Which things in the manuscript can be dated?

[Koen G]

Some time ago, we gathered parallels for the crossbowman's sleeves, as well as Virgo and female Gemini's sleeves. I then put all of them together, and it appeared the dates crystallized around a few decades. The core dates for these types of sleeves largely overlapped with the date range of the vellum. On a timeline, it looks like this:

   


So now I wondered, which other things can be dated with some certainty? Specific aspects of scripts, for example? Can anything be added to the timeline?

(For clarity, I'm not talking about changes of ownership etc., rather things "inside" the MS that can be dated to some period).

[-JKP-]

I have a timeline for each of the added scripts. I'll get it for you over the weekend.

I've already posted a tentative timeline for the column text on the right-side of 1r. This is speculative since the letters are hard to see and there are no full words, but I don't think it will hurt to include it since the comparisons were based on real samples that I can present when I have time.

It's at the bottom of this blog:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


I also have data for the thematic components of the zodiacs. Let me get the script info first, then I'll get the zodiac-theme info. I have to work this weekend, so I will have to jump in when I have time, but I'll pull out the information on my breaks.

[DONJCH]

So now I wondered, which other things can be dated

Didn't somebody say the style of the suns and moons could be dated?

[davidjackson]

That's something I've always wondered about. If nick P is correct about many of the nymphs being 'updated' by a later scribe, was this person just trying to make the nymphs look more modern and less antiqued?

[-JKP-]

To me it looks like a second hand added small details, like breasts. I didn't get the impression they were trying to change the overall style or content (EXCEPT maybe changing the gender on a few of them).

[Helmut Winkler]

From the C14 dating we know the ms. was written most likely around 1420.  the main part of the 'Voynich' script was written around 1415/25, which fits the palaeography, and the last of the marginalia, the script with the loops should be around 1450. Everyting else should be inside his time span. I think you could build a relative timeline inside the ms. from the development of script and illustrations, but have never taken much time and trouble about it, because I don't think it is going to help much with reading and understanding the ms.

[ReneZ]

Hello Helmut,

what do you mean with the 'script of the loops'?

[Helmut Winkler]

Hello Helmut,

what do you mean with the 'script of the loops'?

I mean the 116v script, pox leber to geis mich

[ReneZ]

Ah, OK thanks.

Yes, it is entirely reasonable that this would be the last 'original' entry in the MS.

There aren't many entries in the MS that can be called 'later' with any confidence.
I think these few cases are:

- the quire marks. logically, these would only be added after the MS was completed and ready for binding.
- the month names in the zodiac area.
- the folio numbers
- much more recent annotations that seem to be in pencil: 'a' 'b' and 'c' above some of the cosmological pages
- the cover and anything written on it

[MarcoP]

There aren't many entries in the MS that can be called 'later' with any confidence.
I think these few cases are:

- the quire marks. logically, these would only be added after the MS was completed and ready for binding.
- the month names in the zodiac area.
- the folio numbers
- much more recent annotations that seem to be in pencil: 'a' 'b' and 'c' above some of the cosmological pages
- the cover and anything written on it

I think that many of these could be dated, with greater or lesser confidence.
The script and spelling of the month names look like particularly good candidates.