+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Marginalia (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-45.html)
+--- Thread: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? (/thread-1970.html)
Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - MarcoP - 24-06-2017
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.
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - Helmut Winkler - 24-06-2017
I doubt that the items on 116v are related and I doubt very much that 66r and 116v are related, the exception is the michiton-script, which looks similar to the 66r script. That 66r is a patient and his remedie is obvious, I don't think that is the case on 116v. Btw, I think the 66r figure is a man and fits into the common patient pattern and another btw, has anybody ever taken a count of males and females in the nymph section?
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - MarcoP - 24-06-2017
Thank you, Helmut! Do you have any specific alternative for the meaning of the 116v illustration?
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - bi3mw - 24-06-2017
@MarcoP: I know it's OT, but I have compared with Folio 75r. There is a nymph right at the edge.
![[Image: nymph_compare.png]](http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/mwille2/VMS/nymph_compare.png)
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - Koen G - 24-06-2017
bi3: actually I think that's rather on topic. I also agree with the points made by Helmut.
The 116v nymph is somewhat in line with standard Voynich nymphs. The figure on 66r, however, is drawn by a different person. The belly is different, the arms are straight and square, the thighs are too long and narrow... The shoulders are twisted in a way unseen in any other nymph. As far as I am concerned, this could indeed be a patient, though there's no way yet to be sure.
The 116v figure on the other hand, looks almost a bit more polished and more fluent than some other nymphs, as if someone showed someone else how he was supposed to draw these women. It is much closer to a "proper" Voynich nymph. I see no indication of a medical context. Please undress but you can leave your hat on?
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - MarcoP - 24-06-2017
Of course we cannot be sure of anything and it's even possible that 66r was drawn by a different person than 116v.
About 116v, I consider these points hints of a medical context:
- nudity with headgear as in G-left
- the presence of a text with words separated by crosses as in F
- I also wouldn't discard You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. of the object at the top as an internal organ
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - VViews - 24-06-2017
(24-06-2017, 03:18 PM)Helmut Winkler Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.btw, has anybody ever taken a count of males and females in the nymph section?The human figures in general have been counted on the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. thread, both for the Q13 and astro sections.
Male/female has not been done because several are rather ambiguous.
As Claudette Cohen points out in one of her You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., the Voynich men are really not very masculine looking, which makes it difficult to tell.
I will make a count of the potential male figures in the Voynich and add them to the Counting Things thread.
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - -JKP- - 24-06-2017
(24-06-2017, 05:28 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
The 116v nymph is somewhat in line with standard Voynich nymphs. The figure on 66r, however, is drawn by a different person. The belly is different, the arms are straight and square, the thighs are too long and narrow... The shoulders are twisted in a way unseen in any other nymph. As far as I am concerned, this could indeed be a patient, though there's no way yet to be sure.
...
The nymphs on 75r and 116v certainly look like they drawn by the same person. I'm not as certain about the one on 66r but I suspect it is drawn by the same person and that the differences are attributable the difficulty of trying to drawn someone prostrate. Whoever drew the VMS nymphs did not think well in 3D. The joints are never well articulated.
![[Image: ThreeNymphs.png]](http://voynichportal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/ThreeNymphs.png)
All three drawings exhibit the same difficulty in drawing hands and feet, the same missing jaw line on the side facing the viewer, the same S-curve connecting the nose and the eyebrow. Look how the right shoulder is missing and the arm comes out of the chin.
Both 75r and 116v have the same large belly, the same thickness in the thighs. On both of them, the pen "stutters" when drawing the lower part of her left leg (the straight leg). Even though the nymphs are not exactly the same in proportions (75r has a more pregnant look), they are the same in drawing style.
The differences between 75r/116v and 66r might be attributable to posture and gender. I've been assuming the prostrate figure is female, but I'm not at all certain as there are a number of male figures in the VMS without genitals. If the belly ache is a malady general to both men and women get, rather than a female malady, maybe the gender is intentionally nonspecific or maybe this is a male and the smaller nipple-less breasts are not breasts, but an attempt to draw a man's chest.
I think many people would have difficulty drawing someone lying down clutching the belly, including the VMS illustrator. That, and the possible gender ambiguity, might account for the differences in proportions.
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - Helmut Winkler - 24-06-2017
(24-06-2017, 04:22 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thank you, Helmut! Do you have any specific alternative for the meaning of the 116v illustration?
No, I think it is just a nymph, there is always the danger of overinterpreting things, there are many good examples for overinterpretation in discussions of the Voynich imagery
RE: Are the illustrations in 66r and 116v related? - Helmut Winkler - 24-06-2017
I rather think the person on 66r is pointing to the swelling on his underbelly and you have to see this in connection with the rest, the text is mel (German for flour) and mus (German for pulp or mush) over a pot or skillet and something pancakelike. which looks like a medical plaster, in fact I think the en on the left is short for enplastrum, it is ike an illustrated expanation of making and applying a plaster in a medical textbook