31-03-2017, 10:22 AM
Even though there's considerable debate about it, let's say Poggio was indeed a forger (there are hints in his letters to his compatriots that something was going on)...
From what I've been reading, there was quite a bit of debate and refutation, reaffirmation, and continued debate about whether the "lost" Tacitus is a Poggio forgery. Some say the timeline offered by Ross is off in both directions and the claim of forgery is not substantiated. Poggio certainly had motive, opportunity, the right connections, and the right skills to pull it off... so I think it remains a possibility but it doesn't appear to have been proved one way or the other.
If the motive was profit, would Poggio create a book of drawings by an "unknown" author, in an unknown script, for a limited audience (it was mostly doctors who were interested in plants) when "hieroglyphics" (a more general term at the time than it is now) could be inserted into any kind of book? It took a long time to research and draw all those plants and to create the small-plants section at the end would have taken considerable time also. He was more of a calligrapher than an artist, and there's no evidence of formal calligraphy in the VMS. Although herbal and alchemical manuscripts were popular, something like the VMS might be a gamble. It might sell for a decent price and it might not, whereas a "lost" Tacitus manuscript would certainly command a princely sum.
I don't know. I'm simply glancing around at the research and mulling over possibilities. If he were involved with the creation of the VMS, it doesn't mean he wrote or illustrated it. Maybe his compatriots were creating it and his role was to announce its discovery or to deliver it because he had the right connections. Whatever is hinted at in the letters, it was a group project.
From what I've been reading, there was quite a bit of debate and refutation, reaffirmation, and continued debate about whether the "lost" Tacitus is a Poggio forgery. Some say the timeline offered by Ross is off in both directions and the claim of forgery is not substantiated. Poggio certainly had motive, opportunity, the right connections, and the right skills to pull it off... so I think it remains a possibility but it doesn't appear to have been proved one way or the other.
If the motive was profit, would Poggio create a book of drawings by an "unknown" author, in an unknown script, for a limited audience (it was mostly doctors who were interested in plants) when "hieroglyphics" (a more general term at the time than it is now) could be inserted into any kind of book? It took a long time to research and draw all those plants and to create the small-plants section at the end would have taken considerable time also. He was more of a calligrapher than an artist, and there's no evidence of formal calligraphy in the VMS. Although herbal and alchemical manuscripts were popular, something like the VMS might be a gamble. It might sell for a decent price and it might not, whereas a "lost" Tacitus manuscript would certainly command a princely sum.
I don't know. I'm simply glancing around at the research and mulling over possibilities. If he were involved with the creation of the VMS, it doesn't mean he wrote or illustrated it. Maybe his compatriots were creating it and his role was to announce its discovery or to deliver it because he had the right connections. Whatever is hinted at in the letters, it was a group project.