25-03-2017, 10:34 PM
I've asked myself this many times, especially when hunting for text, shapes, styles, costumes, and colors.
I always work both backward and forward from about 1400. This is a date I chose before I knew anything about the carbon-dating results.
One thing I've noticed is the similarities somewhat diminish after about 1480 and greatly diminish when I pass the year 1530 or thereabouts. The kinds of pens they used, the style of writing, styles of painting and drawing, palettes, all these things noticeably changed once technology (even primitive technology) began to take hold.
When I work backward, the similarities in the text tend to peter out sometime in the mid- to early-1300s. Letter forms, abbreviation styles, spacing (and many other textual conventions), were quite different before this time. I find occasional earlier references, but they are not frequent. When I do find earlier references, they tend to be visual rather than related to the text, and they seem to be specific rather than fundamental.
Even the foliation and quire numbers are consistent with this. The quire numbers are transitional numerals that existed mainly in the late 1300s (they became popular for a brief while as roman numerals were falling out of use) and first half of the 15th century. One can still find them in a few later documents, but they are significantly less common. The foliation numbers are in the style that became popular in the very late 1300s and early 1400s (they coexisted for a while with the quire-number style) and eventually evolved into what we use today as the quire-number style fell out of use in the late 1400s and was almost gone by the early 1500s.
The plants are ahead of their time in some ways. The detail in which certain parts on certain plants are drawn is unusual. I think there are a number of "firsts" in the VMS as far as botanical illustrations are concerned. But the traditional themes are there, as well (heads in the roots, animal roots, vines twined around specific kinds of trees, etc.). By the early 1500s, it's clear that real botany was emerging and more effort put into accurate, naturalistic renderings. Once again the VMS imagery seems consistent with the radiocarbon dating estimate.
The same is true for the "zodiac" section, oddities like crossbows disappear by the mid- to late 1400s and zodiac images became much more standardized. Before 1300, similarities to the VMS start to peter out, as well.
Paint palettes become broader and more luxurious, on average, after about 1460 (particularly in France and Flanders). Most of them are more basic before 1300 and the VMS fits mostly with the more basic palettes. There are always exceptions—the Julia Anicia herbal illustrations are remarkable for their time and the painting style is more similar to later 15th-century illustrations than one would expect for something so early but the VMS, is pretty consistent with limited palettes that existed in most places from about the 12th to 15th centuries.
As far as iconography goes, most of the early iconography for many of the themes that are also represented in the VMS were "Roman style", not only in the characteristic colors and togas and decorative lines with dots that are so common in images copied from classic sources. And yet, even though some aspects of the VMS content appear to hark back to early times in many ways, the WAY they are drawn is characteristic for the 15th century. So... one might see a lot of diadems and turban-style head rolls, for example, but those wearing them are drawn like 15th-century characters. It's like walking into an SCA meeting where contemporary people are dressed up in medieval style. In the VMS, 15th-century characters appear (at least to me) to be used to express themes passed down from earlier times.
I always work both backward and forward from about 1400. This is a date I chose before I knew anything about the carbon-dating results.
One thing I've noticed is the similarities somewhat diminish after about 1480 and greatly diminish when I pass the year 1530 or thereabouts. The kinds of pens they used, the style of writing, styles of painting and drawing, palettes, all these things noticeably changed once technology (even primitive technology) began to take hold.
When I work backward, the similarities in the text tend to peter out sometime in the mid- to early-1300s. Letter forms, abbreviation styles, spacing (and many other textual conventions), were quite different before this time. I find occasional earlier references, but they are not frequent. When I do find earlier references, they tend to be visual rather than related to the text, and they seem to be specific rather than fundamental.
Even the foliation and quire numbers are consistent with this. The quire numbers are transitional numerals that existed mainly in the late 1300s (they became popular for a brief while as roman numerals were falling out of use) and first half of the 15th century. One can still find them in a few later documents, but they are significantly less common. The foliation numbers are in the style that became popular in the very late 1300s and early 1400s (they coexisted for a while with the quire-number style) and eventually evolved into what we use today as the quire-number style fell out of use in the late 1400s and was almost gone by the early 1500s.
The plants are ahead of their time in some ways. The detail in which certain parts on certain plants are drawn is unusual. I think there are a number of "firsts" in the VMS as far as botanical illustrations are concerned. But the traditional themes are there, as well (heads in the roots, animal roots, vines twined around specific kinds of trees, etc.). By the early 1500s, it's clear that real botany was emerging and more effort put into accurate, naturalistic renderings. Once again the VMS imagery seems consistent with the radiocarbon dating estimate.
The same is true for the "zodiac" section, oddities like crossbows disappear by the mid- to late 1400s and zodiac images became much more standardized. Before 1300, similarities to the VMS start to peter out, as well.
Paint palettes become broader and more luxurious, on average, after about 1460 (particularly in France and Flanders). Most of them are more basic before 1300 and the VMS fits mostly with the more basic palettes. There are always exceptions—the Julia Anicia herbal illustrations are remarkable for their time and the painting style is more similar to later 15th-century illustrations than one would expect for something so early but the VMS, is pretty consistent with limited palettes that existed in most places from about the 12th to 15th centuries.
As far as iconography goes, most of the early iconography for many of the themes that are also represented in the VMS were "Roman style", not only in the characteristic colors and togas and decorative lines with dots that are so common in images copied from classic sources. And yet, even though some aspects of the VMS content appear to hark back to early times in many ways, the WAY they are drawn is characteristic for the 15th century. So... one might see a lot of diadems and turban-style head rolls, for example, but those wearing them are drawn like 15th-century characters. It's like walking into an SCA meeting where contemporary people are dressed up in medieval style. In the VMS, 15th-century characters appear (at least to me) to be used to express themes passed down from earlier times.
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)