In You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view., Koen discussed again the possible relation between the nymph at center-top of You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and illustrations of the Cassiopeia constellation.
The important addition to his argument is the mention of You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. downloadable from the site of Kristen Lippincott.
At the end of the document, Lippincott presents a few medieval images that illustrate different subjects with images that appear to be derived from Cassiopeia (three stained glasses illustrating St.Mary and a 1440ca painting illustrating a scene from the lives of Saints Cosmas and Damian).
My impression is that this VMS detail is as close to some constellation illustrations as the examples discussed by Lippincott. The fact that such an eminent art historian considers similar parallels relevant seems to me to confirm Koen's observation.
While I am grateful to Koen for repeatedly mentioning this parallel, my personal opinion is that the Voynich nymph was not meant to represent Cassiopeia, but I do agree that the image was likely directly or indirectly inspired by an illustration of Cassiopeia.
I disagree with Koen when he writes that the Voynich illustrator "bypasses European developments altogether and somehow taps into different sources which have retained more of their authenticity" (by "authentic" he means directly derived from classical images). After examining Lippincott's collection, the Voynich image seems to me closer to medieval illustrations than to those that appear to be more classical.
In particular, the Voynich illustration represents a naked woman, in a perfectly frontal view, sitting on a simple parallelepiped; her arms are outstretched and her posture is symmetrical, but for the face that is slightly turned to her right; she wears a veil and a headdress that Koen seems to interpret as a diadem (this is how he sees the similar garment of the nymph on the right) and I interpret as You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.. The woman seats on what Koen appropriately describes as "a simple box" (an undecorated parallelepiped).
The two early images of the constellation discussed by Koen (from the Farnese Globe and the Leiden Aratea) are consistent with the W-shape of the actual astronomical constellation: they present the legs of the figure in profile, matching the triangular arrangement of Cassiopeia stars gamma, delta, epsilon. At p.10, Lippincott discusses that Aratus apparently only considered the “lower” part of the W, three segments arranged as vertical, horizontal, vertical corresponding to stars alpha, gamma, delta, epsilon (2, 4, 5, 6 in Ptolemy’s Almagest): these segments actually can be matched to the profile of a sitting figure. The segment between alpha and beta (2 and 12) is part of the modern “W” shape, but was not included in the three-segment zig-zag described by Aratus. Since star beta (Ptolemy's n.12) is place on the backseat of the throne, it seems that the most authentically Ptolemaic illustrations must feature a backseat.
Cassiopeia in the Kugel Globe (Lippincott p.23) is closer to the pose of Voynich nymph. The legs are crossed and seen in three-quarters (similarly to the Leiden ms) but the arms are completely outstretched and seen frontally.
The legs seen in profile (or three-quarters) are necessary for the image to fit the arrangement discussed by Ptolemy and Aratus, but (as far as I know) the full-frontal view could also have appeared in classical astrological works. Anyway, my point here is that all these poses are well documented in medieval images: there is no evidence for a direct derivation from an ancient model.
I think BAV Vat Reg Lat 309 (IX Century) Lippincott p.43 provides a good match for the VMS illustration: the figure is seen frontally, with her head slightly turned; she is veiled and seats on a "simple box". The inconsistent perspective is particularly noteworthy: as in the VMS, the body of the woman is seen from the front, but the "throne" is seen in three-quarters.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. (Milan 1447) Lippincott p.74 has a half-naked woman with a turban-like Quattrocento headdress. Her posture is similar to that of the nymph, but her throne is a complex gothic structure.
Cambrai ms 933 (Padua 1460) Lippincott p.54 has a completely naked woman sitting on a "simple box".
On the basis of Lippincott's collection, I think that the Voynich illustration derives from a medieval image (possibly similar to that in Vat Reg Lat 309) that was transformed into something close to other images produced in the XV Century (e.g. the Milanese and Paduan manuscripts).
Of course, several of the alterations must correspond to the intent of the illustration and the unknown meaning of the pipes connecting the nymphs and the associated labels. Actually, while it is interesting to see that the detail of the central nymph may fit in a specific visual tradition, the true originality of this composition and of Quire 13 in general is in the almost exclusive presence of naked women and the pipes and "fluids" that accompany them. I see no reason to think that the overall illustration is more related with astronomy or astrology than the Cassiopeia-like illustrations of St.Mary (Lippincott p.113).