- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
[split] Color annotations?
- [split] Color annotations?
-
RE: [split] Color annotations?
ReneZ > 28-08-2020, 08:17 AM
Many thanks, Vladimir, for showing that my initials are in the MS
This is not just dirt but it seems impossible to say whether there is anything intentional here. It is also quite clear in the newer scans. -
RE: [split] Color annotations?
MarcoP > 13-05-2025, 04:44 PM
Color annotations from Firenze Riccardiana You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. f.43v
V=verde (green)
B=bianco (white)
R=rosso (red)
On the left-side stem, it could be either O=oro or C=citrino for yellow.
It seems the R annotation for the top-right fruit or blossom was ignored.
-
RE: [split] Color annotations?
Koen G > 13-05-2025, 06:03 PM
I think it is O for Oro, since it reoccurs as O in the leaf and petals of the same plant.
Maybe they used color annotations so intensively on this page because of all the alternations/combinations/patterns? -
RE: [split] Color annotations?
MarcoP > 14-05-2025, 05:24 AM
Thank you, Koen. The alternating colors of the leaves obviously make these annotations an interesting parallel for Voynich You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I guess A stands for "Azzurro". The R at the top-right was apparently corrected into an A, so the color is consistent after all.
-
RE: [split] Color annotations?
ReneZ > 13-06-2025, 04:14 AM
Some years ago, someone suggested to me that there was a Voynichese qo in the fourth root of the third row on f99v.
Just looking at it again, it appears much more to be one of the standard 'p' or 'r' that are rather hard to distinguish from each other.
This seems to be the only case on a pharmaceutical page.
As I was updating the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , it occurred to me that all colour annotations appear to be on A-language and hand-1 pages.
This may have been noticed before, but I do not remember this. -
RE: [split] Color annotations?
Koen G > 13-06-2025, 08:12 AM
(13-06-2025, 04:14 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As I was updating the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , it occurred to me that all colour annotations appear to be on A-language and hand-1 pages.
This may have been noticed before, but I do not remember this.
I wrote about it a couple of times, most recently here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
But I also note in that post that since then I had noticed that Nick Pelling already mentioned something along these lines in Curse, but he didn't think they're color annotations.
Regarding root 4, row 3, there is certainly ink there but I can't tell what it's supposed to be and if there even is a descender. Looking at the way the right part is formed, I would exclude EVA-qo.
-
RE: [split] Color annotations?
nablator > 13-06-2025, 09:30 AM
-
RE: [split] Color annotations?
ReneZ > 13-06-2025, 09:55 AM
Anton got it from my web page, I got it in an E-mail from someone in Spain.
But I see you already preferred the 'p' or 'r' reading
-
RE: [split] Color annotations?
Jorge_Stolfi > 13-06-2025, 09:04 PM
(13-05-2025, 06:03 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think it is O for Oro, since it reoccurs as O in the leaf and petals of the same plant.
Maybe they used color annotations so intensively on this page because of all the alternations/combinations/patterns?
Rather "O" for "ocra" ="ocher". -
RE: [split] Color annotations?
Jorge_Stolfi > 13-06-2025, 09:38 PM
My two centavos:
Maybe the Author put color keys on some parts of the plants in his sketches. But it seems that they were ignored when the figures were finally painted.
On f29r, I see the "r" sign but I would not try to guess what it is.
By the way, have you noticed the graphical inconsistency in the roots of f29r? The Scribe apparently drew 6 roots on the left, 5 roots on the right, and then got quite confused when he/she tried to join them in the middle. some of the gaps on the left become roots on the right, and vice-versa. The result is like that famous You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. (But I don't think there is any deep meaning in this detail. To me, it only shows again the limited artistic ability of the Scribe, or maybe his haste or lack of care.)
I think that there were at least two distinct Painters (agents who applied color to the figures), acting in well-separated epochs.
- There was a Light Painter who applied a light golden yellow transparent paint to most pages, including the hair of many Zodiac nymphs. This person did not fill the figures up to the outlines, but generally seems to have respected them. He/she used the light yellow paint to provide two stars on Zodiac diagrams that the Scribe had failed to draw outlines for. Thus it would seem that he/she had some understanding of the contents of the manuscript, e.g. that there should be 30 stars per diagram, not 29. He/she used a brush to paint a roundish splot inside many stars, but apparently used a broad-nibbed pen in other places, like on the roots of f29r. But he did not color the details that I attribute to the Retracer, such as the crowns and "scalloped showercaps" that the latter would have drawn on some Zodiac nymphs.
- Then there was a Dark Painter, who applied opaque tempera-like paint of various bright colors. In the Herbal section, he/she usually filled the outlines right to the edge, but sometimes overflowed and obscured the outlines. His/her choice of colors appears to have been totally whimsical, sometimes using unrealistic alternation of colors. On one page he rendered the leaves red and the flower green. On the Zodiac he/she was quite a bit clumsier and less careful.
Thus I believe that we should maybe pay some attention to the work of the Light Painter, but completely ignore the work of the Dark Painter. - There was a Light Painter who applied a light golden yellow transparent paint to most pages, including the hair of many Zodiac nymphs. This person did not fill the figures up to the outlines, but generally seems to have respected them. He/she used the light yellow paint to provide two stars on Zodiac diagrams that the Scribe had failed to draw outlines for. Thus it would seem that he/she had some understanding of the contents of the manuscript, e.g. that there should be 30 stars per diagram, not 29. He/she used a brush to paint a roundish splot inside many stars, but apparently used a broad-nibbed pen in other places, like on the roots of f29r. But he did not color the details that I attribute to the Retracer, such as the crowns and "scalloped showercaps" that the latter would have drawn on some Zodiac nymphs.