Are Eastern and/or Central Europe a relatively blind spot?

[-JKP-]

In my experience, there is a difference in availability when it comes to digitized manuscripts, and indeed online resources in general. There are too many German, English, French and Italian manuscripts to view in a lifetime. But outside of the central/western European region, things get a bit more hazy. I could easily name a dozen Italian or French manuscript traditions, among which those that appear the most relevant for the VM. Off the top of my head, I can recall some Czech manuscripts I've seen, and even mailed some Czech libraries to request images, but that's about it.

Now on the other hand, the first shows up on history's radar in Prague. So I wonder..
Did I simply not study eastern European regions enough?
Are the most "comparable" manuscripts, like herbals, simply mostly from countries like Italy?
Are there simply fewer manuscripts that were produced east of Germany?
Is it a matter of accessibility? (digitization, literature not in English...)

Do we need to look more towards Eastern Europe as a possible context of creation for the VM, or are we best off with the current focus?

There are some in the vernacular, but most of the eastern European manuscripts I've seen are in Latin. As for there being fewer of them available, it's probably related to resources (both in the Middle Ages and now) and also the fact that rural areas (as you move farther east) would have fewer literate people in those days (they gravitated to universities in the west).

There are wonderful libraries in the Prague area, with tens of thousands of manuscripts. I wish I could go there. I traveled through Hungary (mostly looking at Bohemian glass) but, as much as I wanted to, I couldn't make it to Prague. I don't know how well their digitization efforts are being funded. Maybe the Polonski Foundation could help there.