The Voynich Ninja

From a manuscript recently You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.: BNF NAL 3255, France, 1300-1325

Thanks, Marco. Is that a ring or a mirror though? Looks like it could be some vanity motif.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has got an unusual version of the "Venus with mirror" motif. And as a bonus, two barrel buddies:

[attachment=2489]

(offtopic) That bloke with a beard looks like he had an accident in the Pringles factory!

The barrel-guy is Diogenes, asking Alexander stand out of his sun.
The subject also appears in a XV Century tarot card from Ferrara.

I'd like to post a couple of examples depicting a ring. Those examples also depict rings in a bigger size than they are. I think the reason is to make the accent exactly on that detail, i. e., to make that detail noticeable.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Anulus (ring) - "symbolum mutue dilectionis" (a symbol of mutual love)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:

Quote:It is said that on a journey back from mass on the feast day of St John the Evangelist, King Edward was stopped by a beggar asking for Alms, or money for the poor. The King who had no money on him, took a ring from his finger and gave it to the man.Some time later, two pilgrims in Jerusalem met an old man who asked them to return the ring that he had been given by the king. He told them that in six months, the King would come to live with him. When the pilgrims asked who he was, the man replied ‘St John the Evangelist.’ Supposedly, this happened six months before King Edward died.

So am I correct understanding that rings go with marriage and betrothal, but can also be seen as independent symbols of love? Or must they always accompany an official union?

Another ring, though not a lady, is found in Van Eyck's famous You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. I had always learned that ring indicated the anonymous man's occupation as a jeweler, though apparently this view has recently changed in favor of a betrothal. It was finished in 1430. Similarly, a ring is held by Jan de Leeuw in another portrait by Van Eyck; in this case, the ring supposedly does symbolize his occupation as a goldsmith. However, given the sitter's seductive gaze towards the viewer, I think here too a portrait for his betrothed is more likely.

[attachment=5102]

Isn't the ring also a status symbol ?
The pope and the bishop, kings and emperors also had them. 
Signet ring.
It doesn't always have to do with love and marriage.

Significance.
What the nymph is holding in her hand is a Christmas tree ball. You can see it on the hook.
The fact that she is grabbing her buttocks with the other hand can only mean one thing!
I don't give a shit about Christmas.

(05-01-2021, 10:43 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So am I correct understanding that rings go with marriage and betrothal, but can also be seen as independent symbols of love? Or must they always accompany an official union?

As much as I understand, no, it can't be an independent symbol of love. From You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (I couldn't discern some words, excuse me, but I think the main sense is preserved):

"Ponsus (positus?) sponsa anulo debet sponse anulis...
...anulus sponse a sponso et eam datur in signum mutue dilectionis et fidei ...XXX.9.V femme ... ideo anulus a sponso sponse in quarto digito inseritur, ut sunt vena ab illo digito cordi conjungitur, sit eorum corda per sacrum matrimonii conjungentur XXX.9.V. femme..."
Thus, the approximate translation: The ring is given by a bridegroom to a bride as a sign of their mutual love and faith...Therefore the ring on the fourth finger of a bride by a bridegroom is inserted, as it is joined to the vein of the heart, let their hearts be joined by means of the sacred marriage...

Quote:Another ring, though not a lady, is found in Van Eyck's famous You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. I had always learned that ring indicated the anonymous man's occupation as a jeweler, though apparently this view has recently changed in favor of a betrothal. It was finished in 1430. Similarly, a ring is held by Jan de Leeuw in another portrait by Van Eyck; in this case, the ring supposedly does symbolize his occupation as a goldsmith. However, given the sitter's seductive gaze towards the viewer, I think here too a portrait for his betrothed is more likely.

From Wikipedia:

Quote:Erwin Panofsky's analysis in the mid century – or that the painting was commissioned as a betrothal portrait to mark a proposal of marriage intended for an unseen bride and her family.This latter theory is supported by the panel's near miniature dimensions; such a small size would have been easily packed and transported to the intended's family.
...
Yet it is interesting to consider such an idealised portrait in the context of a betrothal portrait, where the intended bride's family most likely had not met the man and are dependent solely on the portrait for an indication of his means and character. Carol Richardson observes that the unidealised representation would have been a significant novelty and shock at the time, and that, complete with the evident skill of the painter, the verisimilitude would have given the sitter weight and creditability

I have the same impression. They've often sent their portraits to an bethrothed, maybe, some were pretty original to make a marriage proposal in the same time.