In the hypothesis that the VM is a medical compendium, what is each section?
#12
Here is Touwaide's analysis of the different sections - from "Il manoscritto più misterioso - L’Erbario Voynich", in M. Formica (ed.). Villa Mondragone. Seconda Roma. Rome: Palombi Editori,2015.

Italian:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


Minimally edited English translation by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


As always, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. also is an interesting read. In particular "3.4 Meaning of the Collection of Drawings as a Whole" (p.22). This is the beginning of the paragraph, but the rest is also interesting.

Quote:Voynich stated his impression on first seeing the manuscript that "the drawings indicated it to be an encyclopedia work on natural philosophy" (1921, p.1). Elizabet Friedman says: "The 'botanical' and largest section of the manuscript (125 pages) is probably herbalistic in character, and the manuscript may constitute what is now called a pharmacopeia" (1962).
Panofsky provides another clear summary: "So far as can be made out before the manuscript has been decoded, its content would comprise: first, a general cosmological philosophy explaining the medical properties of terrestrial objects, particularly plants, by celestial influences transmitted by astral radiation and those 'spirits' which were frequently believed to transmit the occult powers of the stars to the earth; second, a kind of herbal describing the individual plants used for medicinal and conceivably, magical purposes; third, a description of such compounds as may be produced by combining individual plants in various ways" (1954, p.1). He confesses that he is unable to suggest any known medieval parallel synthesizing all of these doctrines into one compact book. (There were, in fact, a number of very large encyclopedic works of many volumes that covered a somewhat similar range of topics: an obvious example that comes to mind is the work of Albertus Magnus, a contemporary of Roger Bacon).

Panofsky's interpretation is very speculative: when he said he was not aware of any closely matching text he was basically admitting that. In my opinion, D'Imperio's reference to Albertus Magnus is not totally appropriate: Albertus wrote about everything, while Panofsky is suggesting something strictly focussed on the vegetable world.
[+] 1 user says Thank You to MarcoP for this post
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: In the hypothesis that the VM is a medical compendium, what is each section? - by MarcoP - 23-06-2021, 07:55 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)