I was thinking over the article about Hořčický's books on Rene's You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., and there's definitely something weird about all this.
Let's begin with the fact that Hořčický numbered his books. We don't know if he numbered all his books, or just a subset thereof. We don't know when he began to number his books. Neither do we know if there was a gap of time between the book being acquired and it being numbered.
But all that is not very important in the view of the self-evident circumstance that the books must have been numbered in the ascending order. In other words, suppose you have a pack of hundred books before you. When you take the first book and number it, you typically won't give it number 78. You will give it number 1. When you take the second book after having numbered the first one, you won't give this second book number 63. You will give it number 2. And so forth.
I presume that this was the practice that Hořčický adopted.
Now, let's build on the fact that some of the books numbered by Hořčický luckily feature not only their numbers, but also the year in which they got their numbers from their possessor, alias Hořčický. Such are books number 7 and number 18. Both of them were numbered in the year 1602. (As a sidenote, this means that books number 8 through 17 (which we know nothing of) must have also been numbered in 1602).
Not only do books 7 and 18 feature date, they also feature the particular form of Hořčický's mentioning himself. Namely, they attest him as "Jacobi Synapij". I won't speculate whether this handwriting (and writings discussed hereinafter) is that of Hořčický or of his scribe/secretary/whosoever. But that's not very important. What is important is that they say "Jacobi Synapij" (and not "de Tepenec"). That's perfectly fine, because he was not a nobleman at that time.
The fine state of things disrupts at this point, and something strange starts.
Consider book number 4. Since 4 is less than 7, let alone 18, this book must have been numbered no later than 1602. However, it says not "Jacobi Synapij", but "Jacobj à Tepenecz". (The handwriting is totally different from that on books 7 and 18, but, as I said, let's abstract from that for now).
So the question is: if Hořčický was not a nobleman yet back in 1602, how could he mention himself as "à Tepenecz"? I could not find what "à" meant back then. Currently, "á" means "and" in Czech language, which makes no sense in the context. Could it have meant "from" back then? In that case the attribute "from Tepenecz" could have been not a reference to the nobility, but just an indicator of the origin. As I understand, the Tepenecz castle was situated not very far away from Hořčický's birthplace.
I can think of no other explanation, can you?
When we move to the book number 40, we find out that it says "Jakuba z Tepenize". I guess that the name Jacob is put in attributive form here (is it?): like: whose is this book? - this is Jacob's book. But what is important is the preposition "z". It literally means "from". In other words, the whole phrase stands for "Jacob from Tepenez". This nicely fits my assumption above that Hořčický used to refer to himself as to Jacob "from Tepenecz". The only strange thing here is: why did he use the strange preposition "à" instead of simple "z" when he numbered book number 4?
Mind that we don't know the date when the book number 40 was numbered. It might have been before or after he gained nobility. If it were after, then this is OK from all respects. If it were before, then, as described in the preceding paragraph, we could resort to my assumption of Jacob as the man "from Tepenecz", but anyway this is no stranger than the pre-1602 book number 4 signed in a similar manner.
It is worth noting that Hořčický's legal signature of the year 1617 reads the same way: "Jakub z Tepenize".
There remains only a single Hořčický book which we know of, as of the present time. And that book is the Voynich Manuscript. It features no date (at least, none has been revealed yet under the UV light). It's number, in the present condition of f1r, is ambiguous. Rene suggests that it is number 19, but to me number 79 looks also quite a good match to the remains of the writing that we are to work with.
But the inscription (and the handwriting!) is quite, quite the same as on the (pre-1602) book number 4! It is "Jacobj <or, possibly, "Jacobi"> á Tepenecz". I would note that the diacritic over the "a" looks the other side, but note, in particular, the way that "cz" is written in the two books. It's 100% the same! (I wander why the inscription in the VMS is often quoted as "á Tepenece". It is surely not "Tepenece" but "Tepenecz".)
Two strange things are observed here.
First, if the VMS is number 19, then it must have been dated not long after number 18. It would be strange for Hořčický to have a timeout of several years in numbering his books (even if we assume that he did not number all books that he acquired, but only a subset of those). In other words, the VMS would have been numbered in 1602 or 1603, something like that.
But that ruins the story that Hořčický acquired the book from Rudolf II, or after him.
If the VMS is not number 19 but, say, 79, it's not that bad.
The second strange thing is the inconsistency of the form that Hořčický mentions himself in. First he says that he is "Jacob from Tepenecz" (book 4). Then, quite quickly, he switches to "Sinapius" (books 7 and 18). Then he returns to "Jacob from Tepenecz" again (book 40 and the Voynich Manuscript).
(09-07-2017, 07:06 PM)VViews Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Here are more reliquaries, this time from 19r in the Oldenburger version that MarcoP linked to in the ladies with rings thread.
They do look really quite familiar!
and there is the famous musdel (in your cutout line 5 from the lower margin)
Hi everyone,
I was reviewing the comments section in the Guardian article about Skinner's theory, and saw that " Sierranorth" had made the following contribution:
"Consider this:
Wilfred Voynich was a brilliant man whose ‘seductive’ personality, facility in languages, wide ranging knowledge, and keen entrepreneurial skills made him a highly successful book dealer. Voynich might have owed his continued success more to his knowledge as a chemist than to his other skills and personality. He graduated from Moscow University with a degree in chemistry and was a licensed pharmacist. Not long after he opened his bookshop he began finding previously unknown rare manuscripts. He was said to have acquired supplies of unused medieval paper from Europe and to have used ‘his knowledge as a chemist to replicate medieval inks and paints, thus enabling him to create “new” medieval manuscripts to order’. Readers’ tickets from the British Museum Library reveal that his associate Sydney Reilly (Reilly, Ace of Spies) had presented himself as a ‘chemist and physicist’ interested in the study of medieval art. Among the books that he studied were Some observations on ancient inks and A Booke of secrets, shewing divers waies to make and prepare all sorts of Inke and Colours."
I was not aware that Voynich and Reilly had such a close connection... yet an old BBC You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. seems to say they frequented the same bookshop, and another You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. claims that Reilly may have frequented Voynich's wife at one time, but not much more.
Are any of these claims verified?
If the statements about them checking out books about how to mimic medieval inks at the BM library is true, I have to say that might give some weight to the modern hoax theory...
There are only a few images of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. offered by the library website, and many of those feature some kind of decoration in ascenders and descenders. I know that these are relatively common, but one of them struck me as somewhat similar in effect as some of the VM's more fanciful ascenders. This is what I mean:
Picatrix is an Arabic treaty about astrological and talismanic magic. Like the often mentioned “Astromagia” ms You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., the Catalan translation of the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (from an Arabic original) was produced at the court of Alfonso X of Castile (XIII Century).
A few years ago, Darren Worley provided a few details about the Illustrated Latin Picatrix (Jagiellonian University Library, Poland, Ms. Krakow 793 – or BJ 793) on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. He included a link to the digital scans.
Prof. Ewa-Śnieżyńska Stolot of the Jagiellonian University (also author of a brief but very informative You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) edited a monograph about the ms in 2009 (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
An extensive discussion of the Krakow ms (that contains several other texts) can be read in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Benedek Lang.
Lang (pg.97-98) points out that the Krakow manuscript, although incomplete, “is the earliest surviving Picatrix that is longer than a few folios”. “This Krakow manuscript is the only illustrated Picatrix known to us”. “According to the art historian [Zofia Ameisenowa], the clothes in the pictures point to the fourth decade of the [XV] Century, depicting the Bohemian style. In contrast -as it happens- the text editor supposes that the codex was copied from one or several Italian sources. The only certain fact is that the manuscript was copied by a Polish scribe....”
JKP's latest You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has a paragraph about "short legged men" in the Zodiac central emblems. He also found a number of images which match both the strange proportions of these fellows, and the dress of the crossbowman, to some extent.
One image I found particularly interesting features a Sagittarius-like man approaching a robed figure. Not the female twin, but a clergymen.
This looked like the kind of image that was copied, so I dug around a bit and found that it features in texts called Le Songe du Verger: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Quote:Pour expliquer ce nom on avance souvent l'hypothèse qu'il renvoie aux conditions dans lesquelles cette œuvre a été inspirée : Évrard endormi dans un verger, aurait vu dans un rêve le roi accompagné du pape, puis un clerc et un chevalier choisis comme avocats par les deux hommes pour débattre amicalement de points litigieux. Finalement le chevalier l'emporte.
In other words, the figures are "a clergyman" and "a knight".
JKP posted an image from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Another manuscript, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (bottom images) is very similar and was also written 1420-1430. It features some fancy ascenders as well.
(JKP, I just noticed that you also posted the Mazarine image but wrote it's from Liber Floridus - I think the wrong image got uploaded by accident).
Apparently the Songe was based on the work of a 14th century lawman from Bologna, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. I have not been able to find out yet whether the images originated in Italy or rather in France (likely author: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
So well... Any thoughts on these manuscripts? Or JKP's other examples? Or other examples of short-legged men in skirts?
The conversation on religious imagery (#1975) reminded me of a topic I've been meaning to write up on for ages. Never mind, I'll throw a few half assed ideas up here and see where it leads us.
We haven't had a decent discussion of the sun and moon imagery, so let's start one.
Nick P. has his usual insightful thoughts on the subject (for example, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). I'm going to mention a different angle:
Are the sun and moon religious in nature - and if so, are they Christian?
First off, how many suns and moons are there?
Well, every folio in Quire 9, when they are mixed along with lots of "stars" and other diagrams
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (all three foldouts)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (third foldout)
And one in Quire 10
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (middle foldout)
Am I missing any?
Now, try as I may, I can only find one angle where the Catholic Church used sun / moon imagery as official symbology: the conquest of Islamic Al-Andalus. The Moors used the half crescent sun, so the Spanish forces used the imagery of a sun, often superimposed upon a moon, to reflect the triumph of the Christian Kings over the Moors. Here's an image from my local cathedral, a sun surrounded by 32 rays:
It's the "sun of Villalán" and it's also the symbol of the city of Almería. Bishop Villalán seems to have come up with it, and used it as his personal seal. He later had it added to the Cathedral when it was being built under his auspices in 1525. You find similar symbols carved here and there on ancient buildings in the east of Andalucía, although outside of this region it was never an official Church sanctioned symbol.
Interestingly enough, the whole motif never caught on, although there's a tenuous link between it and south America, where the emergent sun appears on all sorts of flags and motifs for the old Spanish possessions over there. But they are secular in nature.
So no, the sun and moon doesn't seem to be religious in nature, and their use in the manuscript certainly doesn't lend itself to this interpretation.
But does anyone out there have a Christian angle to the sun/moon imagery or any other thoughts on the matter?
The cross has been bouncing around the blogosphere again recently, so I thought it might be worthwhile to open a new thread about it - this is always easier for discussion.
There are three (?) crosses in the manuscript. Two are placed on top of crowns, symbols of monarchy. The third, on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , is held aloft by a naked woman.
Basically, one can go about interpreting this image in two ways:
It is a christian cross.
It is something else.
In the first case, looking deeper into the cross could give us valuable information about the cultural background and mindset of the maker. Are there parallels for the pose and the figure holding the cross? Why is the only non-regal cross in the manuscript found in such an atypical position?
Proponents of the second case usually read the object as a type of measuring device. Diane likened it to the Egyptian Merkhet:
These were two separate sticks, but they were sometimes depicted like a cross.
Searcher posted images of cross-staffs:
And while googling these images I saw that the Romans had a similar device called the groma, which was basically a weighted cross on a stick:
The bottom line is that there seems to have been some universal preference for these cross-shaped objects for making certain observations and measurements.
In JKP's latest You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., he explains the use of the cross-pole. One of the images he linked I found particularly interesting, since it also includes a set of wavy lines:
The gentlemen are using a sighting tube and astrolabe respectively, but what is the thing all the way on the left? It also appears to include a cross shape. Might it be some kind of armilary sphere with ecliptic and equator?
(For my personal opinion, I still see this whole composition as referring to Argo Navis, but I believe the images are layered by design. Canopus' position close to the horizon made it a reference point of particular importance in the night sky. Hence, this reading does not exclude but rather reinforce the possibility of the cross' being a sighting device).
Voynich You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. feature marginal illustrations and a mix of Voynichese and words written in the Latin alphabet. I think these two small sets of marginalia belong together, i.e. they are too similar to be unrelated.
D'Imperio wrote:
“There are small drawings of people, animals, and other less easily-identifiable objects on some pages. Folio 66r, as has already been noted, contains a drawing of a man lying on his back clutching his stomach as if sick or dead, and surrounded by various indeterminate small objects. The last page, 116v, has several sketches of people, animals, and other mysterious shapes in its upper left corner”.
(I guess she mistook the figure in 66r as a man because she only had poor quality reproductions of the illustrations)
In my opinion, the two illustrations represent two “patients,” together with the substances to be used to cure them. I guess this interpretation is widely seen as the most likely, but I would like to know what others think. In particular, I would be interested in different interpretations of the two sets of illustrations and corresponding visual parallels.
Here are a few illustrations that I consider relevant to the subject:
Patients are often illustrated as naked, possibly a way to make them immediately recognizable from people curing them (e.g. J and K). Sometimes, they are naked even if there is no physician in the scene (e.g. D, E, F, G-left, H, L). G-left is only wearing some kind of headgear. like the woman in VMS 116v.
Patients are often represented as sitting (D, H, L, K). The posture of (D) is particularly similar to that of the woman in VMS 116v.
Less frequently, patients are represented as lying in bed (J). The closest I have found to the figure in VMS 66r might be (I), which however is different in many respects: the subject is a dressed man lying on his side. Actually, this is not the illustration of a patient, but of the correct posture in which one should sleep. One could note that this illustration does not present anything that could be interpreted as an ingredient for a medicine.
In some cases, the patients seem to touch or point to the suffering body part (e.g. E, G-right, H). This seems to be the case also in VMS 66r.
Often, the substances to be used in the cure are illustrated as well. In herbal illustrations, actually the ingredients are the main subject and the patients are secondary details (L, G). D illustrates the application of Peony to cure epilepsy. C features a goat, a possible parallel for VMS f116v. (J) features a bowl of soup, a possible parallel for the cylindrical container in VMS 66r (this illustration of “polte de orzo” / “barley broth” was pointed out by Rene on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
Illustration (F) is of particular interest because the corresponding text is an incantation with crosses (to cure spasms). VMS 116v also seems to include an incantation with crosses.
A point for which I have no explanation is why the two marginal figures are both women (while, in most of the examples I have seen, the patients are men). Since female figures are prominent in the whole manuscript, I doubt this is a coincidence.
![[Image: capture-d_c3a9cran-636.png]](https://voynichviews.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/capture-d_c3a9cran-636.png)
![[Image: 18877_284877523446_276708388446_3365641_5791008_n.jpg]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_zS_YoT-fVj4/TEsY2UwlvlI/AAAAAAAAAUU/8tXB1jyZ9jQ/s1600/18877_284877523446_276708388446_3365641_5791008_n.jpg)
![[Image: merkhet.jpg]](http://www.crystalinks.com/merkhet.jpg)
![[Image: cross-staff-1669-na-mariner-sighting-on-...FF7K2E.jpg]](http://c8.alamy.com/comp/FF7K2E/cross-staff-1669-na-mariner-sighting-on-the-sun-with-a-cross-staff-FF7K2E.jpg)
![[Image: 667af07088fcb4d0e8cf93c064083bf6.jpg]](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/66/7a/f0/667af07088fcb4d0e8cf93c064083bf6.jpg)
![[Image: SightingLabe.png]](http://voynichportal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/SightingLabe.png)
