26-03-2017, 09:05 AM
JKP: I agree that there are a number of very recognizable styles to which the VM does clearly not belong. Any style which uses standard decorative motifs is off the table. You mention Celtic knot and Classical toga, and there's many more. Floral margins style, illuminated initial style, architectural frames style, geometrical borders style.
There is some semi-similarity between VMS patterns and the geometrical borders style, as we discussed in relation to the "angels cranking the celestial spheres" diagam, see this thread You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
But upon paying further attention to this style, I noticed it appeared in a lot of manuscripts and the patterns were mostly decorative, while in the VMS they are not used in such a way. This style is older than the VMS, the example we discussed was mid 14th century. But The resemblances might be superficial, and they mostly address the rosettes foldout.
What this teaches us is that the VMS is not the clear product of a standardized "school" of manuscript making. I assume this is something most people might agree on, since it applies also when the MS is seen as a highly individualistic creation.
When you say "the way it is presented appears to be mostly late 14th c and 15th c" what exactly do you mean? Are there specific manuscripts that are more similar to the VM than earlier ones?
There is some semi-similarity between VMS patterns and the geometrical borders style, as we discussed in relation to the "angels cranking the celestial spheres" diagam, see this thread You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
But upon paying further attention to this style, I noticed it appeared in a lot of manuscripts and the patterns were mostly decorative, while in the VMS they are not used in such a way. This style is older than the VMS, the example we discussed was mid 14th century. But The resemblances might be superficial, and they mostly address the rosettes foldout.
What this teaches us is that the VMS is not the clear product of a standardized "school" of manuscript making. I assume this is something most people might agree on, since it applies also when the MS is seen as a highly individualistic creation.
When you say "the way it is presented appears to be mostly late 14th c and 15th c" what exactly do you mean? Are there specific manuscripts that are more similar to the VM than earlier ones?
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)