The Voynich Ninja

Some while ago, I was watching a document about history and medieval ages and in that document they were saying that knowledge of reading and writing was not as usual as it is today even more for women. Only a few studied ones could actually read and write. It was declared that women who can read are witches or something to laugh to.

To be honest, I don't know if that declaration was truthful or not. What are the opinions of others?

If we hypothesise that the VM was made by a group of like-minded women, am I correct to deduce that the vast majority of precedents points towards religious institutions? This seems important to keep in mind: if you say "women scriptorium" you probably also say "nuns". Or beguines, which are not entirely the same

(07-12-2021, 04:01 PM)Ranceps Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Only a few studied ones could actually read and write.

Well, whether women could read and write probably depended primarily on their social status. Many nuns could read and write, that is sufficiently proven. Women of higher social status (nobility) were also not illiterate. In the emerging cities, women will have been active at least in the commercial sector.
Among the lower class (peasants), of course, it was different. Mostly neither men nor women could read and write. Illiteracy is therefore less of a gender-specific problem here.

Exactly. Literacy during this period has more to do with status than gender. Lots of women could read and write, especially as we move into the 14th and 15th centuries. Many owned Books of Hours and literature. It was quite common for women of wealth and status to be educated. And yes, most nuns were literate and many were scribes. There were also professional scribes and notaries who were women, although those are more rare. There were also women who were artists, although those are rare as well.

I feel like I would understand this argument better if I knew the kind of group of women we are imagining. I believe that there are some consequences to a hypothesis of female authorship.

1) An argument in favor of women being behind the VM relies on a mostly literal reading of the imagery. The plants are medicinal, Q13 has to do with feminine health, basically a scientific compendium. Is this correct? In favor of a "gender-agnostic" interpretation, I have argued that men would also draw "souls" as female figures (anima is feminine), but this requires an interpretation of the nymphs as souls and/or allegorical figures. If I understand correctly, it is the mostly literal interpretation which pushes the balance towards likely female involvement.

2) From this follows the assumption that this group of women made the VM for themselves and/or their peers, is this correct? I mean, if we are thinking about a professional assignment, the gender of the makers is irrelevant because they (man or woman) would just make what the client commissioned. So suggesting female authorship based on the imagery also suggests that the work was not a commission for a professional scribe. Additionally, the VM does not present itself as a professional work. 

From this follows that if the VM was made by women, this was a group of women cooperatively making a scientific compendium for themselves, using weird imagery and a secret writing system.

This sounds intriguing, but which women would do this? The examples we have seen so far are either women working professionally in the manuscript business, or nuns. The literal interpretation of the imagery implies that it is scientific and genuinely lacking in religious content. Would nuns make something like this?

(07-12-2021, 07:39 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.1) An argument in favor of women being behind the VM relies on a mostly literal reading of the imagery. The plants are medicinal, Q13 has to do with feminine health, basically a scientific compendium. Is this correct?

Not necessarily, also other interpretations are possible, which would not exclude a female authorship in any case ( I refrain here from naming my "favorite theory" to Q13 ). Basically I believe that everything that could be thematized by men could also be taken up by women. Otherwise one would have to ask the other way round, what could be a typical male view on the visual language.

(07-12-2021, 08:43 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Basically I believe that everything that could be thematized by men could also be taken up by women. Otherwise one would have to ask the other way round, what could be a typical male view on the visual language.

Of course - to be clear, my feeling is that the contents of the VM are "gender neutral", so for me the chances that women were involved would equal the ratio of female to male manuscript makers (this isn't 50/50, right?). Literacy alone is not enough, since the VM is a product that was actively made. So say that for example one in ten people involved in writing/drawing manuscripts is a woman, I would say that the chances of female involvement are this same 10%.

However, what makes this discussion interesting is the question if there are additional indications within the VM that it was made by women. I would say: not necessarily. But if one does say so, this entails certain assumptions and consequences.

I really love when someone goes back to the old thread and the discussion continues.

Thanks for clarifying that to me.

(07-12-2021, 09:05 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Of course - to be clear, my feeling is that the contents of the VM are "gender neutral", so for me the chances that women were involved would equal the ratio of female to male manuscript makers (this isn't 50/50, right?).

Yes, I agree. I would assume a ratio of women to men of 25/75 ( see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ). So the proportion of women is not particularly high, but also not so low that it would be negligible.

(07-12-2021, 12:59 PM)LisaFaginDavis Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The content of the VMS absolutely speaks to women's knowledge and women's wisdom.

Hi Lisa, I would love to know more of the features that you find to be particularly telling in this respect. When this thread started, I remembered that you said something along these lines in some other post or maybe in a video. I searched for it, but I was unable to find anything (searching videos is still quite frustrating).

Something that is obviously more feminine than masculine is the number of subjects in the illustrations: women are clearly predominant. One can observe something similar (possibly even more drastic) in the already mentioned You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (The City of Ladies) by Christine de Pisan / Pizan. This parallel is not conclusive, but it could hint to some role of women in the creation of the manuscript.