Newly arrived Voynich theorists Giuseppe Fallacara and Ubaldo Occhinegro will be holding their book launch at the European Parliament in Brussels tomorrow (4th December 2013, 6pm, room ASP 5G2 if you just happen to be nearby).
They’ve even managed to bring Roberto Giacobbo, the hugely well-known (and much-parodied) guy from long-running TV history / pseudohistory documentary series Voyager on Italian channel Rai 2 along to the presentation to give his thoughts, along with MEP Sergio Silvestris, no doubt somewhat delighted that anyone outside of Brussels remembers that he has a pulse. Cipher Mysteries readers with sad photographic memories for trivia may recall that it was Giacobbo’s Voyager programme who busted the infamous “John Titor” time-traveller hoax waaaay back in 2008. Though not everything on Voyager has managed to reach the same level of factual accuracy and careful research, if its many critics are even partially to be believed.
As far as I can tell, what the two Italian Voynich authors will be demonstrating is that the Castel del Monte was not only an incomplete Imperial hunting lodge (as if anything so obvious could be the case, pshaw!), but also a planned fantastic herbal laboratory (of sorts) for gaining eternal life, via Voynich-style spagyric alchemy. It’s true that they seem a little bit wobbly as far as physical history (Roger Bacon? Hmmm) / codicology (what?) / art history (where?) goes – frankly, their Voynich theory seems to be all about architecture and nothing else – but that’s probably entirely par for the course. Perhaps they’ll have something genuinely interesting and insightful to say about the Voynich Manuscript I’m not expecting… anything’s possible, I guess.
The nicest thing of all is that they plan to stream the whole event live-and-direct to we far-away denizens of the Whole Wide World via their shiny website www.castello-manoscritto.it. So there’s still time to get a refund on that EasyJet flight to Belgium you just booked for tomorrow, because you can watch the whole thing at your PC or Mac, perhaps even in your dressing gown (depending on your timezone relative to 18:00 Central European Time).
I doubt they’ll allow questions from the (virtual) wings, though… it all looks that bit too fragile to stand up to proper scrutiny. I’m sure you’re way ahead of me already as far as what questions they’d find hard to answer (i.e. why does the Voynich’s cryptography so resemble ciphers made 150 years after the dates you’re talking about? etc), so I won’t list them here. 😉
Will I be in Brussels tomorrow? Well, not unless a CIA black team descends on Cipher Mysteries Mansion and some kind of extraordinary rendition thing happens (and it’s reassuring to that know the rules have changed so that I wouldn’t now get tortured in the process). However, my best guess is that no three-letter agency (or even honorary members GCHQ) is currently sufficiently bothered about the Voynich Manuscript to do that. But all being well, I’l doubtless try to stream it. Hopefully that will be as close as I need to get! 🙂
1438 gives only a likely terminus ad quem for inscription; it doesn’t provide an argument re terminus ante quem for contained matter (i.e. the reference of imagery or the plain text presumed to underly the present one, believed in cipher).
Theoretically at least, one would have to allow that the present text could be ciphered using a method devised at any time before the manuscript’s last rebinding. Theoretically.
People did still know how to make gall-ink in the seventeenth century and as Rich Santacoloma was the first to argue, I think, the parchment’s date isn’t necessarily that of its inscription.
Well, if it is similar to what was so far released by European Parliament . . .:-)
Jan
What I am finding interesting is the name of Fallicari’s co-author. Were his ancestors Guelph or Ghibbeline? Another puzzlement: Are we to believe that Frederick II rolled up his sleeves and went right to work cutting stone and directing every step of the construction? Who drew up the plans? Who inherited the plans? Who, in Frederick’s court, would be responsible for maintaining the estate and castle inhabitants?
I’ve recently been visiting (online) one of Boccanegra’s projects, the rehab of the port of Aigues Mort. It is interesting in so far as it still operates a salt mine beside having one of the largest yacht harbors on that stretch of the coast.
Nick, I just tried to refer you to another website with some very interesting info on Frederick’s building of the castle. Your spam filter is working on my note. I shall try to be patient. In the meantime, if you can find references to Professor John H. Lienhard at the University of Houston, you will find some history of Frederick II’s design of the castle and his correspondence with Fibonacci……
So, could the Vms be Frederick II’s written prelude to the design of the castle? It is interesting that one of his sons was imprisoned in that castle for quite a while.
My previous lengthy note, which spam filter is reviewing, is referring to Professor Lienhard’s ref “No. 1348:Castel Del Monte”: two pages of discussion, Fig. 404 plan drawing of Castel del Monte. and a short page of bibliography.
From Prof. Lienhard’s site – building described as:
“Stupor mundi et immutator mirabilis”.
“Stupor mundi” was used by contemporaries in describing Frederick – one of those two-edged phrases to which diplomacy is prone.
“… mirabilis” a term associated with Friar Roger.
Correction: It was three of Frederick II’s grandsons who were imprisoned in Castel del Monte for 30 years – only one escaped – and promptly disappeared “into Egypt”. It was Frederick II’s son Manfred who died in battle in 1266.
So, I shall be “looking up” the details of that battle, as well as the ancestry of Frederick II and his wife (mother of Manfred).
bdid1r
Good for any Ottoman thesis, or thesis involving the Ottoman turks.
I’ve been seeking for some time the root of the cultural tabus evident in the Vms, among which is the systematic avoidance of colours in the purple-to-black range.
Well – I’ve found one possibility. In an article for Aramco World, Philippa Scott writes:
“Ottoman superstitions held black and purple to be unlucky colors. Although purple at times conferred distinction, during times of war it was an omen of death”.
I expect people under Ottoman rule, or even passing through their territory would conform to this superstition; minorities and foreigners were attacked by mobs for doing less, and you wouldn’t want to try making up potions from a recipe whose plants were coloured black or purple would you?
Cheers
So, we have a manuscript which folios are being written upon animal skins which date to the mid-1400’s. So, does this mean that we are (still) looking at a fraudulent document? Or could it simply mean that succeeding “jailers” were keeping a record of the inmates (victims of the Nymphaeum treaties/wars)?
I am going to attempt to follow up on the correspondence of Frederick II and Fibonacci. Not too long ago I read some online discussion in re Fibonacci sequences appearing everywhere in nature (snowflakes, cellular matter, animal or vegetable). So, are we now are looking at a castle which may have been designed using Fibonacci “math”?
bdid1dr: I’d be surprised if fractal maths genuinely preceded the 1970s, let alone the 1270s. 😉
I quote:
some paisleys are fractals and some fractals are paisleys
unquote
on the same maths board, Joukowski’s Airfoil is said to be its closest mathematical expression.
Links are given
Fractal maths is not the same as the Fibonacci Sequence.
Benoit Mandelbrot wrote the Voynich. I have a new VMS theory and claim my £5.
I still 1-dr what kind of “math” was required to build monuments of cut stone (anywhere on Earth). The Inca monuments come to mind: beautifully fitted and earthquake-proof. I’ve often pondered upon the huge stonework projects which can be found on nearly every continent (and some Pacific islands).
OK Di, I’m off to research Joukowski — just for the fun of it!
Nick, did you get the book –40 euros worth?
SirHubert: Voynich research is inherently fractal, in that it’s b*ll*cks on every level. 😉
Oh, and I think your claim is the wrong way round: if you have a new VMs theory, I should claim £5 from you for having to listen to it. 😉
Well, you can dismiss it, but I bet Gordon Rugg’s Search Visualizer will prove it was Mandelbrot…
Seriously, if you will accept a fiver in the form of a pint or two at a future Voynich pub meeting, I’ll be happy to pay up!
I should like to see the ‘European genesis’ argument argued.
Not by ignoring contrary evidence, but by acknowledging that the theory of European genesis for the Vms rests assuming four unproven things: that it is European; that it was manufactured in Europe; that Mnishovsky’s alleged personal opinion is weighty evidence; and that failure to reach conclusions by seeking and weighing contrary evidence is no serious flaw in the process.
So convince me that ‘European genesis’ provides more elegant, comprehensive, detailed and exact explanation for every aspect of this manuscript, including its pictures. I don’t believe it can be done.
SirHubert,
I believe it may one day be proven that looking at the Voynich manuscript induces that phenomenon recognised by medieval science as “contagion through the eyes” but which modern science could define, after receiving several grants of suitable generosity, as MBS (‘Mandlebrot brain syndrome’). Of course, computer-savvy people may scoff, seeing it as merely an infinitely regressive loop, but hippie philosophy would say it’s better to travel than arrive, so Voynich-induced-fractal-brain can’t be all bad.
I get bored at sea, myself.
But, Diane, I still believe we are seeing a lot of jostling for imperial power between Byzantine and Roman emperors, with their citizenry getting the brunt of seriously greedy religious leaders’ avariciousness.
So, Lotus, Saffron, Cardamom, Nutmeg, mastic, bananas, pomegranates, tulips……
Nick, several months ago I asked you if you had ever visited Saffron-Walden, where even today they have crocus fields planted.
Diane:
I don’t mean to sound flippant, but the best person to defend such a position – which you describe very specifically – would be whoever argued it. Has anyone in fact articulated a ‘European Genesis’ theory along the precise lines you specify?
I see it as a failed city state.
Sir Hubert, all along I’ve been trying to prove European provenance for B-408. Right up to Constantinople/Istanbul. Where does “European” end/begin? I haven’t yet wandered into Bulgaria, Serbia, Macedonia….even though I can dance the traditional dances. Here, in the US we call the festivals “Kolo”(held usually in San Francisco or Berkeley). The festivals also include food, dancers, singers, and musicians from those countries, as well as Albania, Greece,Turkey, Macedonia, and Armenia. Only once have I gone to an Italian festival. Once was enough. At one time, I knew how to greet and speak with most of the dancers. I’m 70 years old, but still lead lines of the Greek/Turkish/Armenian traditional dances (and speak my own version of Sabir).
Diane, I would love to teach you the Syrto. I wouldn’t have to say or write a single word, because I use hand and thumb signals to indicate the directions of the dance. The first signal is the “hitch-hikers thumb-out”.
Ennyway…..the Yule season is approaching fast. So, Nick, I’ll understand if you and your family have a lot to do in the next few weeks. We had snow this morning. I had no inclination to compare the individual flakes with Fibonacci or Paisley designs! Later!
Still bd-eyed but with new focal lenses. The window of opportunity for cataract surgery closed last year.
ps: My favorite dances are “Ali Pasha” and “Kacerac”
SirHubert,
I don’t think it was ever a conclusion drawn, was it?
Voynich saw the letter from Marci; saw the ms looked like a 13thC, and supposed the text a cipher.
He then began soliciting opinions only from experts on Bacon’s writings and on ciphers – estabishing the model for most research since then.
The cipher/noncipher case seems to have been fairly tested and argued, but for the rest, there’s a hanging IF embedded in almost everything one reads: a subtext along the lines of
IF the ms were European, and IF everything in it were sprung from medieval Latin culture.. and specifically from its book-making style.. then..this item would be relevant.
But what if the truth is otherwise? There’s Baresch’s letter versus Mnishovsy’s; Panofsky, the Keeper of Manuscripts at Cambrige and Goldschmidt opposing Singer (and Voynich); the pigments are a problem for the central European hypothesis, so too the parchment’s finish. My own conclusion was that the matter (genesis) was not Latin European, but that the Bacon hypothesis might well apply to a thirteenth-century recension, and Latin European manufacture for our present 15thC ms.
It’s difficult to treat the ‘all-European’ hypothesis fairly when its case is yet to be presented formally.
Diane:
There are all sorts of assumptions made about the manuscript which some researchers follow uncritically. It is well worth pointing them out and questioning them, and I think you do that very well. But your question as you posed it was very specific in terms of how you wanted a ‘European genesis hypothesis’ to be framed and proposed. If nobody has done that, you end up shadow boxing a straw man.
And:
The cipher/noncipher case seems to have been fairly tested and argued.
There has been some very good analysis carried out, and this has revealed that ‘Voynichese’ is highly structured in all sorts of respects – far more so than a natural language. Speaking as someone with a background in historical linguistics and some knowledge of hand ciphers, that’s about as far as I’d go.
SirHubert,
It’s not so much wanting to define *how* the argument is set out, so much as frustration that the argument has never been made; to make it one would have to recognise and seriously consider contra-indications rather than waving them away or (as has been done) attacking any person who notices them.
So much which is said about the ms might be really helpful – except that its worth still hangs on that unresolved and often unspoken condition: IF the work had a European genesis, then…
… then the botanical ids might be reliable, the ‘hatching’ might be an aid to dating and so forth. You might be able to trust proposed reference of labels too.
But there’s no solid argument for the all-European hypothesis and plenty to be said against it. Not so helpful for those trying to locate the origin of the script, or the language.
So much of the past century’s effort depends on the European hypothesis, that it seems only fair to wish it depended on more than habit, presumption and arbitrary preference for Mnishovsky’s alleged opinions over those of Baresch, Panofsky, Stolfi or – yes – me.
Diane, SirHubert: I think the biggest general problem has been that Voynich researchers weren’t looking in the right century until a decade ago: the consensus for far too long had been that the Voynich Manuscript was a sixteenth century artefact of some sort, with possibly / probably / hopefully some kind of hand-wavy-but-thoroughly-convincing connection to John Dee and/or Edward Kelley. Which was rubbish.
Ultimately, I guess it is that ridiculous Grand Old Man Nick Pelling character who is the ultimate source of the fifteenth century European hypothesis: and frankly I haven’t yet seen any evidence that speaks convincingly otherwise. e.g. the Voynich plants are drawn according to a rationale and logic that nobody yet satisfactorily understands (hence drawing any conclusions from them is questionable at best); Panofsky cared little for the VMs; I have a radically different take on Baresch’s description of the manuscript (but that is something for another day entirely); etc.
Perhaps the biggest obstacle in the way of an answer is that for too long Cipher Mysteries has been my research repository rather than a finely-honed argumentative sword; while Curse was obviously not definitive enough to settle any Voynich-related pub arguments. But can I now sensibly invest a second set of 6+ months to write the last seven years of research up into a gigantic non-speculative account of the Voynich’s European history, bringing together all the fragments into an accessible argument impervious to all attacks? Actually… no, I can’t justify it. But next year, who knows? 😉
Great, Nick –
If you have a publication date, I’ll pre-order.
Just as point of interest, Panofsky was interested but being questioned by military intelligence – and by a person of Col. Friedman’s cast of mind – in McCarthy-era America was not likely to render a German-born Jew loquacious on links to Wilfrid & Ethel Voynich or a ms he believed to refer to Kabbala. The ‘questions’ are a better example of Panofsky’s intellect than his opinion of the Vms. For that you have to go back to the 1930s.
Oh – Nick. Tiltman reported that in the late 50s (post Friedman) both the Keeper of Ms at Cambridge and Panofsky ‘insisted on a date within 20 yrs of 1500’, so they kind of scrape in for the 15thC hypothesis, don’t they?
In re this topic page: Frederick II was entombed in a sarcophagus of “red porphyry”. I’m wondering if the “coral stone” mentioned in the current-day castel’s curator’s website is the “contrast” stone around doors and windows.
Pun from my husband: “You shouldn’t have too much faith in someone whose name is “Fib-er-nacci”.
🙂
bdid1dr: you two were obviously made for each other. 😉
Diane: …and should I also be delighted that the dates for Edith Sherwood’s Leonardo da Vinci Voynich theory are so close to mine? I really don’t think so… 🙁
Nick – yes, awkward for you. But facts is facts.
Still, her theory is one of the ‘Latin-Christian European Author’ theories.
The old reflexive habit of thinking date of manufacture is date for first composition is one I think (perhaps ‘hope’) we’re over. Edith’s entitled to credit for being with you on fifteenth-century date for ms – no?
Bdid1dr
If porphyry, it is presumed second-hand. Working porphyry was like working jade.
Diane: I think you’ll find her theory is one of the I’ve-settled-on-the-answer-now-where-did-I-put-that-evidence-or-did-I-just-dream-it theories, that do nobody any good (including their proponents).
Diane: I quote from Edith Sherwood’s website:
In this paper I suggest that Tarot cards were the source of the sun, moon and star motifs found on drawings in the Voynich Manuscript and carvings on an Afro-Portuguese ivory horn. In addition it likely that the VM’s illustrations of little nude ladies, bathing in green pools, were inspired by 14th century manuscripts based on Roman/Greek mythology. These observations make it unlikely that Roger Bacon was the author of the VM, or that John Dee, Edward Kelley or Wilfred Voynich forged the manuscript.
and:
It would normally be regarded as a distinct handicap when viewing the botanical drawings in the VM, never to have seen a medieval herbal or botanical manuscript, however having no preconceived ideas as to what to expect, I am able to view the drawings without bias.
Anything there you’d care to critique?
Nick – mine host –
I do not wish to quarrel, nor to seem to support any version of the ‘Latin-European-author’ hypothesis.
But I must admit that she is another who remained standing when the sixteenth-seventeenth versions of the theory were dealt a blow (or setback) by the radiocarbon dating. It only impacts on authorial hypotheses, not ‘brought it to Prague’ ones, of course.
By “Latin” European, I mean those whose education and formal language in common was Latin, as Greek in the Byzantine empire, and Arabic in the Islamic empire.
I can’t imagine how any theory requiring a late ‘author’ ever got off the ground: so many early experts recognised the general look of the thing as thirteenth century or so.
But I do not like hypothesis-driven research for that reason; it’s ok in theory, but over the past twenty years we’ve seen results of the theory’s failing to to take pyschology into account. A creative notion of our own becomes ‘our own’ and the urge to support it, and ward off ‘attacks’ from contrary evidence so easily distorts the process, that it is generally inadvisable to investigate one’s own hypotheses except within fairly narrow areas within firmly established fields.
I know my own preference for evidence-gathering first, comparative discussion second, conclusions last & ‘theory’ only maybe hs bewildered some & bored most, but now I think I could write a formal paper on about 2/3 of the folios & a book about all of it knowing that in the end the method did produce a consistent, documentable explanation for the whole. Call it a theory now, perhaps, but it came last, not first.
Diane: but you must surely have had some kind of working hypothesis at the start that somehow made every cultural artefact of the preceding 2000-odd potentially relevant to your search for evidence? You must admit that the net you have cast is several hundred times larger than any used by almost all other historians tackling similar problems.
As for Edith S: the fact that two independent theories failed to be disproved does not mean that those two independent theories are connected. I would add that, having gone through her website very carefully a number of times, I can honestly say that the two evidence bases and associated chains of historical reasoning supporting the separate theories barely (if at all) overlap.
SirHubert,
The hand-painted cards which developed, within Europe, into what are now called tarot cards are part of medieval Europe’s history, and were worthy of more balanced study than the “rational=protestant”; “meaningful=nonsense” dichotomy permitted twenty years ago. It is possible, just, that some early cards, handpainted over print, gained their base from north Africa, but the earliest (12thC) account in Islamic literature is correct, I think when it implies that card-use came from a pre-Islamic society, probably Syrian, in which the tokens served both as aids to memory & as tutorial exercises. In that account, as in a dissertation on card-use given by a Domican friar in the 1370s, cards are closely linked to the work of geographers & almanac makers. ‘Status & stadio’.
Some of Sherwood’s opnions possibly derive from mistaken interpretation of information I brought forward in the 1980s, and which is now received wisdom; this includes my original identification of Mansa Musa as prototype for one figure – I referred then to Cresques’ worldmap and pictorial almanac with various academic sources including EGR Taylor.
Nick: actually, I’m going to stick up for Diane on this one. As far as I can tell, all she has done is to approach the imagery of the VMs with a very wide knowledge base and an open mind. I can’t see that she has tried to test, let alone prove, a preconceived theory. Clearly she has now developed one, but I think that emerged from her research rather than informing the direction her researches took.
I’m going to repeat myself – sorry – but breaking ciphers is all about testing hypotheses and finding *the* consistent solution, of which there will be only one. Historical research doesn’t admit of one neat solution and works very differently.
As a relative newcomer to all this, *my* biggest problem with the whole field has been the almost total lack of any generally accepted facts with which to work, and without Nick’s efforts in the codicology in particular we’d be poorer still.
Sadly, the speculative weeds of theory which grow in this factual wilderness continue to flourish. Sherwood, in my opinion, falls squarely into this category.
Nick
If I had any preconception when I began, it was that the pictures should prove medieval, Latin, German or Italian.
The imagery gave the lie to that idea on almost every folio, so I followed the trail of the internal evidence, section by section.
The great headache was working out how it came together on parchment dated to the early 15thC and possibly or probably manuactured in Europe.
I thought Panofsky’s & Baresch’s explanations fitted very well indeed, and weren’t necessarily in conflict. I went into some detail considering each. Made sense. I’ve now adopted those views, pretty much.
SirHubert – thanks. Your post crossed with my response to Nick.
Diane: hopefully someone will uncover a piece of evidence soon that will be able to disprove all these damned theories (mine, yours, everybody’s). Bring on that day!
Nick, Diane, Sir Hubert: I am now headed in the direction of “who, in the 15th century — on writing materials manufactured in the 15th century — would be writing about a castle, its inhabitants, human, fauna, flora, fowl, and fairy tales — of some two centuries earlier? I’m following the trails of various persons who may have been referring to some of the works of Nizami and Ovid, and “star-struck” gods/goddesses of the “Pleiades”. Maybe just a hunch, but it seems to be working for me. I am still very impatiently waiting for the Aga Khan museum opening in January.
BTW, it was 300 saffron crocus corms my husband planted recently, not 30! Boenicke 408, folio 35r discusses Crocus and Smilax……
Nick, are you at all curious about my previous posts about Saffron Walden? I’m not at all educated in British history. I do remember commenting on just how much British history British students had to cram into their “memory bank”s! It appears that Saffron-Walden has recently upgraded their historical museum.
🙂
Nick, the manuscript is the evidence. It needs research not revelation.
Were the Beinecke conservators and Schoenberg collection’s curators to collaborate, I don’t doubt they could provide a proper assessment of ms Beinecke 408 within a matter of weeks, if not days.
One can only wonder why they don’t; perhaps they wish to spare our feelings. 🙂
bdid1dr: Saffron Walden is still a pretty market town with a fine church, and also one of only eight mediaeval turf mazes remaining in Britain. It’s unicursal, and I think probably the longest to survive today.
Diane: it needs both. Yes, proper study of the object might tell us considerably more, although this may not necessarily tell us quite as much about the text – no way of knowing until the time comes.
What really would be a game-changer would be to discover another manuscript written in or containing examples from the same alphabet (if that’s what it is). It’s extremely unlikely to happen, and we can’t sit around waiting in case it does, but analysis of the text seems to have got rather stuck at the moment and I find it difficult to see what we can try next.
Otherwise, we find ourselves in the same position as some other lost or partially-lost languages or scripts. There are plenty of surviving Etruscan inscriptions, but it’s amazing how hard it is still proving to establish grammar, syntax and even vocabulary. And Etruscan was never intended to be obscure. But sometimes you have to accept that you don’t yet have enough material (of whatever kind) to work with, and that’s as much about the quality and variety of the texts as their sheer length.
The town was famous for growing the saffron crocus.
Boenicke manuscript 408, folio 35-r, is all about the saffron crocus.
The first word on line 7 next to the blossom is “croc-os-am”
The last word appearing on sentence 1 below the blossom “cup” is croc-os-ec-am.
The most obvious visual clue is the red “stigma” and blue pistils. The red stigmas are dried and had many uses besides flavoring rice dishes. They were used in bath-water. They were also used for dye-ing fabrics. Saffron-dyed silk thread or fabric was especially valuable.
SirHubert,
With respect, more than fifty percent of the manuscript is filled with its pictorial text. Whether a line is used to represent sound, or represent meaning more directly, it has its roots, development, environment and style too. I suppose the analysis of iconography could be called a kind of palaeogaphy except that it also has its rules in pre-modern times. It is possible to recognise a visual vocabulary. I wish I could add a link to an Occitan codex recently noted by Ellie Velinska, where one folio (16v) has a motif which clearly says “Mistral” – the southeast wind of Provence, It puts a ring like the collar on some early Egyptian glass around it, too, just like what descends from the SouthEast on folio 86v.
Sorry, I’m rambling on here.
Bdid1dr
Funny if the botanical section were by Uyghurs learning Latin 🙂
Diane:
No respect necessary. I do appreciate that the images speak for themselves independently of the text. And I’m not saying that both strands aren’t equally worthwhile and valid. But the title of this blog is Cipher Mysteries, and I’m a language/cipher person rather than an art analysis person (so much), so it is the text which primarily interests me.
And I do think that if the text is meaningful and can be translated it will shed a great deal of light on the iconography. And, indeed, vice versa.
Sir Hubert, the text is entirely meaningful; it just hasn’t had its origins explained yet. Translatable? Definitely! I guess I’ve become the “elephant in the corner”, so to speak. So be it. Considering that the topic on this page is Castel del Monte, I wonder why you all are circling “round and round” an octagonal structure which is unique (anywhere in the world?).
Toilet and bath facilities in nearly all of the second-story rooms? At least two cisterns being filled with water from the catchment towers? The courtyard cistern probably being a fountain? Lack of cooking/food preparation facilities, which probably were separate from the octagonal structure. Fireplaces and chimneys were probably the most problematic fixtures.
So, I wonder where the stables were located. I wonder where Frederick II kept his falcons. I wonder where the waterfowl nested. I wonder where the people who occupied those tiny rooms went — after they were cleaned up and sent onward to various other bastions. I wonder where the saffron, nutmeg, silk, and other valuable imports went. I suspect the whole edifice was constructed because of the continuous Guelph-Ghibelline conflict which was ongoing for centuries. Perhaps Signor Fallacara and Signor Occinegra are continuing their investigations?
Nick, Mollom is reviewing a post in re Cistercian monks being involved in the construction of Frederick II’s myriad enigmas. So I shall try to be more succinct: Bridge Puglia USA magazine article: Castel del Monte The myriad enigmas of Frederick II’s masterpiece. Some mention of Cistercian monks involvement.
Oh well, succinct — repetitively so? My apologies!
Another search brought up quite a bit of material on Cistercian architects. If someone hereabouts has access to a book written by Maximilian Sternberg, University of Cambridge, titled Cistercian Architecture and Medieval Society, we might all gain insight to Castel del Monte’s builders (commissioned by Frederick II).
Dear all, IF it can be conclusively demonstrated by some analytical technique, like micro Raman spectroscopy that the original coloration of the VM botanicals was plant- NOT mineral-based, would this not drive a stake pretty deeply into the heart of an Italian and/or European origin for the VM art work and, by inference, the VM itself? For sure this fact would place it outside of the usual art depiction work going on in 13-15thC Europe where mineral based pigments are used in Italy, Germany,even Romania. It could be some screwball operation like an alchemical organization, insisting on plant based or “vegetable” dyes.for philosophical reasons but I think it very likely that the reason most of the botanical painting had to be augmented or totally redone was that the original coloration had lightened, faded or totally disappeared with the passage of time.
I think the “bleed through” and “bleed across” work of Nick’s appies only the later more heavily applied paints and that only these were capable of this. Extrapolating from the three examples (only) sampled by McCrone Associates, much or all of the repainting of the VM botanicals likely used mineral based pigments. The original coloration which is faint now and in many cases gone altogether did not bleed anywhere. Maybe at that stage the folios had not been assembled so bleed across was unlikely? Nick has gone into this aspect (see Curse) of folio ordering very thoroughly. I think the many examples remaining of what appear to be indigo (cf. bottom sides of leaves of f22r and 42r) started life as an indigo/ yellow mixture to make a green pigment and both the indigo and yellow are fugative, but the yellow more so.There are dozens of examples of the remnants of that homely indigo throughout the botanical section. It is the later retouching with mineral based paints that we have to ignore and look past for a better guess as to the venue where the first coloration was applied. That, as was observed in “Enigma”, was likely ink or a wash. That “spill” on the putative sunflower would support this view. Cheers, Tom
Tom: Curse pp.65-68 (“Colour Clues”) gives a specific example of the two layers of paint giving different contact transfer between pages from the same page, indicating – I think – beyond any reasonable doubt that the two types of paint were added at times when the folios had been bound differently. And yes, I believe that the first layer of paint was (15th century) organic / plant pigments and that the second layer was (16th century) inorganic / mineral pigments.
Nick, Thanks for the clarification on “bleed across” or transfer. I missed that. I knew, if anyone would pick it up, it would be you.
It was Diane who directed me to several 15C colored codexes on parchment where the original coloration was still looking good.That got me thinking about why the VM had to be retinted maybe once or several times and the colors did not look good at all! Furthermore on nearly every plant painting, one could spot original pigment.. I thought this had settled into dogma but evidently a few still held a contrary view or were open minded but needed more in the way of proof. Likewise I thought two scribes was widely agreed upon but there seem hold outs there also.
Some of these conclusions seem self evident and simply a matter of inspection but I guess the jury is still out for some.
I think the three non-ink pigments analyzed by McCrone Assoc., far from helping us, might be a red herring! Cheers, Tom
Dear all, Several internal clues in the cipher text do smack of Latin, but as Diane has argued, this does not mean Europe, just anywhere where a few scribes, at least, knew some Latin glyphs (o,a, &, m, n, i), had a Latin vocabulary (bd has guessed it to be limited) and Tironian notes (T.N.) or variations on those as Nick has noted. I think the gallows glyphs, particularly the two with a crossing of the ascender half way up (I have assigned these as “p” and “h) can contain concealed macrons. The “p*” (actually sort of looks like a Latin “P”) often has the loop really extending to the right and I think indicates a letter or letters that is/are omitted (such as an “h” or “r” or “l”).When no macron is intended, then the “p*” has a flourish at the end of glyph where the scribal pen is lifted off the vellum. Several glyphs like m, n, c have the T.N. (“)”) indicating a following letter missing that might be usually “t” So “c” with a superscript “)” could be “st”. It is often at the start or end of a “word”. A “9” with a lengthy extender to the left is, I think, “st” again since “9”= t usually. Anyway, the scribes both use these abbreviations but I think in this case,they are “in house”, not commonly used by Latin-trained scribes.But the use of macrons was common in pre 15C Latin, yet here it is all over the place. Dante did not use Tironian notes as they had become totally unwieldy (>4K) when he wrote. This might make one think 1) the VM is copied from a plaintext dating before the early 15C or 2) the scribes are in some Latin backwater and are still doing things the old way or 3) the VM is made to look older than it is. . What surprises me is that the ampersand (“&” appears many places in the VM botanicals.This mark really took off during letterpress printing (ca. 1470 in Italy) but Latin scribes usually used “et” as it was easier. .It was rarely used in Latin cursive. Lastly I think many “words” are “ium”, “iam” “ion” and I think are Latin suffixes just split off to look like “words”. My guess at the moment is that the VM text is mainly Latin with some German but out of the mainstream of European scriptoria. Maybe somewhere West, North or East of the Crimea? Cheers,Tom
Nick and all, I thought the purpose of the Fallacara/Occhinegra presentation “overlay” of the “Nine Rosettes” folio over a photo of Castel del Monte (subject heading of this post) was to prove, maybe, provenance of Boenicke manuscript 408. So, why are we once again re-cycling discussions of just who may have written the document, as opposed to who drew the plans for the castle, who were the workmen who did the quarrying of the stone, and subsequently built that unique structure? I have already found that information but nobody seems to care. Here’s a clue: Cistercians. So, maybe we may also discover that the manuscript may have been written by female Cistercians as part of their order’s function, as proprietors/caretakers of the castle’s workings. Do we have any manuscripts attributable to Cistercian monasteries?
Thomas,
the writing might be by a European; the underlying text might be anything – just enciphered;a translation enciphered.. whatever.
What is so difficult for our own text-focussed generations to grasp is that pictures cannot be treated as no more than ‘illustrations-to-writing’ or creative self-expression – even in a fifteenth-century codex.
Even then, pictures remained till then largely stand-alone or complementary *text* which was designed and intended to be read by reference to the ‘book of memory’ not just the book in front of you.
Latin copies of Ibn Botlan’s work (as Tacuinum sanitatis) keep some or all of the original’s imagery, but the text is not original. So too, some of the Tacuinum mss copies Romanise the pictures; others keep enough to tell us the source work was not European.
A person seeing later versions of Tacuinum-style imagery in other Latin mss might assume this proved a wholly Latin provenance for Ibn Botlan’soriginal work – but they’d be wrong. Confusing effect with cause, and a picture’s echo with source is not so common but in Voynich studies is the most frequent error – all the more so for being tacit not argued.
Voynich studies regularly take date of inscription for date of first composition; suppose manufacture and materials define content (e.g. French parchment = French ‘author’ = content all originating in 15thC France)
The imagery is filled with ‘tells’ just as we find in some copies of the Tacuinum, but rather than paying those details more attention than others, as pointers to the source, Voynicheros tend to be very impatient about such ‘quibbling detail’ some actually seeing it as mere distraction from a preferred hypothesis, rather than as pointers to developing one that is true.
So it goes.
Diane: generation after generation of Voynich researchers have obsessed at length (and continue to do so) over identifying individual drawings, from the “sunflowers” (ha!) onwards… but as far as I can see they have gained close to zero of genuine historical value concerning the Voynich Manuscript itself from doing so (the crossbow hunter and the nine-rosette castle(s) being just about the only arguable exceptions). Rene Z has an intriguing theory about the drawings in one particular Q13 page, but that’s about as close to a ‘tell’ as I’ve seen.
bdid1dr: I wouldn’t presume to guess what the authors are trying to prove with their Castel del Monte presentation until I’ve read their book. All I can say is that almost none of what I’ve read on the Internet about their Voynich theory seems consistent with the physical history and construction of the object itself, and that’s not a very promising start.
Dear gd, Nick – I should say that representing the sun with an artificial beard tied bout its chin would be pretty obvious (f67v-ii); or the green-painted figure with the Yemeni-southern-Indian headwear (f.67v-i). The green-faced figure in such headwear still seen in traditional drama of Kerala). , Or how about the red, cylindrical containers in the pharma section. Seriously – you want to argue them 15thC Italian? – show me.
Without hypothesising them away.
How about the long-nosed figure in the north-west roundel on f.86v – too early for plague doctors.
What about the five-element system (f.77v). I expect if you argue from hypothesis to evidence you’ll try to make aether the fifth – so show me a non-alchemical text which personifies the two principles producing them in such way.
If you think it’s a European alchemicl text – why didn’t McLean think so?
The whole ‘pharma’ section is a tell. Show me one single example of European Latin herbal literature where plants are depicted so – in layout or in presenting them in parallel lines, only by root and leaf: show me. Not ‘might have’ – did.
folio 33v – look at the calyces. Who drew calyces tht wy? Not Latins in their herbals.
Why is the oft-supposed “European water lily” on folio 2v given a flower like the hibiscus’?
Why is there a double set of roots on fol. 43r and why is the upper separated by space from the latter?
The great weakness in the “European Latin genesis” theory is that lacks explantory power; in the end it explains its own theory, using the manuscript as clip art. who says the women in blue or green fluid are women, and these are baths? If it *were* of wholly Europen origins, they might be. But then, the whole of the ms’ br its text would be explicable and none would have to be pooh-pooh’d as “irrelevant” simply because denying the hypothesis.
btw – I think the non-zodiac calendar probably has its present form by using intercalation to correlate an eastern 8-segment zodiac with the Mediterranean and/or Chinese 12-segment system. It’s not the archer who is the ‘tell’ but the inclusion of two bulls and two goats to make up the numbers. Hypothesising that the following folio showed the last two of the Mediterranean 12 would be reasonable if every other folio was immediately legible in European terms, or could be explained without resorting to creating an imaginary ‘author’ whose skills must be imagined veering wildly between absolute precision and hopeless incompetence.
Diane: what I’m not saying is not that the Voynich Manuscript’s drawings are irrelevant, but that I am sure that they were drawn according to a complicated rationale which we presently do not understand. Over time, I have come to see all too clearly that hunting down similarities when we have not even begun to understand that rationale can only be a hugely perilous project. Are these really all tells? Not to me, they aren’t… not yet, anyway. Find the rationale (even 10% of it would be enough, I suspect), and all these issues go away.
I’m more pragmatic. I ask first whether there is any medieval manuscript made before 1440, indisputably of Latin (i.e.Christian) authorship, interpretation of whose pictures is deemed ‘entirely subjective unless the text is read’.
Does one need study of medieval languges to identify the Book of Kells as Irish Christian art, or a century to identify Hildegarde of Bingen’s palm-tree?
Besides: western Christian mss pictures are *about* domination, whether over nature or over other people, whether of sin, disease, death or the devil.
The Vms is shows no interest in that theme – a possible exception (f.80r, upper right) is likely to prove astronomical (e.g Virgo&Scorpius or Andromeda&Perseus).
I read recently that Frederick II’s grandsons were imprisoned in that castle for a very long time. When I took a look at its website’s offerings, I noticed that there were only slits in the walls for observing the surrounding countryside. So, would “insanity” be the grandsons’ inheritance from their brilliant grandfather? Or could it be the result of many years of peering through the “keyhole”-slit windows?
bdid1dr: if you’re interested in the history of Castel del Monte, why don’t you just buy a copy of the Italian authors’ book, rather than just speculate around the edges?
Dear all, On the possible Latin interface present in the VM. I think that the few classical Tironian notes(T.N.) Nick has mentioned in “Curse” and there are maybe a dozen or so additional ones, speaks to the fact that likely some Latin is being used in the ciphered text of the botanical section at least, and likely throughout. The scribes who wrote the VM were aware of these and the idea of a macron to indicate missing letter(s). Is there any other language at the time that used T.N. and was distinct from Latin? There evolved variations of Latin, such as that used in the Crimean by Venetian traders and the Beneventon (Montecassino and Dalmation coast) discussed by Nick in “Curse”.
I think a major “tell” is the occurrence in the VM botanicals of Yin/Yang symbology but I seem out on a limb alone on that one at the moment. All those blue flowers, the frequent shape of leaves, the right or left orientation of blooms or leaves support that notion. Then embedded clues abound. I happen to think that when all the berries are shown with their pips all facing the viewer that these indicate treatment for an eye ailment. When blossoms face away (shunning the light),these are for cataracts and not an example of phototropism. Eye problems are a major concern of, among others, Armenian medics. I think nearly every plant drawing demonstrates mnemomism and often subtle, such as leaves that are fused, stems that are fused (likely for healing skin wounds and bone fractures, respectively. Diane has been there early on with that idea.
I depart from Diane’s view, however, that something so strangely ordinary as the bathing nymphs has some other interpretation. I happen to think they are sporting themselves in shallow cisterns such as abounded in Chios during Genoese rule.These had complex irrigation and drinking facilities incorporated and might sometimes be covered, often with an arbor. These cisterns might be fresh water piped in or mineral waters,which I think is indicated respectively by blue or green coloration.
If I understand Diane’s position: it is the drawings that will convey the venue and who done it. It the writing should even prove to be ALL Latin-based,that will not pin down the venue. Latin users were all over the Mediterranean, the middle East and Africa.
But those weird plant depictions may be where the clues lie. Even the useful book on medieval herbal illustrations by Minta Collins has nothing at all like those of the VM, although it indicates, to me anyway, an Arabic rather than a European style of plant depiction is used by the VM plant delineators. Plants are sylized with no attempt to be faithful to reality. Cheers, Tom
Nick (chiefly) I think the example you give in Curse (p66) is a transfer, not of original coloration,but of a later stage of recoloration and that my argument about the original coloration not either transferring or bleeding through, still holds.
On this subject, can you explain the weirdness of f34r where there appears to be a transfer but not of any nearby folio? I don’t think it is a bleed through from f34v as the ghostly images appear more spikey and less round than those of f34v. If I had to hazard a guess, they come from an image that pretty well fills the page,like that of f9r. This is weird I know. The folio sheet of f34r/v has a tell tale crease indicating that the numbering of recto/verso is OK and that folio is intact but it may be out of order as you have found with some others. I lack any sophisticated photo reproduction software and maybe yours can shed some light on things.
BTW the latest “The New Yorker” has an interesting piece on a very good forgery by modern day Argie and Italian forgers of a Galileo proof,right down to the putative owner’s library stamp. The Argies forged the medieval paper and the Italians the watercolor wash of Galileo’s telescopic view of the moon’s phases then used something like a photopolymer process for the text but some tell tale errors were made that were picked up by experts. Not the auction house or final bidder however who were stung for big bucks. Evidently in Italy, the Carabinieri handle frauds like this and the Italiano fraudster is looking at 10 years in the slammer.Says he just wanted to prove he could fool the experts and deliberately put some indicators in, like the library seal of the owner has no tiny break in the oval as the original did. The paper was an unintentional giveaway however as it incorporated tiny bits of lint that even then in paper made in Florence would not have survived the paper making process. Cheers, Tom
Tom: I’m checked over f31, f32, f33, f34, and f35 and all the contact transfers and bleeds seem fully accounted for, so I can’t quite see what you’re describing. You have to remember when looking at the scans that the Beinecke photographed the images with the manuscript bound (not unbound), so there are inevitably various distortions that prevent completely accurate matching between sides from the scans, particularly near the central folds.
For example, I was only able to verify that the page with two different types of contact transfer had been bound differently during the two painting phases times because I physically checked for myself while I was at the Beinecke.
I’m sorry, Nick, I thought the subject heading for this post was about the book launch which featured, mainly, the “Voynich” overlay of the Puglian castle’s features.
Today is Friday the Thirteenth — which marks the day the Templar Knights were immolated on the small island behind Phillip the Fair’s (Phillip le Bel) palace.
Instead of monopolizing your various conversations, I’ll be writing my own book of my own discoveries. We have several “small” book publishers in our 30-mile radius. The publications are indexed via Dewey decimal and the Library of Congress here in the US.
Nick, Could be as you say, a will’o the wisp.But the weirdness of f34r is not only at the fold but accross the page. Bleedthrough from f34v should generate “roundish” ghostly images, instead it looks to me like leaf lobes are present in some transfer and this extends across the page. I see some elements of f34r on f34v but I think there is something else on f34r than anything from f34v and a transfer seemed likely but the most likely was f9r. Anyway, no one should expend more time on this or lose any sleep over this. The ghostly images are very faint and maybe just some artefact of photography? Thanks for checking. Cheers, Tom
Diane, both water lilies and water lotuses laid their blossoms wide open so that insects would venture into them. In the evenings, the blossoms would close, trapping the insects so they would pollinate the blossom). One VERY interesting observation (discovery) in re the water lotus: It gives off heat; enough to raise the surrounding water temperature considerably. I’ve just tried to re-locate that discussion — which is NOT Voynichese, nor part of the British Botanical Garden’s offerings.
🙂
Bdid1r
Are you suggesting that in f.2r, depiction of the calyx is simply an error for the water-lily’s very differently formed one, and that what protrudes (not unlike the hibisus’ fused stamens) is a symbolic representation of water lilies’ producing heat or trapping insects?
I’d suggest rather a depiction of plants from the Nymphoides/Villarsia.
The Nymphoides group has leaves of the right shape, the Eurasian N.peltata having frilled petals and grows even in Romania, so not obviously threatening to any ‘CEA’ theory.
For the protruding part, a very good picture at
watermyflowerDOTeu/romaniaDASHnymphoidesDASHpeltata
(if the filterpermits)
Flower’s being depicted as hibiscus-like is interesting, especially if the group were meant to include the white sub-Saharan Nymphoides ezannoi, which grows across the continent southward of a line that I had reason to mention when discussing f.86v – as an important route by which Asian ceramics went west, while Mali’s gold and slaves were carried in the reverse direction.
map of plant’s range and more at
flowgrowOTde/db/aquaticplants/nymphoidesDASHezannoi
N. peltata’s documented range
discoverlifeDOTorg
(and search)
In addition, Nymphoides now includes Villarsia cambodiana (also found in Vietnam).
Folio 2v sits in the sequence beginning with the Clove plant (1v) and ending with Javanese Dracaena (3r) and the Artocarpus group (3v).
The last image (3v) is formed into a mnemonic referring to southest Asia’s ‘Dragon boat’.
Of that series, the Nymphoides/Villarsia picture was most difficult for me to identify.
(Villarsia nymphaeoides is syn. for Nymphoides peltata)
No, Diane, I am not suggesting that the (a)qua-lily behaved the same as the (a)qua-lotus. The pictorial distinction between the two plants was made most clearly by the shape of their leaves. Another distinction was the height of the (a)qua-lotus above the water surface (both blossom and “umbrella-shaped” leaves.
I hope I recall correctly that it was Clusius who placed the water lotus in a category all of its own: a legume: the ‘Sacred Bean of Egypt”.
Boenicke folio 86 (v or r, still confused) is identifying the coprinacae mushroom which is edible BUT can cause delirium and death if any alcoholic beverage is consumed within several days before or after eating the mushroom. It apparently had its uses for the deaths of several prominent historic Europeans. The story being told is about the minor god and goddess Alcyone and Ceyx. (Alcyone can be pronounced with a silent “h” as allucin — (hallucin-ation)
The long-nosed bird is a kingfisher. There are human figures appearing on the stems of each of the other corner mushrooms. 😉
Thomas,
You represent my position pretty well – thank you.
The only modification I’d make – I *expected* these drawings should convey their lineage, and what you call “venue and who done it”.
I found that the plant drawings *are* ‘faithful to reality’, in those parts on which definition relies: habit, leaf, stem, petiole.
It is important that where the routine informing their construction is abandoned (e.g. 3v, 16v) it is replaced by an established local, iconic form. By ‘local’ here I mean local to where the plants grew.
So the sense of ‘weirdness’ is just instinctive reaction to a non-European way of seeing.
I don’t object to proposals of Latin mediation or transmission, but constant presumption that a European Latin Christian male must, necessarily, sit atop the Voynich ms’ historical pyramid does imply a certain sub-text, already out of date in most fields of European history.
Diane: I suspect you are presuming other people’s presumptions here, a position that is arguably even worse than having those presumptions yourself (because other people have far more potential presumptions to presume than the actual presumptions any one person might actually have). 🙂
Nick – That’s great! I see no point in remaining interested if my opinion becomes immovable.
You disagree with my description of the dominant Voynich hypotheses all beginning faith in the unproven expectation that the arbiter of the Vms’ form and content will be a white-christian-male-European.
Good – who says differently? Of those, which came closest to changing your current hypothesis?
(myself excepted)
Diane: for what it’s worth, I think your description is a presumption about other people’s presumptions that has no direct usefulness in helping to unravel the mystery of the Voynich Manuscript. But that’s just my opinion.
My other opinion is that almost no Voynich theory is even remotely consistent with the primary evidence and our accumulated codicological data, which seems to me to be a curiously ineffective and unenlightening place to start a long and difficult journey from. But what do I know?
Good question, that last. When do we find out?
Seriously though – any area of research which finds itself batting endlessly at a glass wall like a fly in the hothouse must one day reconsider its assumptions. It’s long overdue in Voynich studies.
One of the most common assumptions is that everything about the ms is of European genesis; another ubiquitous until very recently indeed is that the ms was all the result of one or another
imaginedhypothesised author.A third still universal or nearly so is that the ‘author’ (or more recently ‘compiler’) we’re looking for is male, white, European and Christian.
Who says? It’s a backward agument from studies of the text’s apparent cipher isn’t it? Supposing that only European men had much interest in writing ciphers?
Suppose that is granted: I’d still like to read the argument for shifting focus from England to central Europe ~ and before you begin on cloud bands and shading – not exclusively European,as I’ve shown.
Diane: *is* there any evidence that links the Voynich Manuscript to England? If there is, I haven’t seen it.
Our opinions differ markedly on wolkenbanden and parallel hatching: but History is like that sometimes… and that’s ok.
Nick & Diane, I’m not seeing any sign of English origin of B-408. I am reading a very intelligible manuscript written by a person whose interest seemed to be focused on the management of a large estate and its human inhabitants, flora, and fauna. That person appears to have been educated in one of the European universities where the “universal” teaching language was Latin. So, take your pick of students from “all-over” and compare their hand-written alphabets with their attempts to interpretive-ly write latin phraseology in their “homeland” dialect/script/handwriting/and abbreviations. Cyrillic? Crimean Gothic (aka: Crim-Gothic)? Persian?
It appears to me, anyway, that the writer may have had a collaborator with the illustrations. Which collaborator may have been depending on the writer to provide the details of the floral/botanical exhibit — colors, flower shapes, leaf shapes, country of origin, common name and/or species category……..
Nick
The first evidence for England is the same as for Rudolf’s supposed ownership.
The radiocarbon dating tells us that if Mnishovsky’s notion has any value, the written text could be of Bacon’s devising, but it can’t be supposed written by his own hand – if the parchment is correctly dated.
But if Mnishovsky’s reported assertions & opinion on this point are dismissed, then too the only source or the story that the Rudolf so much as set eyes on the ms.
Bdid1dr’s ingenious suggestion that the Vms might be one of those mss sent by deBusbeq to Ferdinand I of Austria &/or that it is deBusbeq’s own commonplace book is surely interesting in these terms.
When writing in English today the term used is “cloud band”.
Unlike terms such as ‘chiaroscuro’ or ‘sgraffito’ the German word for cloud band has never been made the technical term; to use wolkenband for ‘cloud band’ is rather like writing ‘he gave me two blue eyes’ when you mean pair of black eyes – as if the German idiom made one’s description more medically precise, or implied that punch-ups were a German invention.
As I’ve shown, cloud band motifs were widely used, even before 1415. One example I cited is Menabuoi’s fourteenth-century painting now in the Museum of the Eremitani in Padua.
Oh well! Dee and fellow con artist (whose name escapes me). Rogue monk Bacon. Y’all seem to be stuck in a deeply grooved 33-1/3 record. Unfortunately there seems to be no more record-players to “read” and “discuss” the “Voynich” story.
The danged manuscript was just one of some 240 manuscripts “rescued” from the Ottoman empire by Austrian diplomat Busbecque. Its origins will only be proved by a full translation of the “mystery” handscript. I’ve already offered word-for-word translations of some fifteen of that manuscript’s folios, in addition to offering cipher-by-cipher sylla-byll-if-i-cation. So, why these constant circular arguments of possible provenance/origins instead of reading the script word for word? I have not yet been able to find on the W-W-W a full presentation of Crimean-Gothic alphabet. But that is where I’m placing my “bet”.
Diane:
“Does one need study of medieval languges to identify the Book of Kells as Irish Christian art?”
No. It’s written in Latin, and mostly Classical Latin at that. And while I’m happy to defer to you on this, I wasn’t aware that it was known to have been written in Ireland, as opposed to Iona or somewhere else in Scotland or Northern England. Or Continental Europe, for all I know.
And, as its title suggests, it is a book. For you, and probably for many people, the illustrations are far more interesting and certainly more spectacular than the text, but it is not solely a piece of visual art – there is a written text there too. And I honestly don’t know whether the people who created it – presumably monks – viewed the illustrations as being more important than the written word of the Bible.
Diane:
The translation of the Marci letter (from Rene Z’s site) reads:
“Dr. Raphael [Mnishovsky], tutor in the Bohemian language to Ferdinand III, then King of Bohemia, told me the said book had belonged to the Emperor Rudolph and that he presented the bearer who brought him the book 600 ducats. He believed the author was Roger Bacon, the Englishman.”
There are two different statements here.
Mnishovsky told Marci that ‘the said book had belonged to the Emperor Rudolph and that he presented the bearer…600 ducats.’
Mnishovsky told Marci that he believed the author was Roger Bacon, the Englishman.
The first statement is presented as fact, gives details about a sale price, and relates to what were then relatively recent events. The second is simply an expression of Mnishovsky’s own opinion as to a plausible candidate for authorship.
It is probable, given what we now know from the C14 dating and indeed your own observations on the imagery, that Mnishovsky was wrong about Roger Bacon (it is, I suppose, conceivable that the VMS is a copy of an enciphered work by Bacon). But, with respect, this does not necessarily weaken his entirely separate statement that the manuscript was presented to Rudolph.
My apologies, ThomS & Armenian friends. One of my favorite dancer friends is Armenian, “Artemis”. Another dancing friend of mine (male) is married to a survivor of the WWII concentration camps. She survived the experiments of that insane “doctor” but is still using wheel chair and walker just to get around — no dancing for her. Another pair of friends (some 40 years ago) (Haig and Muriel) were musicians with the San Francisco Symphony. I met them through their acquaintance with my neighbor (Jew) who was a student at the Conservatory of Music in San Francisco.
I loved San Francisco. I was often approached by “lost” tourists for directions to “here” and “there”. It is only in recent years that I’ve realized that our common language was/is “Sabir”.
Eventually, when I became a US Post Office employee, my boss realized that I was able to “decipher” a considerable amount of the Foreign Mail “Nixies” (illegible/unreadable addresses) and send them on their way.
San Francisco is probably one the least-insular cities in the world.
Humanist script: ” Italian” script of the 15th century – based on CAROLINE (my emphasis) miniscule.
Incunabula: A BOOK PRINTED BEFORE 1500
INDICTION: In dating terms, a repeating cycle of 15 (fifteen) years beginning on the FIRST SEPTEMBER 312, INTRODUCED BY Emperor CONSTANTINE for taxation purposes but utililized as a DATING system during the MEDIEVAL ERA
LIGATURE = a method of writing certain letter combinations in which TWO separate letters are joined into a new form. (My note in re the most common ligature we see in B-408 is the lower case “c” and the lower case “e”. Confusion abounds as to which character is the “c” and which character is the “e”. The confusion is often visible in B-408. It depends on which of the look-alike characters is smaller. Most often the ligature is attached to the smaller “c”.)
Except I am getting more tired with the constant circular arguments, I can only refer you to an excellent source of my latest extracted comments. I hope the link will come up for further edification:
Index of Scripts Small Gothic-Glossing Script
Function – Book Hand
Best I can do to prove my translations and identification of the script and its writers, without setting off s-am filter. So, consider my efforts to be benign and well-meant.
Is it that the spam filter doesn’t recognize smileys as being legit?
I still think B-408, the entire volume, ended up in Mehmed’s enormous archive, which archive was inherited by Suleiman the Magnificent — who then sold or gifted some 240 manuscripts to Austrian emperor Ferdinand I (via Busbecq). Some, if not all, of those manuscripts can be found in several European museums and universities. A lot of valid discussion can be facilitated by researching handwriting and the origins of the various manuscripts, rather than speculation of various notorious historical figures (of which provenance has not been proven). So, I shall be returning to the discussion of “incunabula” — fascinating and definitely relevant to the handwritten script of B-408. By the way, I admire Nick’s seemingly patient consideration of all of our posts, regardless of the swerving argumentations which occasionally do not address the actual topic which Nick had presented.
Thanx (small #9 = “x”) Nick!
🙂
Nick, I hope you won’t “nix” my last note (above). Nix can be written, incunabula-wise, with the ‘one-barb’ hook shape and ‘small numeral 9’ : nx
Some other time (if you encourage me at all) I’ll repeat my translation of the incunabula, the elaborate “P” shapes, the ‘extended ell’ (you called them brackets) and various symbols which were used to indicate how a particular manuscript was to be bound, quire by quire, and whether or not a colophon was to be included.
SirHubert
The only evidence we have for any of it is Marci’s late relation of events based on nothing but Mnishovsky’s supposed assertions.
Whether Mnishovsky represented some of it as events witnessed, and other of it as personal opinion is neither here nor there, since none of it has ever found documentary support, and all stands or falls on the same extraordinarily tenuous base.
Sometimes evidence of absence is very telling – as for example the absence of any earlier allusion (including in Baresch’s letter and allusions made in correspondence to Kircher thereafter) to any connection whatever to the Emperor or his court.
The translation, just btw, I think better cited direct from Neal’s own website, he having made the translation which appears on Rene’s own site.
Neal’s technical notes are illuminating too – though he also supposed Mnishovsky a reliable source, and (by default) that in this case Marci’s decaying memory had not failed, either.
Neal’s site is at voynichDOTnetBLSHneal
Why are y’all so firmly focused on the Marci and Minischovsky correspondence and/or findings? If one can’t determine provenance of a particular manuscript, why not concentrate on translating the actual script? Is it that you don’t believe that I am translating? Do you think I’m hypothesizing? Guessing? John Tiltman, quite frankly never had a clue. Nor did Currier. We’re running out of names of famous/infamous historical figures who ‘might’ have composed B-408. Why not concentrate on the origins of the script itself? Nick, I firmly believe you should re-visit your discussion in re Rondelet and Montpellier. Fascinating!
Diane: well, if you say so. It’s conceivable that Marci was senile, that Mnishovsky was a liar or whatever else. It’s also perfectly possible that the Rudolph attribution is sound. And an argument from silence, where the entire history of this object is almost completely shrouded in silence, is not convincing – at least, not to me.
Assuming you were right – and it’s not possible to prove that, I fear – where exactly would that get us?
BTW – thank you for pointing me to Neal’s site. His translations of the various letters are exemplary.
Diane & Sir Hubert, Many months ago I referred y’all to Phillip Neal’s elegant archive. It was from that archive, I extracted and translated a letter written to Kircher (last-known holder of the Jesuit archives) and ‘illegible’. The letter was describing the method for making colloidal silver. From that letter, latin script, I was able to assign alphabetical meaning to each of the mystery ciphers of B-408.
Nastrovnya! Good health! Season’s Greetings, whether the season be “Israelite” or Christian. Evharisto!
bd (who was born smack-dab in the middle of WWII: Twentieth Century
“Sunflower”: Scabiosa caucasica — a treatment for scabies and/or mange, depending on the animal being treated.
Boenicke 408 folio 33v: Cor-oll-as-aes-am: “curialum” Second word translates to “sanatio”. Other words in the dialogue refer to ‘of the soil, earth, dirt, to wash out’ .
So, Nick, can we now dismiss the “sunflower” discussion, or at least cross-refer any further references to the “sunflower” and focus on ‘Pincushion plant’? And why Brigadier Gen. Tiltman was un-able ‘decode’ that folio?
Dipsacacae
S. anthemifolia, S.atropurpurea, S. caucasica, S. columbaria, S. ochroleuca, S. Stellata
Diane, ThomS: I hope you can have as much fun as I have with this silly plant specimen.
Ref to “A Day in a Medieval City” (Frugoni), page 167, fig. 143: “Three Women Take a Bath at Home”, drawing c. 1390-1400, from Tacuinum sanitatis. Liege, Bibliotheque general. Manuscript 1041, folio 76. By permission of the British Library. The somewhat faded drawing has Latin script (miniscule) at its base.
SirHubert, Nick
Thank you both so much for engaging in real discussion, if warm enough to be the sort better enjoyed over a dram or pint.
It’s a long time since I’ve seen any genuine (i.e. to-and-fro) argument about this manuscript.
To have a discussion like that, each person must at least take time to read and consider the others’ work, writings and evidence they’ve adduced in support. So it remains a dispute about evidence – rare enough in what Nick once called ‘the Voynich swamp.
Thanks Bdid1dr, too, for your kindly efforts to cool and scent thé atmosphere.
Hope you all enjoy a most productive New Year – beginning here in just two hours’ time.
My New Yr’s toast, though is to Patrick Lockerby, who wrote in 2009 (before the radiocarbon dating):
“My dating of the manuscript is 1350 to 1450. From that perspective, whatever happened in Italy after 1450 is of no relevance in formulating any theory about the Voynich ms.”
Amen.
Diane, keep your “cool” under a nearby “gum” tree”!
Song: Cuckaberra sits in the old gum tree,
Merry merry king of the bush, is he.
Laugh cookaberra, laugh cookaberra,
Gay your life must be!
beedee I’d 1-der
My last comment is entirely well-meant as a New Year’s salute. I know y’all are celebrating Christmas/New Year’s in mid-summer, “down-under”, roight?
Keep cool, and drink lots of cool beverages!
bd
The first of Busbecq’s ambassadorial assignments was to be a witness at the marriage of Mary Queen of Scots and Phillip II of Spain at Winchester Cathedral in 1554 (Turkish Letters, Introduction, xxi — Forster/Roider)
bdid1dr
How curious that you should know that old children’s round. You manage a nice part-profile of the population too:
Adding ‘right?’ to end a sentence is an American habit, I think, but it has indeed become more common since Foxtel arrived.
I like the nod to early Irish refugees (i.e. your ‘right’ as ‘roight’),
To bring things up-to-date I should find some way to refer to our other communities whose first languages include Arabic, Cantonese, Mandarin, Malay, Hindi, Sudanese French, Russian, German and of course some remaining of the hundreds of Australian languages.