+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Imagery (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-43.html)
+--- Thread: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis (/thread-5355.html)
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - DG97EEB - 14-02-2026
(14-02-2026, 08:27 PM)Bernd Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Not impossible.
Considering the demographics of medieval Prague, I would guess that at least some of those artists were ethnic Germans like Kyeser who spoke German rather than Czech and would have no issues finding work in other German-speaking territories. Generally we shouldn't underestimate how much and far professionals traveled for work. Whether there's a continuity from the Prague scriptorium to Lauber remains to be seen but is something we should definitely explore. However we should also keep in mind that the Prague scriptorium didn't exist in a vacuum either and the artists likely studied in Germany or Italy before receiving a position at the court in Prague, like Kyeser did. So the root of the VM imagery does not necessarily have to lie in Prague. My bet is on the city states of Northern Italy.
My personal opinion at the moment: plausible yes, necessary no.
I fully agree . There's a Padua/Bavaria link that seems self evident...
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - Koen G - 14-02-2026
Even though I'm sometimes an instigator of associations with locations, I haven't figured out in the least yet where I think the MS was made. Being aware how international everything was, and the immense draw of Italy on intellectuals at the time, puts everything in perspective.
Maybe someone who grew up in a German-language (and art) environment, but was in Italy at the time. That could even be Tuscany, apparently. Florence, Siena... Maybe Bologna, Padua, Venice...
Ik fairy certain that the Zodiac symbols come from a German language source (details are known), but that was clearly not the only type of source. It has long been suspected that they are not entirely from the same background as other things in the MS. The Laufenberg connection may be from the same.
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - DG97EEB - 14-02-2026
(14-02-2026, 09:47 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Even though I'm sometimes an instigator of associations with locations, I haven't figured out in the least yet where I think the MS was made. Being aware how international everything was, and the immense draw of Italy on intellectuals at the time, puts everything in perspective.
Maybe someone who grew up in a German-language (and art) environment, but was in Italy at the time. That could even be Tuscany, apparently. Florence, Siena... Maybe Bologna, Padua, Venice...
Ik fairy certain that the Zodiac symbols come from a German language source (details are known), but that was clearly not the only type of source. It has long been suspected that they are not entirely from the same background as other things in the MS. The Laufenberg connection may be from the same.
True, and that pushes it further North, but then the broader point is maybe Natio Germanica. It's clearly not northern Italian alone, and it's clearly not Allemanic alone, so you're left with someone who was German and studied in Italy as the most likely example in my opinion. That means a student at Bologna or Padua most likely. The challenge is treating Germany like some amorphous mass. It's a huge country and in particular in those days. And it's difficult to reconcile the Allemanic with the Bavarian, I agree.
As for the Diane O'Donovan arguments,I think she confuses inspired by, with directly sourced. There is a lot of material with ancient roots that finds its way in to both Italian and German drawings in that period. This is very different from Stolfi's Chinese theory or some of her theories on Michael Scot or Indian precedent.. the most honest answer is this stuff was widely available and copied (badly in this case)
...but it's a very personal view... And in the end we have almost zero hard facts about Voynich, so it's actually no less stupid than any other...
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - Koen G - 14-02-2026
Ik wasn't specifically referring to Diane's views on the Zodiac figures (the central ones). The central Zodiac figures just stand out, not in the least because we actually know what they represent.
What I'm getting at is that for me, multiple source documents are a core hypothesis for the MS. And I can make the most sense of it all if I allow those sources to be diverse, and from diverse locations. That, plus the mobility of people during the international Gothic period, makes it impossible to say where the MS was produced. I guess I'm currently leaning Italy again.
This changes if Taccola's work was actually a direct source. In that case, the options are more limited.
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - DG97EEB - 14-02-2026
I don't think we're disagreeing. But Northern Italy/Southern Germany are not a million miles away in this period. It's all HRE. There's diverse influences for sure. We have a notionally Arabic alphabet but we also see the same in both German and Northern Italian grimoires of the period. Likewise we have Lauberesque drawings in Venetian Manuscripts, and we have Taccola and Kyser, but we know Kyser influenced Taccola, not the other way round, which inverts the transmission path from Germany to Italy. The conclusion of which must be that it's a fully permeable membrane between the two..
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - Jorge_Stolfi - 15-02-2026
(14-02-2026, 10:03 PM)DG97EEB Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is very different from Stolfi's Chinese theory
My theory about the drawings is independent of the Chinese Theory. It says that most of the drawings are just decoration provided by the Scribe, with minimal instruction by the Author.
For example, for each Zodiac diagram I think he told the scribe only "Arrange these 30 labels in two concentric circles, with a nymph and a star next to each. Then in the center draw an archer, like the one in this book here".
For each Herbal page, he might have specified "Copy the root of the plant from this sketch I made, copy the leaves from this page of this book, and add some flowers at the top.")
I used to think that the Scribe made up all those decorative elements from his own mind. But, thanks to all the research that has been posted here in the past few months, I have changed my mind. It now think that everything that the Scribe did not copy from the Author's draft was copied from books provided by the Author. That scenario in fact is more consistent with my image of the Scribe as an uneducated simpleton. It could have been the Author's teenage nephew.
In particular, we now know that most of f68v3 (the "Spiral Nebula") was copied from [some version of] that Oresme book. Including the cloudband, the stars, and the T-O map at the center. The meaningful (non-decorative) contents of that illustration may be only the eight curved rivers or roads connecting "Heavens" and "The World" to something outside both.
And the "water slide" of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. was probably copied from [some version of] the cave scene in the /Balneis Puteolanis/, and/or from some drawing by Taccola.
And the middle part of f85r2 was copied from [some version of] that German book with poems about the four seasons of life.
And now we also know that the Scribe often did not understand the pictures that he was copying. He totally misunderstood the cloudband on f68v3 and drew it as if the starry area was either a pool or a thick plate, with a "nebuly" outline. On You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. he mis-interpreted the small side channel and the siphon feeding it (from Taccola?) On f85r2 he mistook the rosary for ... duhh ... and the doctor's urine sample flask for a perfume bottle...
(By the way, about that old woman with the rosary: In the best of the original versions that were posted here, I interpreted the "staff" as a light hatchet, and the "rosary" as a chain to carry a bundle of dead branches for fuel. The meaning being that in the fall people collect firewood to prepare for the winter. Could it be? What did the attached poem say?)
All the best, --stolfi
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - pjburkshire - 15-02-2026
(15-02-2026, 02:02 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
My theory about the drawings is independent of the Chinese Theory. It says that most of the drawings are just decoration provided by the Scribe, with minimal instruction by the Author.
For example, for each Zodiac diagram I think he told the scribe only "Arrange these 30 labels in two concentric circles, with a nymph and a star next to each. Then in the center draw an archer, like the one in this book here".
Why the odd collection and not the standard 12?
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - Jorge_Stolfi - 15-02-2026
(15-02-2026, 02:39 AM)pjburkshire Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why the odd collection and not the standard 12?
What do you mean?
It seems almost certain that the Zodiac section had a total of 360 labels, divided into 12 "signs" of 30 labels each, except that two of the "signs" ("Aries" and "Taurus") were split into four diagrams with 15 labels each.
But two of the "signs" that should have been at the end of that section, presumably labeled "December" ("Capricorn") and "January" ("Aquarius"), apparently got lost. The folio numbering (which was added when the book was (re)bound, a century or more after it was written) jumps from f73 (last of Zodiac) to f75 (first of Bio), and there is a stump where the missing folio was apparently cut out.
All the best, --stolfi
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - DG97EEB - 15-02-2026
(15-02-2026, 02:02 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(14-02-2026, 10:03 PM)DG97EEB Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is very different from Stolfi's Chinese theory
My theory about the drawings is independent of the Chinese Theory. It says that most of the drawings are just decoration provided by the Scribe, with minimal instruction by the Author.
For example, for each Zodiac diagram I think he told the scribe only "Arrange these 30 labels in two concentric circles, with a nymph and a star next to each. Then in the center draw an archer, like the one in this book here".
For each Herbal page, he might have specified "Copy the root of the plant from this sketch I made, copy the leaves from this page of this book, and add some flowers at the top.")
I used to think that the Scribe made up all those decorative elements from his own mind. But, thanks to all the research that has been posted here in the past few months, I have changed my mind. It now think that everything that the Scribe did not copy from the Author's draft was copied from books provided by the Author. That scenario in fact is more consistent with my image of the Scribe as an uneducated simpleton. It could have been the Author's teenage nephew.
In particular, we now know that most of f68v3 (the "Spiral Nebula") was copied from [some version of] that Oresme book. Including the cloudband, the stars, and the T-O map at the center. The meaningful (non-decorative) contents of that illustration may be only the eight curved rivers or roads connecting "Heavens" and "The World" to something outside both.
And the "water slide" of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. was probably copied from [some version of] the cave scene in the /Balneis Puteolanis/, and/or from some drawing by Taccola.
And the middle part of f85r2 was copied from [some version of] that German book with poems about the four seasons of life.
And now we also know that the Scribe often did not understand the pictures that he was copying. He totally misunderstood the cloudband on f68v3 and drew it as if the starry area was either a pool or a thick plate, with a "nebuly" outline. On You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. he mis-interpreted the small side channel and the siphon feeding it (from Taccola?) On f85r2 he mistook the rosary for ... duhh ... and the doctor's urine sample flask for a perfume bottle...
(By the way, about that old woman with the rosary: In the best of the original versions that were posted here, I interpreted the "staff" as a light hatchet, and the "rosary" as a chain to carry a bundle of dead branches for fuel. The meaning being that in the fall people collect firewood to prepare for the winter. Could it be? What did the attached poem say?)
All the best, --stolfi
Thank you, and apologies for misrepresenting your ideas.
I fully agree with 90% of what you've written, in that the bad copy hypothesis is far and away the most likely. I strongly suspect the scribes were given the text already written and copied it verbatim, and I strongly suspect they were given a pile of books and given guidelines. I also agree it could have been a family affair. For a while I was thinking a Stadtartz/chief Apothecary and his wife, given that she may have been a local midwife, and their kids to teach them. Unfortunately this is where I'm not aligned with you, as I don't think the text carries semantics (although there is clear evidence of lexicon, and this does therefore not preclude some kind of personal notation system), and was simply a pedagogical tool, with the information in the pictures for the family to refer to.
...but this is the joy of the Voynich. Many origin stories and theories, and they can't all be true
RE: Konrad Kyeser's Bellifortis - pjburkshire - 15-02-2026
(15-02-2026, 07:36 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(15-02-2026, 02:39 AM)pjburkshire Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why the odd collection and not the standard 12?
What do you mean?
It seems almost certain that the Zodiac section had a total of 360 labels, divided into 12 "signs" of 30 labels each, except that two of the "signs" ("Aries" and "Taurus") were split into four diagrams with 15 labels each.
But two of the "signs" that should have been at the end of that section, presumably labeled "December" ("Capricorn") and "January" ("Aquarius"), apparently got lost. The folio numbering (which was added when the book was (re)bound, a century or more after it was written) jumps from f73 (last of Zodiac) to f75 (first of Bio), and there is a stump where the missing folio was apparently cut out.
All the best, --stolfi
I hope to organize my notes and make a zodiac post later today. Feel free to comment in that thread.