30-06-2017, 06:50 PM
One problem in discussing these issues is that the VM is what looks like a somewhat unified (uniformized? 
) composite manuscript. I actually think that we agree about more things than we'd think initially. But the composite nature, and the fact that it's been edited to some extent, also imply that there are chronological differences and layers in and between the various sections. So what holds true for one section, may not for all.
For example, I won't debate that the crossbowman is a medieval character, and some of the best parallels for the Gemini are also found in medieval manuscripts, both astronomical and astrological. Also the cosmological diagrams, and especially those circles with four figures around them, have some convincing medieval parallels.
However, I think q13 and perhaps the nymphs around the Zodiac emblems are relatively unaltered images from an ancient source. Since I do believe this source must have been rare and now likely lost, as you correctly remark all possible evidence is indirect and relatively weak, and needs some degree of interpretation.
The same holds true for the plants. We see some few tantalizing parallels with other traditions, enough to know that the VM plants weren't invented or all drawn from nature. I think you might agree that they could derive from an older source, but this also is hard to prove beyond any doubt.
Fragments like the Johnson Papyrus do prove that very old illustrated herbal manuscripts did exist, but they were inscribed on a fragile medium.
Anyway, to get back to the point of this thread, I think the VM is a Sammelschrift which includes documents from different times, and at some point was stylistically unified and edited. But for some reason it has been "updated" much less than similar manuscripts. This is indeed something we still see in the more authentic astronomical manuscripts.
) composite manuscript. I actually think that we agree about more things than we'd think initially. But the composite nature, and the fact that it's been edited to some extent, also imply that there are chronological differences and layers in and between the various sections. So what holds true for one section, may not for all.For example, I won't debate that the crossbowman is a medieval character, and some of the best parallels for the Gemini are also found in medieval manuscripts, both astronomical and astrological. Also the cosmological diagrams, and especially those circles with four figures around them, have some convincing medieval parallels.
However, I think q13 and perhaps the nymphs around the Zodiac emblems are relatively unaltered images from an ancient source. Since I do believe this source must have been rare and now likely lost, as you correctly remark all possible evidence is indirect and relatively weak, and needs some degree of interpretation.
The same holds true for the plants. We see some few tantalizing parallels with other traditions, enough to know that the VM plants weren't invented or all drawn from nature. I think you might agree that they could derive from an older source, but this also is hard to prove beyond any doubt.
Fragments like the Johnson Papyrus do prove that very old illustrated herbal manuscripts did exist, but they were inscribed on a fragile medium.
Anyway, to get back to the point of this thread, I think the VM is a Sammelschrift which includes documents from different times, and at some point was stylistically unified and edited. But for some reason it has been "updated" much less than similar manuscripts. This is indeed something we still see in the more authentic astronomical manuscripts.