+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: Is the Voynich a renaissance work? (/thread-5255.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Is the Voynich a renaissance work? - Koen G - 19-01-2026
(6 hours ago)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Some argue that the script is humanistic. I'm not convinced, because it's like comparing apples and oranges.
There are a few hash patterns typical of post-1450 drawings but they are not used consistently for 3D shading, so again an unconvincing argument.
The many nymphs, if they are interpreted as mythological allegories, may be evidence of a Renaissance-type work, drawing from Greco-Latin mythology, unless they are actually from some other mythology, in which case all bets are off.
I certainly agree about the hashing. The VM likes patterns, including parallel lines, but it doesn't compare at all to the actual shading technique.
About the humanistic script, I understand that there may be similarities, but I've never seen a study of these by someone who actually believes in the connection. And as you say, apples and oranges. Reminds me of that one paper (at the Malta conference maybe?) where the closest similarities to Voynichese script were found in Uncial. Probably for similar reasons.
Explaining some 500 nude figures is tricky, whether you look at medieval or classical sources for inspiration. The individual nymphs with attributes may be akin to personifications. But the large numbers of "nondescript" figures remind me more of medieval sources, like a Balneis or Last Judgement scenes.
One of my professors at university, who may have been rather old-fashioned in his ideas, like to describe the renaissance as a new way of "looking". Relying on observation of the world becomes more important, more expected. We are still children of the renaissance in that regard. When an artist like Giotto paints figures that have a bit more gravity to them than the flat & floaty gothic figures, we praise his talent. We get excited about developments in the understanding of perspective, the increasingly lifelike depiction of vegetation, people, movements and emotions.
I see none of those concerns in the Voynich images. Take the Zodiac bull. This screams "I copied this thing from a book and on top of that I got the limbs wrong" rather than "I went out to the pastures to see what a bull looks like".
It doesn't have to be all black or white though. For example, the flowers of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are not in a style you'd expect from, say, the 13th century. There's some concern here for volume and depth, however badly executed. It's not like one moment there were only gothic examples available and the next day there were all these classical models.
Taking everything into account though, I think it makes sense to call the VM a medieval codex. Calling it a product of the renaissance would be a remarkable choice, and raise questions about why you chose that term.