17-07-2020, 07:12 PM
Hi, All:
I wanted to bring this dissertation to the group's attention:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Cultural Uses of Magic in Fifteenth Century England by Laura T Mitchell
I will start with the disclaimers -- yes, it's England and yes, it discusses "magic" (lots of focus on charms) and yes, I know that both of these are big question marks when it come to the Voynich (e.g., we don't know "where" and we don't know "what").
But here is the value I found in this scholarship: The manuscripts that she discusses are concrete examples of theories that have been put forth for the Voynich.
After doing a general survey of magic in manuscripts in England (very interesting, but maybe not applicable for the disclaimers discussed above) she moved on to the focused manuscript topics I found quite useful.
She takes several different manuscripts produced in the general time period of the carbon dating and discusses reasoning behind WHY they were produced and what aspects of the manuscripts, in a very broad sense, she used to discern these motivations.
The first is a manuscript produced as a collective effort by a "lower gentry household", the Holdenby or Haldenby family (see, Chapter 2).
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It doesn't "look like" the Voynich, but it was made with vellum and with multiple hands (10!). Colophons indicate that various family members were involved.
This is a concrete example of the "communal book" theory in practice.
Mitchell talks about copying outside of monasteries, the role of book ownership and social status, the role of "wonder" in the Middle Ages, and the role of secrets and concludes:
"The actual knowledge contained inside the book was often secondary to the air of authority gained by possessing it in the first place." (p. 99)
Now I know this is something often assumed in the Voynich community -- but it was helpful to me to see it in a work of scholarship. An aside: Interestingly, the most blatant reference to "charms" had been erased, but can be seen under UV light.
The next chapter discusses another concrete example commonly discussed in relation to the Voynich -- the personal notebook. Now this one is paper and has only one hand and hasn't been digitized, but there are interesting discussions of the personality of the (unknown) owner based on the magical content. So this has less to do with the Voynich on the surface, at least, but it was interesting. I'm not sure I agree completely with the whole connection between "masculine" identity and ownerships of manuscripts idea (which is just discussed by Mitchell, this is the primary work of Frank Klasssen -- but I haven't read the background scholarship (role of nude nymphs, anyone?).
Next, there is a chapter for a manuscript discussing the physician (or charlatan) reference as well as the "advertising" theory. Because of the colophon, the owner and the scribe are both known. The owner was likely a "part-time" physician. The scribe was a law student/teacher in training. Interestingly, Mitchell states that if scribes are hired, this was the most costly part of the book making process, more expensive than the materials (see page 169). Mitchell discusses how the unusual colophon functioned as an advertisement for both the physician and the scribe. Link to some pages:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
An aside: This is a (the?) source of the famous colophon quote:
Nunc scripsi totum pro christo da mihi potum. (Now that I have written the whole for Christ; give me a drink.)
TL/DR: The PhD thesis by Laura Mitchell discusses manuscripts from 15th century England that personify theories about the "psychology" of the Voynich. It is readable and well researched -- recommended!
I wanted to bring this dissertation to the group's attention:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Cultural Uses of Magic in Fifteenth Century England by Laura T Mitchell
I will start with the disclaimers -- yes, it's England and yes, it discusses "magic" (lots of focus on charms) and yes, I know that both of these are big question marks when it come to the Voynich (e.g., we don't know "where" and we don't know "what").
But here is the value I found in this scholarship: The manuscripts that she discusses are concrete examples of theories that have been put forth for the Voynich.
After doing a general survey of magic in manuscripts in England (very interesting, but maybe not applicable for the disclaimers discussed above) she moved on to the focused manuscript topics I found quite useful.
She takes several different manuscripts produced in the general time period of the carbon dating and discusses reasoning behind WHY they were produced and what aspects of the manuscripts, in a very broad sense, she used to discern these motivations.
The first is a manuscript produced as a collective effort by a "lower gentry household", the Holdenby or Haldenby family (see, Chapter 2).
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It doesn't "look like" the Voynich, but it was made with vellum and with multiple hands (10!). Colophons indicate that various family members were involved.
This is a concrete example of the "communal book" theory in practice.
Mitchell talks about copying outside of monasteries, the role of book ownership and social status, the role of "wonder" in the Middle Ages, and the role of secrets and concludes:
"The actual knowledge contained inside the book was often secondary to the air of authority gained by possessing it in the first place." (p. 99)
Now I know this is something often assumed in the Voynich community -- but it was helpful to me to see it in a work of scholarship. An aside: Interestingly, the most blatant reference to "charms" had been erased, but can be seen under UV light.
The next chapter discusses another concrete example commonly discussed in relation to the Voynich -- the personal notebook. Now this one is paper and has only one hand and hasn't been digitized, but there are interesting discussions of the personality of the (unknown) owner based on the magical content. So this has less to do with the Voynich on the surface, at least, but it was interesting. I'm not sure I agree completely with the whole connection between "masculine" identity and ownerships of manuscripts idea (which is just discussed by Mitchell, this is the primary work of Frank Klasssen -- but I haven't read the background scholarship (role of nude nymphs, anyone?).
Next, there is a chapter for a manuscript discussing the physician (or charlatan) reference as well as the "advertising" theory. Because of the colophon, the owner and the scribe are both known. The owner was likely a "part-time" physician. The scribe was a law student/teacher in training. Interestingly, Mitchell states that if scribes are hired, this was the most costly part of the book making process, more expensive than the materials (see page 169). Mitchell discusses how the unusual colophon functioned as an advertisement for both the physician and the scribe. Link to some pages:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
An aside: This is a (the?) source of the famous colophon quote:
Nunc scripsi totum pro christo da mihi potum. (Now that I have written the whole for Christ; give me a drink.)
TL/DR: The PhD thesis by Laura Mitchell discusses manuscripts from 15th century England that personify theories about the "psychology" of the Voynich. It is readable and well researched -- recommended!