(24-09-2025, 02:33 AM)Jorge_Stolfi wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(23-09-2025, 11:46 PM)Barbrey wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.From that article, the VMS is not really unusual when it comes to alchemical herbals and their authors’ variations on theme. But I m not sure that the differences between plant parts were unduly emphasized as in the VMS - it would be nteresting if they were. I’m not a medieval herbalist - have you seen any other illustrated manuscripts where the entire herbal is illustrated with this pattern of emphasis? Or conforms to your hypothesis?
What do you mean "this pattern of emphasis"? What about the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. posted by Marco Ponzi? To me, the plants there do look very similar to those of the VMS in style. Namely, equally fake-looking...
(My favorite is #33, the plant with a QR code...)
All the best, --jorge
Thank you - I really should try to keep up with Marco P, obviously, because he always seems to have great work. I hadn’t seen this entire before - I would definitely group this with the VMS as being in the same style!
And as it was an Alchemical Herbal, all of which show similarities in style and content from Northern Italy, then at least one of my questions is partially answered. The questions I now have are not so much related to similarity but related to how the VMS differs.
Re, not looking real: none of the Alchemical Herbals look particularly real, emphasis on the fantastical,according to Beasley, so VMS would be in similar company.
But I might be getting ahead of myself. My research has concentrated on the medico-alchemical and I’ve almost completely ignored the herbal pages. I’d like to hear Marco P and Matthias’s thoughts on this so should switch threads.

