+- 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: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? (/thread-3903.html)
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - davidjackson - 27-11-2022
Mark, you seem very excited about something, but God only knows what.
Just what are you trying to prove here? Because I'm all at sea.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - R. Sale - 27-11-2022
When there is more than one valid way to analyze the data, then the data should be analyzed in more than one way. When the investigator chooses one method and omits others, that has the potential to skew the analysis to a more limited outcome. Analysis based on the number of extant mss will give one result. Analysis based on the known sources of relevant mss production will give a different result. Knowing both is more helpful than just knowing either one - without the other.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - Mark Knowles - 27-11-2022
(27-11-2022, 08:15 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Mark, you seem very excited about something, but God only knows what.Well, I tend to be more excited by historical cryptography of the time, but it is true I am quite interested in this topic.
Just what are you trying to prove here? Because I'm all at sea.
So, if the question as to whether the Voynich dates from before 1430 or after 1430 or whether drawings were copied from Lauber or not doesn't matter to you then this thread is not for you.
I think the degree of similarity in the drawings that Koen and others have uncovered with those of the central Zodiac drawings is very interesting as, whilst I haven't researched them in detail myself, it seems hard to deny that there is a connection. At the time I thought this research appeared interesting, but my researches were focused elsewhere, so I left the topic without delving into it.
Recently Koen made the claim with respect to the Hartlieb theory that the Voynich must date from before 1430. This attracted my attention as it seemed at variance with my own theory which implies that at least some of the Voynich manuscript was written in the early 1430. I didn't and don't feel the evidence justified the pre-1430 claim. Now, Koen has since retracted this claim.
So I decided to look in more detail at Koen's arguments that he makes on his blog. I don't think his claims for tracing the source from which the central Zodiac images are based is convincing and I have and am endeavouring to point out the weaknesses in that argument. It seems far more reasonable to trace the source to the 1430s than much earlier and Koen disagrees.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - Koen G - 27-11-2022
That's what I've been trying to say all along: there is a tradition of manuscript making in Haguenau before Lauber showed up. He adopted the older workshop's examples and updated them or neglected updating them as he saw fit. The VM contains nothing of the "updates", but does show similarities to the Haguenau style pre-1430. But while it shows similarities, it also shows enough differences so we cannot ay that it is exactly in Haguenau style. Artistic styles can be related without necessarily being the same. The Haguenau style is very recognizable once you know it.
Again, anyone is free to assume that old examples were copied at any given moment. But this is not an interesting question in my opinion, because it teaches us nothing. A 1450 claim is equal to a 1480 or 1550 claim, because in all cases, the maker would be using antiquated examples. As Lauber did. But once again, Lauber uses post-1430 fashion as well, while the VM doesn't.
If you can point to any fashion in the VM that would have existed in 1430 but not before, this would be very interesting, and then this thread would actually have some substance to it.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - Mark Knowles - 27-11-2022
(27-11-2022, 08:39 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Again, anyone is free to assume that old examples were copied at any given moment. But this is not an interesting question in my opinion, because it teaches us nothing. A 1450 claim is equal to a 1480 or 1550 claim, because in all cases, the maker would be using antiquated examples.It is an interesting question. It is better to end up with no conclusion as to how late the date is than to end with a false, but more exact conclusion. If the evidence, and I am not necessarily saying it does, points to the those drawings being possibly based on illustrations from the period 1450, 1480 or 1550 then it is an interesting question. A negative result such as for example "it is not possible to date the Voynich on the basis of clothing" is, whilst not ideal, nevertheless of value and of interest. Now I am not saying it isn't possible.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - nablator - 27-11-2022
(27-11-2022, 06:12 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Perhaps it's historical location versus current location.No, they mistakenly lumped all Cod. Pal. germ. mss. into Germany.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - Mark Knowles - 27-11-2022
(27-11-2022, 08:39 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The VM contains nothing of the "updates", but does show similarities to the Haguenau style pre-1430.I don't see where you have made that case.
I have read the following blog posts you have written:
The Twins are getting married
Gemini: type, Alsace or Willehalm?
Lauber’s “Buch der Natur”: Bull and Crayfish
The International European Dandy
Bonsai Perspective
The Golden Age of Baggy-Elbowed Tunics
Homard à l’Alsacienne
A network of faulty lobsters: Scotus, Cantimpré, Megenberg and the Voynich Manuscript.
Maybe there is a post or two of yours that clarifies the point that I should read that you can refer me to.
However from what I have read in these posts there is some interesting speculation about the source origins of the images, but nothing even close to a proof of the point. Don't get me wrong they are very good posts and worth reading. However from what I can tell they don't seem to justify your source claims; certainly not to my satisfaction.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - Koen G - 27-11-2022
This discussion would make more sense if you could provide positive indications of anything in the manuscript that points to a date after 1430. Haguenau style existed before Lauber, so similarities with this style are not an indication.
I will also once again point out that the style of the ladies' dress is even rarer and in our admittedly limited survey resulted in an even narrower window within the 1400-1430 period. Do you know of any fashion items in the MS that must postdate 1430? This would immediately terminate this discussion and help us all enormously.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - R. Sale - 28-11-2022
On the contrary, I've found out several things from this discussion. I've seen a lot more of Lauber and learned about Haguenau. Re-examination of prior investigations is a valid undertaking, if for no other reason than the probability of additional data after several years and furthering the interest of other investigators. At the same time, there is the position of those who might feel that their work is being challenged. That is unfortunate. Their work opens the door. The present question is whether the door can be opened further, and will that result in further discoveries? The option should be open for those who want to participate in the discussion with the presentation and analysis of relevant material.
Did all of medieval fashion change in a single year? And was that year specifically '1430'? Probably not. And what about the illustrated depiction of certain events - what temporal limitations can be placed on such artistic representations? That is the difficulty. The data relevant to fashion or to the zodiac is not a single event that was confined to or ended in a specific year.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
When did dagged sleeves go out of style? Early 1400's?? Here's a fashionable lady, second from the left. Presumptively, this is Lauber, and it's dated 1445-1455. Isn't this somehow anachronistic?? This is a ms. of the Trojan War. Apparently, this is an indicator that in historical narratives artists might decide to represent the oldest, most out-of-fashion clothing they could think of. If Lauber can "recall" old fashion, so can the VMs artist.
RE: Are the 1430s the most likely date range for the Zodiac drawings? - R. Sale - 28-11-2022
Here's me, stacking the deck with four additional "Strassburg" manuscripts - all dated between 1418 and 1420.
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.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Plus the initial find:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
PS: Should have guessed...
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
And less specific: Alsace
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.