- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
- Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
-
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
-JKP- > 10-01-2020, 12:45 AM
It's a giraffe. It's clearly labeled. You would never guess from the drawing alone. It looks like a goat with an elongated neck, but elongated necks were common in medieval drawings, so this by itself often doesn't mean anything.
I wish I had blocked out the elephant that was bleeding through and giving it away.
It's amazing how different the drawing can be from the original animal. I've seen a tiger that was drawn as a horse and a crocodile that was drawn as a lion and you would NEVER guess what they were without the labels. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
-JKP- > 17-11-2020, 02:11 AM
Marco, thank you for your blog translation for the Calcatrice. It's very interesting.
I am not good at dating Italian script. I always do it cautiously and usually only for my personal records, unless I can find some historical precedents supporting a certain date range. Italian script is more similar over time than some of the other scripts and I haven't spent as much time studying it as I have the Gothic scripts from other regions. So, my opinion means almost nothing when it comes to Italian scripts, but I still wanted to mention this because I was surprised...
In manuscripts from the mid-1450s, I am accustomed to seeing styles like You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. By 1460 some are more cursive, like You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., but even the latter one is more formal than the Wellcome manuscript.
I would never have guessed the Wellcome manuscripts was so early.
If I look only at the script (not the codicology or drawings), it looks like very late in the 15th century, or 16th century. It even crossed my mind that someone who learned secretary hand (one of the quicker cursive versions from the 16th century like You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) and adapted the style to Italian, but it does look a bit earlier than the linked example.
I assume Wellcome has more information than they are posting (watermarks, binding, provenance, or other clues), but the script still seems somewhat modern compared to most mid-15th century scripts. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
-JKP- > 17-11-2020, 02:27 AM
Marco, did the transcription come from a different version of the text from the one with the dragon drawing?
I noticed the words of the transcription don't match the Wellcome MS 132 manuscript. It's close, but not the same.
Edit: I'm sorry, I must have skipped over the shelfmark when I read your blog the first time. So, the transcription is from BNF It. 450 and the drawing is from Wellcome MS 132. I understand now. That's why the transcription didn't match the text next to the drawing.
-
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
R. Sale > 23-08-2021, 08:52 PM
There are several popular interpretations of the VMs critter. Pangolin is one of them, although the VMs critter does not have the long pangolin tail and the orientation of the scales appears to be backwards. It's still an interesting choice, based on appearance - but appearances can be deceptive. And in the VMs they often are.
The critter itself, whatever it is, is only the first element of the illustration. The second part consists of 'curvy' lines below the critter. And the third part is the set of vertical dashes marked at the bottom. The interpretation of the critter needs to coordinate with the other two parts - whatever they are.
Medieval heraldry tells us that the curvy, meandering, serpentine, wavy lines in the illustration are *nebuly* lines because the crests and troughs are bulbous. Nebuly lines are cloud-based, etymologically, from Latin nebula, for 'cloud'. Nebuly lines are used as cloud bands in various medieval illustrations. And cloud bands serve as cosmic boundaries.
The VMs artist demonstrates a familiarity with this interpretation by the use of a nebuly line as a cosmic boundary in the VMs cosmos with 43 undulations, comparable to BNF Fr. 565, the so-called 'Oresme' cosmos of Paris c. 1410.
What then if the nebuly lines with the critter represent cosmic boundaries? What sort of critter was associated with cosmic boundaries in medieval art? Clearly, it would be the Agnus Dei type of image. Still this does not thoroughly explain the third part - - until the discovery of BNF Fr. 13096 f. 18. The similarity of structure is a strong connection. The droplets are explained. And even though this is an old manuscript in the VMs dates, its provenance includes the Burgundian libraries.
This is interesting because another of the interpretations of the VMs critter is that it is the fleecy part of the Golden Fleece in the medallion for the Order of the Golden Fleece - originated in Burgundy in 1430.
So, if both are true, it would seem that the artist had inserted the Burgundian Golden Fleece into the "apocalypse" structure. And this might be viewed as potentially excessive speculation, if considered singularly. However, in combination with the VMs cosmos, as a combination of Oresme and Shirakatsi, plus the VMs 'mermaid' as a combination of Melusine and Lauber/de Metz, there is more than one witness. Combination is part of the artist's technique to create disguise. That is why it has taken longer to rediscover, because it requires both parts to fully interpret the image. Are the hidden parts of the VMs still intact? -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
R. Sale > 18-06-2023, 09:51 PM
Simply naming the critter does not fully explain the VMs representation. If it were the fox diving into the snow bank to retrieve the fallen grapes, that would include all three parts. The problem is the nebuly line. Medieval artists could use a nebuly line to designate a cosmic boundary. The VMs artist does this in the VMs cosmos.
What does a fox have to do with a medieval representation of a cosmic boundary? - - <Nothing.>
The animal connected to the cosmic boundary in the medieval era is the Agnus Dei.
Specifically, this refers to the representation of the Agnus Dei in BNF Fr. 13096 f. 18.
This has the uncommon insertion of the cosmic boundary between the Agnus Dei and droplets of blood. The structure is the same in the VMs. This ms. was in the library of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy. -
RE: Dragons, Dogs & Amadillos?
Aga Tentakulus > 18-06-2023, 10:25 PM
Perhaps he thinks of a fox as an animal that can be seen at the pond (bath).
By the way, no matter whether Agnus Dei or Pangolin, both simply do not fit in the place of a medical book. And certainly not in a possible procedural sequence that can be seen in the VM.