- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
- Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
-
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
Rafal > 12-07-2026, 12:32 PM
How soon will this thread get locked?
Speaking seriously, it is hard to say what is the result of the illustrator not knowing the anatomy and what is the result of his bad drawing.
Quote:In the VMS, it appears that the breasts are not effected by gravity.
It is actually possible with small breasts. It may be a surprise to guys who spend too much time online but women with small breasts do exist
And there are actually many, many types of breasts in the nature:
![[Image: various-types-women-breast-color-create-....jpg?w=768]](https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/various-types-women-breast-color-create-vector-30810341.jpg?w=768)
The bad thing about VM art is that women here are usually kind of plump but they have have very small breasts. In the nature it is the opposite: skinny girl = small breasts, plump girl = bigger breasts
It also look like some of these breasts were added later or retouched but I will leave it to Jorge as it's his favourite subject
-
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
eggyk > 12-07-2026, 12:49 PM
(12-07-2026, 12:32 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It is actually possible with small breasts. It may be a surprise to guys who spend too much time online but women with small breasts do exist
And there are actually many, many types of breasts in the nature:
Precisely, it's possible and honestly.. completely normal. And that image is just of the main examples of what's considered to be "normal".
It doesn't include larger or pregnant women, who can also have a large variety of shapes and sizes of breasts. And it is certainly not always larger body=larger breasts and vice versa either, although it tends to be the trend of course. -
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
JustAnotherTheory > 12-07-2026, 01:02 PM
(12-07-2026, 12:20 PM)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'll be the one to break the image deadlock. Take this example on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. :
I stand corrected. Those do indeed look like the author had some knowledge of what he/she was drawing. In that case, another question arises: are there any other similar styled women illustrations? I certainly didn't find any in European literature. How about Arabic/Chinese/other? -
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
Koen G > 12-07-2026, 01:58 PM
The irony of this thread is the assumption that modern man's idea of the average breast is based on anatomical realism.
Meanwhile I'll keep yelling at clouds a bit more. Medieval art not influenced by Renaissance ideals is not as concerned with realism as we are. It would be interesting (and more academically sound) to compare the way the Voynich artist treats human anatomy to efforts by other ca. 1400 works. What exactly is different, and what exactly is worse? I once did this for body proportions, and found it very informative.
I really recommend sticking to art historical comparisons. Yes, because we as predominantly men discussing women's breasts has a chance to go wrong. But also because that's how we may actually learn instead of simply assuming the artist must have been some kind of virgin without a Playboy subscription. -
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
JustAnotherTheory > 12-07-2026, 02:41 PM
-
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
rikforto > 12-07-2026, 03:33 PM
(12-07-2026, 02:41 PM)JustAnotherTheory Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(12-07-2026, 01:58 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.some kind of virgin without a Playboy subscription
Of all the theories about the provenance of the VMS, this one certainly stands out
The Voynich Manuscript is often called "the most mysterious manuscript in the world", resisting attempts at decipherment from a broad array of approaches and disciplines varying from the highest heights of the ivory tower to gutter theories of aliens or time travel. To date, many people have taken a feminist lens to the manuscript, noticing that it is full of apparent "biological" drawings and nude women. Fewer people have noticed that the drawings are not realistic and likely drawn by a man unfamiliar with the female form, and no one one has brought a Queer Theory lens to this observation, until now. In this essay I shall... -
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
GracefulShinjo > 12-07-2026, 05:21 PM
Regarding the small breasts this is because that was the beauty standard at the time. According to various art historians who have researched into this area small breasts were considered the ideal standard for female beauty and sign of virginity. To medieval and Renaissance men small breasts were considered signs of virginity, that the woman had not engaged in sexual intercourse whereas larger breasts would mean the woman was…ahem…sexually promiscuous.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
DG97EEB > 12-07-2026, 06:09 PM
(12-07-2026, 01:58 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The irony of this thread is the assumption that modern man's idea of the average breast is based on anatomical realism.
Meanwhile I'll keep yelling at clouds a bit more. Medieval art not influenced by Renaissance ideals is not as concerned with realism as we are. It would be interesting (and more academically sound) to compare the way the Voynich artist treats human anatomy to efforts by other ca. 1400 works. What exactly is different, and what exactly is worse? I once did this for body proportions, and found it very informative.
I really recommend sticking to art historical comparisons. Yes, because we as predominantly men discussing women's breasts has a chance to go wrong. But also because that's how we may actually learn instead of simply assuming the artist must have been some kind of virgin without a Playboy subscription.
I've been reading Diane's art history, and honestly I don't see she's made any meaningful progress.. or if she has, this entire forum is ignoring it.. -
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
Jimmy123 > 12-07-2026, 07:03 PM
Ok if you see a manuscript you don't look at breasts, but in case of voynich there are hundred of breast... -
RE: Did Voynich manuscript illustrator never see women breasts?
R. Sale > 12-07-2026, 07:11 PM
A few images:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Above shows the same scene - different representation.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The first two show an alternative way of representation. The breast is a 'U' or 'V' shape with the nipple at the bottom.
In the other two examples, the breasts are more rounded. The fourth example shows the areola in the center. This is more similar to the VMs. It is also a third item of correspondence between the Book of the Queen and the VMs, though I'm sure other examples can be found.
Mermaids might be a source for further comparison.