dr on November 30, 2013 at 2:53 pm said:

    Clusius? Dodoens? Once upon a time Nick had a discussion of a physician who while on his rounds found and identified a mushroom (Rondelet by Kingsley?). I can’t find his name in my Audubon. The Mycological Society website may have that info. I’m fairly certain it wasn’t Dioscorides.
    Anyway, did you visit, online, the museum’s (Florence, Museo Degli Argenti) collection of cut crystal commissioned by Francesco de Medici? That circular dish’s interior is engraved with ships and sailors at sea. Those ugly gold and lapis lazuli figures on the brim are of Alcyone and her mate Ceyx, in the process of being transformed into kingfishers.

  5. bdid1dr on November 30, 2013 at 3:23 pm said:

    BTW, did you take a look at Boccanegra’s monumental works in Genoa and France?

  6. Il volume Manoscritto Voynich e Castel del Monte (Gangemi, 2013, pp 180, 40 euro), scritto da Giuseppe Fallacara e Ubaldo Occhinegro, sarà presentato per la prima volta in conferenza stampa mercoledì 4 dicembre, alle 18, nella sede di Bruxelles del Parlamento Europeo (sala ASP 5G2).

    http://corrieredelmezzogiorno.corriere.it/bari/notizie/cronaca/2013/28-novembre-2013/segreto-castel-montenascosto-manoscritto-voynich-2223717617380.shtml

  7. Nick,
    Like so many of your hundreds of regular readers, I’ll wait for your review before deciding whether to have a copy.

  8. bdid1dr on December 1, 2013 at 6:19 pm said:

    Signor Fallacara, grazie por la link! Perdoneme Sabir. Have you any information for the port which Boccanegra is said to have redesigned and fortified (not too far from Arles)?

  9. bdid1dr on December 1, 2013 at 7:28 pm said:

    Oh my! I plugged in the search words “Venetian-Genoese Wars”, on Google search, and came up with a whole lot of discussion which seems to deal with the ongoing feuds which occurred between the two treaties of Nymphaeum; but which continued right on through the 1380’s ad.

    Sailing, sailing, over the bounding main…….

    😉

  10. bdid1dr on December 1, 2013 at 9:20 pm said:

    I just visited a website “paradox place” which gives a very brief but well illustrated history of castel del monte. Oh my goodness, count ’em (the rondels surrounding the central feature) and then compare with poor Fr. Kircher’s ID of the “Nine Rosettes” features in B-408’s presentation. Even the shoreline at the base of the folio shows steep bluffs and boats close to shore. BTW, as far as I can tell, I may be the first person to refer to that fold-out folio as (Nine Rosettes). I remember Diane querying me as to why I called them “Rosettes”.
    Do I remember correctly that you and your friends had departed for Frascati/Villa Romana just a week or so before Diane, Ellie, and I began circling around that folio? Also, very soon after you rejoined us you were hacked? I think I may have been one of the first to pick up your new topic “That Which……”.
    A song: ” Where have all the flowers gone, long time passing? …..long time ago..”

    Melancholy baby: beedee

  11. Bd1dr – I think it might have been Nick who coined the term ‘Rosettes folio’ – it’s certainly in his book (2006).
    By the time you raised the topic, I think I’d already published my own analysis of it (as map of world relevant to the content).Also suggested it an example of Jafriye, shown correspondence to motifs on Genoese & Catalan-Jewish works etc. However, the information was deemed ‘distracting’ to the central European hypothesis and I’ve seen none of it mentioned, or at least correctly attributed. I’ve heard on the grapevine that someone in Spain or Germany has been busy creating a less incompatible version of the same, but that might be mere rumour.

  12. bdid1dr on December 2, 2013 at 3:48 pm said:

    So, have we come ‘full circle’ when it comes to Ghibelline or Guelph castles/fortresses being portrayed in B-408?
    The name Barbarossa reappears also.

  13. bdid1dr on December 2, 2013 at 3:56 pm said:

    Onward! Florence next — De Medici works (monuments, castles, art, sculpture, cut crystal, lapis lazuli, precious metals, manuscripts……) See, I closed my parentheses.
    🙂

  14. bdid1dr on December 2, 2013 at 9:15 pm said:

    Nick, Diane: Did you notice that Signors Fallacari & Occhinegro will be having a press conference this coming Wednesday (4 December) at the Headquarters of the European Parliament (Brussels?) — per Corriere Del Mezzogiorno-Bari-Chronicle. The ad doesn’t mention whether it will be televised, etc. I’m hoping “somebody” may be able to post the details here on Nick’s page.

  15. bdid1dr on December 3, 2013 at 4:54 pm said:

    The port I mentioned previously was Aigues-Mort. Will Signor Fallacara be able to determine who constructed (Engineer et al) Castel del Monte?

  16. bdid1dr on December 5, 2013 at 7:19 pm said:

    Yesterday I watched the conference video and their brief photo gallery. One of the Vms folios presented was 55v, which they correctly identified as the water lotus. Although I was not able to get my captioning to work, they demonstrated their identification of that blossom by overlaying a dried seedpod. So, who knows? Maybe the central courtyard did have a pool of water which may have had aquatic plants and creatures, and maybe some waterfowl (swans, geese, ducks) all of which would be feeding on the critters which were mostly bottom-feeders (freshwater clams for instance) and maybe mosquito larva?

  17. bdid1dr on December 5, 2013 at 7:32 pm said:

    Maybe Frederick’s falcon feasted on a cygnet or duckling now and then?

  18. Bd1r
    On March 18, 2013 at 22:47 in comment to Elmar Vogt’s blog, you wrote:
    “I have tentatively identified Vms folio 55v as being an aquatic legume known as the “Sacred Bean of Egypt … the lotus”
    – your ealier id hving been “Mushroom” (Ellie Velinska’s Big Business blog Nov. 18th., 2012)

    Ellie herself suggests the wild Leek: Allium tricoccum or Allium ursinum (on Vms list and on her more recent Blogger blog)

    while Edith Sherwood & Steve Deveson offer the id. Broccoli (Brassica oleracea).

  19. bdid1dr on December 9, 2013 at 5:06 pm said:

    Diane, you are confusing two entirely different folios: 55v is the water lotus (now in a category of its own). The “mushroom” folio is 86 v3 OR 86 r3 (even Boenicke seems to be vague on whether it is R or V). I am not going to discuss our posts to Elmar Vogt’s site, (nor Ellie’s) herein. Please give Signor Fallacari space on this page to at least post his hyperlink. Thanks.

  20. bdid1dr on December 9, 2013 at 6:36 pm said:

    My apologies for my again mispelling of your name. It won’t happen again. I very much enjoyed the video (I am deaf, so I toggled the Italian captioning and was able to comprehend what was being displayed. Grazie!
    So far, I have been able to translate (into Latin) some of Boenicke 408’s folios: Water lily (2v), water lotus (55v), saffron crocus (35r).coprinicae mushroom Alcyone & Ceyx (86r3), Dianthus (56r). Mulberry morus-silkworm food (11v), Turban Ranunculus (49v). Mandrake fruit juice (83v). I am still in progress with the “Nine Rosettes” folio because Fr. Kircher identified that folio’s only castle as “Vellitrae”. So, we now can look at folio 116v with a freshly documented point of view — and with architectural drawings! The folios which numbers are in the 70’s and 80’s appear to be discussions in re the care and maintenance of human “nymphae”. So, I am still circling around the two “Treaties of Nymphaeaeum” (trade agreements). I do understand that Nymphaeum was an actual trading center.

    Again, Grazie!

  21. bdid1dr on December 11, 2013 at 4:16 pm said:

    I’m cross-filing these comments on this page with Nick’s other Voynich castel del monte book launch page — which see.
    bd

  22. bdid1dr on December 11, 2013 at 8:46 pm said:

    By the way, several months ago I mentioned that I was a paralegal with expertise in records management. Here, in California at least, paralegals had to learn the latin term “res ipsa loquitur” — the thing speaks for itself. It looks like Boenicke manuscript 408 is becoming more voluble every day!

  23. bdid1dr on December 12, 2013 at 6:53 pm said:

    Furthermore, see my recent post on Nick’s other castel del monte discussion — in re Cicilian monks involvement in the construction and hydraulics of cathedrals and castles (Regnum Siciliae, Frederick II of Swabia) in particular.

  24. bdid1dr: sorry, but currently I’m not sufficiently bothered about the whole Castel del Monte thing to go haring down rabbit holes to do with it. When I find myself with enough spare money to buy the book (it’s on my list, but that’s a long, long list), I’ll perhaps come back to their wonky Voynich theory then, because all the history and historiography of the Castel del Monte is doubtless covered in sufficient detail within their text.

  25. bdid1dr on December 13, 2013 at 4:23 pm said:

    Thanx for the feedback, Nick. I shall now be haring off onto some other leads I’ve discovered about other castles in Apulia which apparently were also designed by Frederick II and built by Cistercians. Several more examples of octagonal designs.
    A tout a l’heure!

  26. Nick (& Diane), See my latest post of this morning/afternoon (on Nick’s other current discussion) in re a very well illustrated book of medieval life “The Horizon Book of the Medieval Ages”, in re four-legged “Scorpio” manuscript excerpt from “Heures de la Duchesse de Bourgnone ms 1362″……fascinating! I’m also going to dig a little into the life of the Duchess. If my faulty memory can still give me a true clue, and I seem to recall that there is an illustration of the Duchess also posed with a falcon (Fred II’s portrait is quite similar), do you think I can now put a dot at the end of this sentence — or a question mark . ? .
    bdid1dr

  27. bdid1dr on December 30, 2013 at 8:11 pm said:

    Nick & Diane, see my latest ref to 4-legged Scorpio, on Nick’s ‘Internet speaks its mind’ pages.

  28. Dear Nik, if you want I’ll send you a book! … Give me your address!
    Ciao
    and Happy New Year!
    and also … I invite you to visit Puglia and Castel del Monte!

  29. Robert P. Davis on July 13, 2015 at 1:40 pm said:

    Since visiting Castel del Monte I have given some thought to its intriguing peculiarities.

    First, it is very badly designed for defense.
    There are no surrounding moats or walls. The castle just sits there, exposed on the hilltop. The spiral stairs rise clockwise which places a right handed defender at a disadvantage. The windows are Impractically narrow and deep limiting the effectiveness of defending archers.

    I suspect that these deliberate flaws in the design of a defensive stronghold may be Frederik II’s way of “cocking a snook” at those resenting his authority and power.

    Further, the octagonal design causes the castle to look like a crown set alone on the hilltop. That may have been deliberate with the shape of the castle intended to cause it to resemble the Reichskrone, an eight-sided crown that served for the coronation of the rulers of the Holy Roman Empire.
    I think this possibility makes much more sense than the weird speculations that have come forward.

    Think of the Castle as an elegant “folly” foisted on us by Frederick II.

  30. Robert P. Davis: though I’d heartily agree that Castel del Monte was in no obvious way designed as a fortified stronghold, I’m not sure that lumping it in to the whole Victorian “folly” category quite does it justice. It’s… idiosyncratic, sure, but at the time I believe it probably did have a functional use that the depredations of the centuries since have razed from sight.

    With that in mind, I suspect that the core of the architectural part of the two authors’ argument – that it functioned as some kind of bath house – is probably correct, though with the mile-high caveat that the rest of what they propose (particularly the part to do with the Voynich Manuscript) doesn’t really work for me. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Post navigation