The Voynich Ninja

Diane wrote: "North Italy is a perfectly ordinary way of describing the region from which a manuscript has come. Look at any catalogue.


Northern Italy is the northern part of Italy.
It excludes Germany, Switzerland, France,  Southern Italy etc."

Whatever works for you, Diane, if you want to be perfectly ordinary, but in the 14th and 15th centuries, northern Italy as we know it was part of the southern Holy Roman Empire and Lombardy stretched from Austria to the borders of France and Spain. They still speak Lombardic in the now-smaller Lombardy region, by the way—it's only in the last few decades that the Italian language has become dominant. The VMS was written in those times, not now. Migration, communication, and the provenance of the VMS WILL be influenced by those cultural and political ties.



Diane wrote: "(4) Salerno, Germanic?!!  You really have to be joking."

No, I am not joking. The Principality of Salerno was under Lombard (southern Scandinavian) rule from the 9th century and many of the colonists remained there for a significant period of time after the Lombard kingdom passed on. The Lombards were able to sweep southward through the Italic city states because there had been a decimation in the Italic populations at the time (they colonized parts of the Greek islands and north Africa, as well). That's why most of northern Italy was Germanic at the time.

This cultural mixing in Salerno turned out to be a good thing in terms of intellectual development in the area. The legend accompanying Salerno is that it was founded by a Greek, a Jew, a Latin and an Arab. Whether or not that's true, it indicates that they had a certain pride in the multicultural makeup of their unique history and Salerno (and the herbal tradition) particularly flourished after this period.

But what is particularly important vis-a-vis the Voynich mansucript is that the ties between Salerno and the southern Holy Roman Empire influenced the dissemination of the herbal manuscript copies that were spreading from this hot spot to other regions and, from there, also to England through the strong ties between London, Bury St. Edmunds, Ireland, and St. Gall (this was an extremely significant information conduit, maybe even stronger than the one between Paris and England in terms of manuscript "sharing").




"Diane wrote: You assume that the Voynich botanical folios are related to the Latin European herbal genre. Perfectly understandable..."

That's nonsense.

I have NEVER said the botanical folios are related to the Latin European herbal genre. I have never said it. I have never thought it.

I have said that one botanical image bears a striking resemblance to one very specific herbal illustration (and it does). That is not a theory; that is not a hypothesis. It's a statement of fact about one tiny fraction of the herbal compendium, and not sufficient data for any kind of theory. I have no interest in developing theories until I have enough data.




Diane wrote: "As you know, I do not consider the primary purpose of those roundels to relate to astrology;..."

As you know, if you've been reading this forum, I also do not consider the primary purpose of those roundels to necessarily relate to astrology. I see them as anchors for conveying the larger body of information contained in the wheels surrounding them. There are astrological references in various parts of the manuscript, as was common to anything in the middle ages that related to medicine, kabbala, magic, or similar topics, but I'm not convinced they are the central focus of these pages.




Diane wrote: "I think it self evident that the central emblems, read as a series, do not constitute the zodiac series as it was depicted in Latin works between the 9thC AD and AD 1438.  It is not a zodiac in my opinion. The month-names allow us to describe it as some form of calendar."

The month names are written in another hand and probably another ink. It is my opinion that they were probably added later by someone trying to decode the manuscript and have nothing to do with the original author's intentions.



Diane wrote: "For a great many reasons, including the fact that it includes only ten months, now, I consider the calendar related to the sailing season. (which of course, was also the pilgrimage season and trading season)."

It's also possible that the sequence starts with Pisces (rather than the traditional Aries or Aquarius) because it is only secondarily associated with astrology or seasons and is there for its association with the best times to do things (possibly as illustrated by the figures in the surrounding wheels). There are many medieval manuscripts with lists of the best days of the months (and unlucky days of the months), along with the best months for doing certain things, not just labors of the month (like the best times to plant), but also the best months to marry, best months to conceive a child, etc. Sometimes these are written as lists or drawn as textual calenders. It's possible the VMS illustrator took a textual reference of this pervasive idea and re-envisaged it as series of drawings.

It's also possible this is a visually coded journal. Let's say, for example, the person who created the manuscript was at the Council of Constance or some other major activity like a spying mission to Constantinople, and used these as an anchor for noting a series of events of what happened while participating.


I've never assumed the zodiac imagery represented zodiacs, but the imagery is most certainly influenced by zodiac signs. No one accidentally comes up with pictures that resemble Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Libra, Scorpio, and Sagittarius, in that order.


Diane wrote: "It would be considered appropriate courtesy for other members of this list to hold off duplicating my current topic of research work until it has been published, and then if they wish to add comments, or suggest modifications either by email to me, or by comments to the blog. "

Diane, since it's unpublished, we have no idea what you have written about, especially those of us who have not read any (or very many) of the old blog entries about the VMS. Except for a few rare exceptions, I didn't start reading blogs until the Blogosphere reader was created and even now, with long working hours, I don't have time to read them all. What you're proposing is like Hayden asking Beethoven not to write any more symphonies until he's finished the ones he's working on.

A quote from a letter of historical interest for the evolution of Salerno's medical tradition...

This letter is from a diplomatic (spying) mission to Constantinople in the 10th century.

What happens is that the host tries to insult Liudprand by using "Lombard" as a derogatory term ("You are not Romans but Lombards"), to which Liudprand of Cremona bristles, and responds:

"History tells us that Romulus, from whom the Romans get their name, was a fratricide born in adultery. He made a place of refuge for himself and received into it insolvent debtors, runaway slaves, murderers and men who deserved death for their crimes. This was the sort of crowd whom he enrolled as citizens and gave them the name of Romans. From this nobility [note the sarcasm here] are descended those men whom you style 'rulers of the world.'

But we Lombards, Saxons, Franks, Lotharingians, Bavarians, Swabians and Burgundians, so despise these fellows that when we are angry with an enemy we can find nothing more insulting to say than -'You Roman!' For us in the word Roman is comprehended every form of lowness, timidity, avarice, luxury, falsehood and vice. You say that we are unwarlike and know nothing of horsemanship. Well, if the sins of the Christians merit that you keep this stiff neck, the next war will prove what manner of men you are, and how warlike we."


Liudprand was born in Pavia (south of Milan), was associated with Cremona, but was Lombardian (and judging by his tirade, proudly so).

Salerno fell to the Lombards in the 7th century and the famous medical school that spawned many of the herbal traditions was founded and the area declared independent from the surrounding Italic city-states. It grew fairly large, encompassing a substantial part of the "boot".


I personally don't give a rat's behind about ethnicity, but I do care about understanding the proper historical context of the VMS and when you scoff at Salerno being Germanic (which it was prior to and during the formation of the medical school and the herbal manuscript tradition that emanated from that area), you need to do some more research. As I alluded to up-thread, the communications conduit between Salerno and the Holy Roman Empire becomes evident when you follow the dispersal of herbal manuscripts throughout the rest of Europe over the next several centuries. If we ignore this dynamic, we might overlook an important aspect of the Beinecke 408 provenance (or at least some of the possible influences).

Diane wrote: "It would be considered appropriate courtesy for other members of this list to hold off duplicating my current topic of research work until it has been published, and then if they wish to add comments, or suggest modifications either by email to me, or by comments to the blog. "

I can only pop in for a moment, but I wanted to say, just so you know, Diane, that I am supportive of professional courtesy (and courtesy in general) but how many people researching the VMS would hold off on their research (or publication of their findings) so you can finish yours? Besides the fact that research is never finished...

• Some of them have never read your research or have only the barest acquaintance with it. I am somewhat in this category. I'm not even sure what you consider your primary focus since you've responded to a variety of topics on this forum.
  
• None of us has read the part that is in progress (as yet unpublished), so how can people avoid duplicating your research, especially those who have been studying the VMS for a decade or more?
  
• Some of them probably disagree with your research—since we are all individuals looking at it in different ways, they might have a completely different viewpoint of the same material.
  
• Some of them are eager to "be first". You have only to look at how many have jumped the gun and published findings that later turn out to be unsubstantiated, which didn't crack the "code", and which never received corroboration through the work of others. They published before they had confirmed that what they thought they saw was really there (I don't mean the ones who publish interim findings, I mean the ones who publish "solutions" that aren't).
  
• Some are ambitious and don't give a hang about professional courtesy.
  
• Some would feel that no one has an exclusive right to claim a portion of the manuscript and ask others to hold off on their work to accommodate a specific person.
  

Research is a competitive field. I'm just trying to be realistic and look at this in a pragmatic way. Is it possible to make such a request?

OK, we're really OT here.
JKP, you are perfectly correct. This is not a team of acadamia working in close daily tandem but a discussion forum. If that discussion leads us towards a certain point in the distance, then I'm afraid the first person to reach it is the winner.
We either decide to work together in a spirit of friendly co-operation or we retire to our ivory spires to work in isolation. Up to you. Just please attribute ideas and theories where-ever possible.

Also, I'd say the Northern Italy / Germanic argument is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other - depends if you are talking geographically or politically for the period. Still, I'd point out that the Lombard League created the late Middle Ages / Renaissance political tradition of city-states in Italy and certainly turned the intellectual and trading focus away from the HRE towards the Peninsula. And, with Petrach having kicked off new ways of interpreting the world a few years before in Florence, who knows what new ideas could have inspired a person living nearby, who chose to interpret this new world through his traditional lens?

Back to the Vermont 'Tuscany Herbal' - I believe we were discussing similarities between certain herbs here and the VM, if anyone has any further input on this.

JKP

I've been writing up in 'longhand' online, the result of my eighteen months analysis of the Voynich manuscript's imagery. It has taken an awfully long time, because in the past I thought I should try to write for amateurs, simplifying the language, substituting online sources for the ones I'd actually consulted, and trying to find copyright-free, online illustrations to substitute for those in my own library and picture collection.  Very time-consuming.

It has been a constant and regular occurrence that when I announce a new theme or area of study, that suddenly it will occur to someone, usually a constant peruser of my work, to "get a better opinion" from someone who has never, until then, referred to the topic, the manuscript, the period of history, or the plant id.. etc.

What I then find, is that my original conclusion about the map, or about it's connection to the portolan charts (by the way, that was my own comment to P.Han's blog - I checked)... is suddenly re-invented by someone else after being asked to "investigate the idea" or "offer an opinion about...." my work.

Initially, I could count on a time-lapse of perhaps a couple of months, or (when Steve D came on the scene) a couple of day, but to see in a thread where I had announced, in advance, the topic I was about to treat that other peoples "opinion" was being sought - without so much as the courtesy to see first what I intended to say - did get my goat.  I've had seven years and more of this happening.  Why can't the original be read, and acknowledged, and responded to in the normal way?

It seems to have become, by some very peculiar form of non-logic, almost a "matter of principle" to first refuse to acknowledge that work emerging from my research is original, and then to find it so useful that someone else is asked to re-work the subject asap.

The pattern, I repeat, has been there for years.  It is so bad that a specialist in the history of portolans (one I know because of our common area of interest) was actually asked to write a paper "considering an idea" that there was a connection to the Voynich map.  That "idea" was nothing of the sort. it was the conclusion which I had drawn after a considerable amount of solid study and research, added to my existing 30 years' interest in and study of that and related subjects.

My understanding is that the colleague, who is also an ethical man and a gentleman, absolutely refused to have anything more to do with such a project.  His view expressed to me is that it was the academic equivalent of laundering stolen money.

Perhaps some here will agree, others may not. But as in the sciences, or even in the arts - it is not the done thing to try to gazumph another person's topic once they have announced it and begun publishing.  Wait, then reply, is the usual standard.

JKP

I think you may need to re-consider the way in which you've used sources having an outdated understanding of the term 'Langobard', and evidently unaware that there is a current debate among specialists as to whether it was correct that the older historians, and especially those of a particular kind of English and German writing, assumed that the sense in which 'Langobard' is used of the sixth century should be applied to its use in medieval documents written in Latin.

I offer this simply as advice, not as argument.

(11-08-2016, 02:11 AM)Diane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.JKP

I think you may need to re-consider the way in which you've used sources having an outdated understanding of the term 'Langobard', and evidently unaware that there is a current debate among specialists as to whether it was correct that the older historians, and especially those of a particular kind of English and German writing, assumed that the sense in which 'Langobard' is used of the sixth century should be applied to its use in medieval documents written in Latin.

I offer this simply as advice, not as argument.

Diane, I've never used the term 'Langobard'.

I have used the term Lombard in reference to southern Scandinavians who migrated south and colonized a number of regions in the Greek islands, southern Italy, and northern Italy (the area known as Lombardy). Lombardy still exists but is much smaller than it was in earlier centuries). I have also referred to the Lombard language, which is still spoken in parts of current-day Lombardy, but which may be extinct in another generation or two as the current generation is adopting Italian as their main language.

I've also never referred to Lombard documents. I have referred to documents that were written or transmitted in regions where there was a significant Lombard presence. Those are two different things. The Lombardic presence in those regions is important because political/cultural connections have a strong influence on how information and documents are passed from hand to hand (e.g., in reference to a manuscript's provenance).

I came here looking for any new discussion or analysis of the Vermont manuscript to see if anything new has come up. Most of all though i seem to have lost a note i made. What strikes me most about the similarity of the VMS and vermont herbal is that the herbal sections drawings seem to have been done first and the way the text was added around the drawings has some parallels. 

The note i made was a reference i found to an influential teacher who taught students to draw in the field instead of just collecting specimens to draw later. If memory serves it was a university in italy, 14th or 15th century.

I just want to see if the teacher or any known students work has survived so i could see if that could be the way these herbal sections were composed. Thanks

I have just finished transcribing plant names in the Vermont Herbal.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The manuscript contains more than 300 plant illustrations. I tried to identify the illustrated plants, and I think I could do so in about 60% of the cases. For another 20% of the plants, I provide a tentative identification marked with a question mark. I am neither a paleographer nor a botanist, so I honestly expect there are some errors in both the transcriptions and the identifications.

In the process, I noticed some features that might be of interest to Voynich researchers. It's possible that much of this is already known.

• You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. – the description of Aristolochia is followed by a partially encrypted sentence. This seems to be a later addition.
  
• You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - The text contains an incantation-like exorcism with cross signs (the page illustrates ginger “gjengjovo”). Of course, this could be of interest when compared with Voynich You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. 
  
• Several pages contain color annotations. Possibly, the most Voynich-like is Herba Thora (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. bottom) in which the annotation “rosso” (red) appears several times on the stems, that were painted green all the same. Compare with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
  
• About half of the 98 canonical plants from the so-called “alchemical herbal” listed by Segre-Rutz are included in the manuscript (I attach a few comparisons with Bodley Canon.Misc.408, 1378, top row). 
  
• Many plant illustrations appear in two or three versions copied from different books (“alio modo in alio libro” - “in a different way in another book”). E.g. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. One can expect that the text is also derived from different works.
  
• Information from the tradition of astrological herbals is also included in this manuscript: several of the plants are associated with zodiac signs and a few with the planets. For instance, in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. asphodelus is associated with “Aries and Saturn” and stellaria with “Aries and Taurus”.
  

I haven't read the whole text yet, but I have noticed that different works and authors are mentioned, including the “Circa Instans” (i.e. Tractatus De Herbis), Albertus Magnus, Pliny.