04-07-2022, 12:33 AM
Being a retired academic with way too much time on my hands, I have applied myself to the VMS full time for the last six months or so. It’s not the first time; I often included the VMS as a topic when I taught an Honours program in ‘Lost Texts and Apocrypha’ in the years 2000-2010. I’ve studied it over time and now in some depth.
I have a fully developed contextual reading of the work and an hypothesis regarding its authorship, contents and purpose that I’d like to share here. I regard the hypothesis as very solid in itself (or at least sane), and apply it as my paradigm for tackling the real challenge, the reading of the text. On reflection, establishing the context and the author is the easy part; working out exactly what the author has done in the text is admittedly more tricky. In my methodology the task is to get text, context and subtext to all align. Only then will all be clear and a ‘solution’ emerge.
I’II call the hypothesis the Cusanus Ladin Hypothesis. Here are twelve points, each of which I think is defensible and together constitute a plausible case.
Argument: Nicholas of Cusa is the mind behind the Voynich manuscript.
1. The Voynich ms. is from the mid 1400s. (My hypothesis requires a date perhaps a decade later than the carbon dating.)
2. The Voynich ms. is from alpine northern Italy.
3. The Rosette map - the key to the work - depicts the Rosengarten mountain region of the Dolomites (and, crucially, the symbolism of the Alpenglow.)
4. The nymphs depicted are from the mythology of the Ladin people of that region.
5. The illustrations in the manuscript reflect the ancient herb gathering traditions of the Ladin people of alpine northern Italy.
6. In contrast to the illustrations, the text and language in the Voynich ms. are highly artificial constructions that seem generated by complex, systematic methods.
7. The text could not have been made by rustic herb gatherers from the remote valleys of the Rosengarten mountains. It is the creation of a highly educated mind. The script and other factors suggest the author was a humanist scholar.
8. The type of system used to create the Voynich text is highly suggestive of the systems of Ramon Llull. (Ars Magna)
9. In the relevant period, the main advocate of Ramon Llull’s methods and the great humanist scholar of Llullism, collector of Lllull’s works, was Nicholas of Cusa.
10. Nicholas of Cusa was made bishop over the relevant region and people (Bishop of Brixen) in 1450 and served in that role for about eight years. (It was a turbulent but still very creative phase of Cusanus' life.)
11. In the writings of both Llull and Cusanus there is discussion of applying the Ars Magna to herbalism and medicine and the natural sciences generally.
12. Summary: In the illustrations we can identify the herbal traditions of alpine northern Italy. In the text we can identify the systems of Ramon Llull. The person who links these two identifications is Nicholas of Cusa. He was the Llullian scholar, a Christian humanist, who was in a position to have a prolonged encounter with the relevant herbal tradition.
Conclusion: Therefore, the manuscript is likely to be a project of Nicholas of Cusa undertaken during his time as Bishop of Brixen. It brings the Ars Magna of Llull to a preexisting herbal tradition from alpine northern Italy.
It follows: To decipher the text, we need to understand Nicholas of Cusa’s use of the Ars Magna of Ramon Llull and how he might have applied it (or his own developments of Lllullism) in this case.
We have a capable genius, the right type of mind, in the relevant region, in the relevant period, with plausible motive. It is a circumstantial case but, I think, a strong one.
Important additional context: the work is Christianizing. It is a Christianization (Christian humanism) of the native Ladin herbal tradition (and its mythology) made in the context of the rising tide of witch-hunts in the region. (Which Cusanus resisted.)
Surmise: The work is likely to concern measurements in the natural sciences - the nymphs are shown measuring – and is an application of Cusanus’ rather mystical theories regarding weights and measures as well as cartography and his other non-theological preoccupations well signalled in his lesser writings and dialogues with the “layman”. A key work is his Conjectures.
Languages: The natural language that goes with the traditions depicted in the illustrations is what we today call Ladin but at the time would have been regarded as a primitive Latin, and was entirely unwritten. I propose that Ladin (a vulgar Latin with Rhaetean fusions) is at least in the background of the work. (I don't propose the text is a simple mapping of Ladin.) Otherwise, Nicholas of Cusa has Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, Catalan, German, Italian and a smattering of others within his range. Even such an artificial construction as Voynichese must have a natural language underpinning it.
Note well: I doubt Cusanus himself put nib to vallum, and he is not the illustrator. It was not a private folly. But I do believe it was his project.
I am well aware I am not the first person to throw the name ‘Nicholas of Cusa’ into the ring. I am personally satisfied he is the author and the mind behind the work. (I resisted the identification at first, but I think it is an unavoidable conclusion.) The script and the text is his. The quest for me is to work out precisely what he has done (and perhaps with whom?)
I do not think Voynichese is an encryption even though Cusanus, as a diplomat, certainly would have been familiar with all the standard methods of his day. More generally, I do not think the text was intended to conceal. I don't detect a subtext of concealment. We only think that because we lack the key to read it. It is more likely to be pastoral in intent. I suspect its linguistic mysteries may have more to do with some concern for the illiterate Ladin.
What I add to the identification of the author is the proposal that the work comes out of his pastoral encounter with the Ladin people (herb gatherers) from the remote alpine valleys (probably in the context of their pilgrimages to Saben, ancient centre of the bishopric.)
I spend my days exploring this hypothesis, searching for a way into the text through this context. (I join that long list of researchers who are all very confident they are on the right path.)
RB
I have a fully developed contextual reading of the work and an hypothesis regarding its authorship, contents and purpose that I’d like to share here. I regard the hypothesis as very solid in itself (or at least sane), and apply it as my paradigm for tackling the real challenge, the reading of the text. On reflection, establishing the context and the author is the easy part; working out exactly what the author has done in the text is admittedly more tricky. In my methodology the task is to get text, context and subtext to all align. Only then will all be clear and a ‘solution’ emerge.
I’II call the hypothesis the Cusanus Ladin Hypothesis. Here are twelve points, each of which I think is defensible and together constitute a plausible case.
Argument: Nicholas of Cusa is the mind behind the Voynich manuscript.
1. The Voynich ms. is from the mid 1400s. (My hypothesis requires a date perhaps a decade later than the carbon dating.)
2. The Voynich ms. is from alpine northern Italy.
3. The Rosette map - the key to the work - depicts the Rosengarten mountain region of the Dolomites (and, crucially, the symbolism of the Alpenglow.)
4. The nymphs depicted are from the mythology of the Ladin people of that region.
5. The illustrations in the manuscript reflect the ancient herb gathering traditions of the Ladin people of alpine northern Italy.
6. In contrast to the illustrations, the text and language in the Voynich ms. are highly artificial constructions that seem generated by complex, systematic methods.
7. The text could not have been made by rustic herb gatherers from the remote valleys of the Rosengarten mountains. It is the creation of a highly educated mind. The script and other factors suggest the author was a humanist scholar.
8. The type of system used to create the Voynich text is highly suggestive of the systems of Ramon Llull. (Ars Magna)
9. In the relevant period, the main advocate of Ramon Llull’s methods and the great humanist scholar of Llullism, collector of Lllull’s works, was Nicholas of Cusa.
10. Nicholas of Cusa was made bishop over the relevant region and people (Bishop of Brixen) in 1450 and served in that role for about eight years. (It was a turbulent but still very creative phase of Cusanus' life.)
11. In the writings of both Llull and Cusanus there is discussion of applying the Ars Magna to herbalism and medicine and the natural sciences generally.
12. Summary: In the illustrations we can identify the herbal traditions of alpine northern Italy. In the text we can identify the systems of Ramon Llull. The person who links these two identifications is Nicholas of Cusa. He was the Llullian scholar, a Christian humanist, who was in a position to have a prolonged encounter with the relevant herbal tradition.
Conclusion: Therefore, the manuscript is likely to be a project of Nicholas of Cusa undertaken during his time as Bishop of Brixen. It brings the Ars Magna of Llull to a preexisting herbal tradition from alpine northern Italy.
It follows: To decipher the text, we need to understand Nicholas of Cusa’s use of the Ars Magna of Ramon Llull and how he might have applied it (or his own developments of Lllullism) in this case.
We have a capable genius, the right type of mind, in the relevant region, in the relevant period, with plausible motive. It is a circumstantial case but, I think, a strong one.
* * *
Important additional context: the work is Christianizing. It is a Christianization (Christian humanism) of the native Ladin herbal tradition (and its mythology) made in the context of the rising tide of witch-hunts in the region. (Which Cusanus resisted.)
Surmise: The work is likely to concern measurements in the natural sciences - the nymphs are shown measuring – and is an application of Cusanus’ rather mystical theories regarding weights and measures as well as cartography and his other non-theological preoccupations well signalled in his lesser writings and dialogues with the “layman”. A key work is his Conjectures.
Languages: The natural language that goes with the traditions depicted in the illustrations is what we today call Ladin but at the time would have been regarded as a primitive Latin, and was entirely unwritten. I propose that Ladin (a vulgar Latin with Rhaetean fusions) is at least in the background of the work. (I don't propose the text is a simple mapping of Ladin.) Otherwise, Nicholas of Cusa has Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, Catalan, German, Italian and a smattering of others within his range. Even such an artificial construction as Voynichese must have a natural language underpinning it.
Note well: I doubt Cusanus himself put nib to vallum, and he is not the illustrator. It was not a private folly. But I do believe it was his project.
I am well aware I am not the first person to throw the name ‘Nicholas of Cusa’ into the ring. I am personally satisfied he is the author and the mind behind the work. (I resisted the identification at first, but I think it is an unavoidable conclusion.) The script and the text is his. The quest for me is to work out precisely what he has done (and perhaps with whom?)
I do not think Voynichese is an encryption even though Cusanus, as a diplomat, certainly would have been familiar with all the standard methods of his day. More generally, I do not think the text was intended to conceal. I don't detect a subtext of concealment. We only think that because we lack the key to read it. It is more likely to be pastoral in intent. I suspect its linguistic mysteries may have more to do with some concern for the illiterate Ladin.
What I add to the identification of the author is the proposal that the work comes out of his pastoral encounter with the Ladin people (herb gatherers) from the remote alpine valleys (probably in the context of their pilgrimages to Saben, ancient centre of the bishopric.)
I spend my days exploring this hypothesis, searching for a way into the text through this context. (I join that long list of researchers who are all very confident they are on the right path.)
RB