[split] Relying on external imagery

[Koen G]

I think there's a general agreement that the VM is a unique document. Nobody claims or even thinks that "the author" (a potentially problematic term) never departed from tradition or put their own twist on things.

To be perfectly clear, my statement was in reaction to your objections to relying on comparative imagery. Medieval Europeans did not invent things as in "conjure from thin air". But they were of course masters in translating, adapting, interpreting, commenting and so forth. This is what most Medieval texts and images are: there is always a relation to something that came before. 

So like it or not, until we can read the text (if it is possible), using other sources to inform us about the imagery is the best we can do. I'm not saying that any comparison is a good one, and I've certainly made some questionable ones in the past. 

----

About your inventions, to be honest I was thinking about inventing as in "making up images or text without reference to existing material". But your examples do illustrate my point.

1) Clocks: timekeeping devices existed before the Middle Ages, were improved upon outside of Europe and perfected only after the Middle Ages.
2) Glasses: here's a fine section from the Wiki that perfectly illustrates what I'm talking about:

Scattered evidence exists for use of visual aid devices in Greek and Roman times, most prominently the use of an emerald by emperor Nero as mentioned by Pliny the Elder.

The use of a convex lens to form an enlarged/magnified image was most likely described in Ptolemy's Optics (which however only survives in a poor Arabic translation). Ptolemy's description of lenses was commented upon and improved by Ibn Sahl (10th century) and most notably by Alhazen (Book of Optics, ca. 1021). Latin translations of Ptolemy's Optics and of Alhazen became available in Europe in the 12th century, coinciding with the development of "reading stones".

Same pattern: start in Ancient times, transmission through Arab world, picked up and improved in Middle Ages, perfected and more widespread in Renaissance.

3) Wind mills: also reached Europe through the Middle East, time of invention uncertain.

4) Castles: evolution of fortifications. You don't invent castles...

5) Compass: First sentence of the Wiki on "history of the compass": The compass was invented more than 2,000 years ago.

6) Developments in weaponry are not completely novel inventions. And it's not like they discovered gunpowder.

7) Building techniques: same here, those are improvements upon existing things. Obviously there were evolutions, which is exactly why it is so extremely important to study and involve different sources. You want to know what evolved from what, what was the basis for this adaptation and so on.

8) "Overall many refinements/technical improvements to technology adopted from the classical world or arab world or the east" Yes! Exactly. But in those cases, it is important to know what came before.

So in summary, either not Medieval European inventions at all, or improvement of existing things.


Look, I've been arguing for over a year already that the clothing of the Zodiac figures can be reliably dated to within three decades (1400-1430). So I know things did change. But they did not appear out of thin air, and never in isolation. Medieval documents and art is always connected to earlier and contemporary examples, and it is our task to see which ones are most informative for the VM.