The cross and the presence or lack of Christian influences

[MarcoP]

Hi Marco

I don't necessarily mean the nudity, but rather the seemingly "pagan" character of these "water nymphs". This, together with the script, might perhaps raise some eyebrows, in the best case. Of course it's hard to say Who would or would not object to which scene. It all depends on how it would be explained by the owner and the viewer.

Hi Koen, while I intuitively understand what you say, I would still like to see some evidence. Do we know for certain that an unreadable script was looked at with suspicion? Do we know of examples?

The problem with the nymphs is even harder. The closest I can think of are alchemical or magical manuscripts or possibly the truly pagan astrological manuscripts. What was the reaction to them? I must say I don't know, but for the fact that astrology was mostly tolerated.

Anyway, the christian or non-christian character of the VM is something I find fascinating.
This is my impression of the manuscripts you posted. Please correct me if I'm wrong, you have more experience with these things than I do. Just for convenience I use the word "secular" to mean that there is no directly visible influence of Christianity.

As far as I know, there is a large consensus about the character of the ms not being religious. I can't think of many elements to support the opposite view. I think we might as well use the word “secular” in its proper sense of “not connected with religion” in general.

Florence Plut.13.16: this looks mostly like a manuscript that has its origin in older sources. Essentially my view on the VM is that it is similar, yet from a much less mainstream, less documented tradition. The Florence MS has not been christianized, so I agree that, like the VM, it contains little Christian influences.
Also, thank you for linking this MS, there is an image in it which I find extremely interesting related to the cross-nymph, but I'll get back to that in another post.

The link was originally You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., so thanks to him

The tradition of Plut.13.16 is well documented.
In my opinion, the idea that the VMS derives from an earlier tradition can only be meaningfully discussed together with the details of that tradition. Since you provide none, there is nothing I can say.

Tubingen: again a wonderful MS. I agree that its subject is secular, but it has been thoroughly medievalized, with medieval kings, knights, peasants... This also comes with references to the religion which dominated every aspect of medieval society. Just a few folios further, there is a man painting a madonna with child and another one carving saint statues (left) You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. . I'm not trying to be nitpicky, just saying that these images, whatever their origin (also older?) have been made or adapted to speak clearly to a medieval audience. This has only happened a little bit in the VM, mostly in the Zodiac section (crossbowman...)

Yes, this manuscript documents an innovative take on a very ancient subject (astrology). Similar elements appear in the Voynich zodiac, but of course the main subject of the VMS appears to be plants, so an astrological ms necessarily is a limited parallel.
The madonnas in the illustration of the Children of Mercury are accidental Christian elements like the crosses on the VMS crowns. The cross in 79v seems to be something less accidental. The Tubingen manuscript is an interesting comparison with some of the VMS illustrations because people appearing here are often symbolic and don't try to represent reality. The Children of the Planets scenes mix realistic and symbolic elements and are quite complex.
The ms also includes some of the circular diagrams (rotae) that are so typical of medieval cosmologies:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I also find the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to provide an interesting parallel for some details of the Rosettes page.

The Egerton is all about plants, but I agree that the images treat their subject in a "secular" way. It demonstrates perfectly that the VM plant sections' secular nature is not unique, but offers no satisfactory parallel for the other sections, which are much heavier on human activity.

Agreed. The VMS clearly is much more varied in its subjects and layout. It could also be a collection of only partially related works, or also of unrelated works.

Cadamosto is similar, but it does contain much more human activity, which is immediately recognizable as typically medieval: hunting, farming, riding horses, animal husbandry. The first image is of a king on a throne. But I admit that it is surprisingly secular.

This ms is made up of two parts: a herbal and something like a “tacuinum sanitatis” with a number of human-populated scenes. The herbal section is a good parallel for the medieval zoomorphic elements that are so prominent in the VMS.

Arderne: indeed, this is also a scientific manuscript, but it is largely populated by tonsured monks and other typical medieval figures like noblemen.

I agree to this to. These human figures are very realistic and actually illustrate specific concepts (various illnesses, social classes etc).

So well, perhaps I should better say that the Voynich contains relatively few signs of medieval christian culture. If you look at a MS like Tubingen Md 2, which treats traditional secular matter, you see the difference.

Maybe one could say that the VMS doesn't represent much of medieval dresses (most people are naked). It does contain many signs of medieval European secular culture. E.g. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., the zodiac medallions, the O-T globes, the style of the herbal (think of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), the swallowtail merlons.

Might it help to make some sort of typology of the medieval scientific manuscript? Going by the examples you provided, it looks like they are either:

1. Relatively faithful renditions of older sources
   
2. Creative adaptations of older sources, translated for a medieval audience
   
3. About plants (some overlap with 1. here)
   
4. About practical matters, but firmly grounded in medieval culture
   
5. A composition of some of the above
   

I would add to the list highly innovative works, like Fontana's encrypted You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. or the alchemical You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. The kind of stuff that it's difficult to make sense of at first sight or without reading the text.

It seems clear that the VM is a composition, and (3) covers at least part of it. But I think that the other sections remain mostly unparalleled. And when there are parallels, those are usually of pre-medieval origin

Not much can be said about the unparalleled parts: we can only speculate. If some images are paralleled by pre-medieval documents, those specific documents should be discussed. As I said above, I find several medieval parallels relevant, but I agree that these parallels only cover a minority of the ms. An art historian like Panofsky didn't have trouble dating the ms to 1410-30, so it seems that to him there were enough recognizable elements; he found the parallel with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. highly relevant, and I can see why.