Hello Anton,
you almost certainly read about it here:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
I am also far from sure that the entry refers to the Voynich MS, for one because of the copy, but for another that I doubt that it would have been included in the 'Kunstkammer'.
Philosophical is what today we would call scientific, so I don't see a big issue there.
The phrase "Natural Philosophy" was used to describe biology even in the 19th century.
Could there be any chance at all that some of these missing folios still exist in some archive? And if so, where would you start looking?
Rene & JKP:
Yes, that's what I meant by the "wider meaning in those times", but actually the book does not seem scientific or biological to an external observer. It looks like something medical, herbal or astrological. Don't know if those fields of knowledge were considered "philosophy" in those times.
Quote:you almost certainly read about it here:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
That's it!
By the way, there is one Dorer family You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view., although Mathias cannot be the person of interest, because his years of life were 1621 - 1691, and no other Mathiases in that family recorded way back to 1480 when the records begin.
"Mathes Dorrer" is also You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. amongst senators in Reutlingen (which is also located in Baden), although I am not certain to which year that relates.
Anyway, this might have been a widespread surname.
(20-03-2016, 11:17 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Could there be any chance at all that some of these missing folios still exist in some archive? And if so, where would you start looking?
With the amount of wars swept over Europe over the last five hundred years, it's very little I think.
I've come in late here. I gather that there is a tacit argument that Dorrer manuscript is, or could be something to do with MS Beinecke 408, but I don't actually see any evidence that it was.
Is is assumed that by "old writing" is meant not an older style of writing, but an enciphered text using unknown glyphs? Or is it being argued that the Voynich script is a form of old writing once used In Germany?
Sorry, I don't quite get the relevance of this example. With the hundreds of incomplete medieval manuscripts, including ones with pictures of plants in them, what is it about this one that makes it more like the Vms than any other? Is Dorrer's handwriting style, or style of drawing very similar to the Vms'?
These are genuine questions, I really can't see what the two manuscripts are believed to have in common.
(20-03-2016, 07:59 PM)Diane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've come in late here. I gather that there is a tacit argument that Dorrer manuscript is, or could be something to do with MS Beinecke 408, but I don't actually see any evidence that it was.
It's actually not about evidence, but about attempts to locate any historical records about manuscripts in Rudolph's collection which potentially
could match the VMS. There are not that many of such records. I remember we discussed another one in Nick's blog - mentioned in a book by Czech historian, - and that one also did not look as a good match for the VMS.
Anton is right about books and other items being lost. Since I looked at the history of Prague of the time of Rudolf quite a bit, I have seen quite a lot of evidence of this, also related to specific collections known to be lost, and which historians have already partly been searching for.
As is well known, Prague was looted in the course of the 30-years war, and the Swedes took a large number of books to Stockholm. Not long after, a fire in the Stockholm library destroyed a considerable part of this collection. Since catalogues were made shortly before and after the fire, the books lost are well known.
None of the many letters that Kircher sent to Marci have survived. Historians in the Czech republic have been looking for this. It is not at all implied that these were taken to Sweden as well. Marci's library passed (by inheritance) to one of his sons, and all traces of it are lost after that. The interest for us is that it would have included the remainder of Barschius's library as well. Barschius may have left marginal notes in there, etc, etc,
Not only many books, but also many items of art from Rudolf's Kunstkammer have been dispersed, and only part of them has been identified since.
(A similar discussion can be held about what happened with Barschius' notes that Marci sent to Kircher with the MS. These were lost much later, and would certainly make most fascinating reading. There's a chance they are in the Italian national archives, but it's only a small one - and a different topic).
The other point, namely the other book discussed at Nick's blog, would have been the book 'M' in some Rosicrucian's catalogue, IIRC.
Anton,
Sorry, I just noticed your reply:
Quote:It's actually not about evidence, but about attempts to locate any historical records about manuscripts in Rudolph's collection which potentially could match the VMS. There are not that many of such records. I remember we discussed another one in Nick's blog - mentioned in a book by Czech historian, - and that one also did not look as a good match for the VMS.
I see. I thought this was about provenancing the manuscript.
Since Touwiade has recently confirmed that the manuscript appears to have been made in Italy, I'd think it more likely that we'd find any cognate works there, or perhaps in England, if it is accepted that the Arabic page numbers are in John Dee's hand (this from a recognised expert in that area).
I know that Wilfrid never wasted a minute, and was very diligent in seeking the work's earlier history. He concentrated on England and Italy - and I think he was right to do so from the meagre evidence we have.
Still, I guess alll of us follow our own interests in this subject don't we? Thanks for the civil reply, Anton. As ever.
Rene - yes, I'm familiar with that scenario, and know of your long-term efforts to find a way to argue that the manuscript was owned by the Emperor and by Matthias etc.I can only admire the persistence with which you have been attempting to find such evidence, now, for almost twenty years. I certainly wouldn't have maintained the interest in following such an apparently unfruitful line of enquiry, but then they said the same of Schleimann, and in the end he found what he was looking for. I hope you will too.
(02-04-2016, 11:49 AM)Diane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Anton,
Sorry, I just noticed your reply:
Quote:It's actually not about evidence, but about attempts to locate any historical records about manuscripts in Rudolph's collection which potentially could match the VMS. There are not that many of such records. I remember we discussed another one in Nick's blog - mentioned in a book by Czech historian, - and that one also did not look as a good match for the VMS.
I see. I thought this was about provenancing the manuscript.
Since Touwiade has recently confirmed that the manuscript appears to have been made in Italy, I'd think it more likely that we'd find any cognate works there, or perhaps in England, if it is accepted that the Arabic page numbers are in John Dee's hand (this from a recognised expert in that area)....
Does Touwiade define what he means by Italy?
There was no Italy in the 15th century as we know it. It was a general term to encompass a collection of city states and even in the late 15th century, after Lombardy and the Roman Empire had significantly receded northward, "Italie" only reached somewhat north of Venice. North of that were Recia, Vindelitia, and Noricum which still had significant Germanic populations at the time (vestiges of Lombardy).
I presume it is meant like that, i.e. a term of convenience, to refer to the peninsula without identifying the particular region. The Sloane MS is Lombard, but the Paris MS isn't. He is referring to both.