Gemini crossed arms imagery

[MarcoP]

Thank you, Koen!
I cannot find the 2016 post in which you first discussed the crossed-arms detail: it was linked You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., but it must have disappeared from the forum in one of the crashes?

I believe you have done something quite amazing: you have guessed the relevance of an apparently random detail and tracked it down for years. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. was "from a 15th C Revised Aratus Latinus, “French or Italian”, BAV Reg lat 1324, fol. 23v".

The figures are naked here and the pose is not as close a match as your last finding, yet the illustration represents the Gemini constellation, so I consider it highly relevant.


In august 2016, Darren Worley added this much later image from the German "Astrologisch-astronomische Sammelhandschrift (Cod. Guelf. 8.7 Aug. 4°; Heinemann-Nr. 2973) 16. Jh." An interesting feature here is that the figures appear inside a circular frame as part of a series of 12 medallions representing the zodiac signs.


The 1482 "Buch Ovidii" you now added to the collection appears to be the German translation by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (1410-1468) of the Latin "De Amore" by the probably French You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (XII Century): a number of directions for researching the origin of the illustration seem possible, and this is not the first time we meet Hartlieb (see for instance You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).

It could be that the German engraving derives from a French illustration, but of course this is speculative. At the current state of this research, my impression is that your new finding adds to the elements suggesting a relation between the Voynich manuscript and German-speaking countries.
Some of these are:

• The German marginalia accompanied by Voynichese text and Voynich-like illustrations in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f66r, originally pointed out by Richard Salomon and Erwin Panofsky.
  
• The Crossbow-Sagittarius originally pointed out as significant by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and later traced to a Central-European tradition by Rene Zandbergen and others.
  
• The German colour annotations (in particular "rot" in f4r) originally observed by Rene Zandbergen and later confirmed by Alain Touwaide.
  

I hope that the relevance of your findings will also one day be confirmed by academic scholars. My opinion is that the 1482 German engraving truly is an impressive parallel!

[Koen G]

Thanks for the overview, Marco; it's clearer than what I remembered myself

Given the current evidence, I can only see the VM in terms of transmission of material, not in terms of "creation" in one place. However, recent findings have shifted my focus for the latest stage and manufacture more towards Southern Germany. Similar influences from Balneis imagery remain as well, so for now it may be more convenient to include Northern Italy in that region as well. 

To put it extremely simplified, I see the transmission somewhat like this, with yellow being early, orange in between and red VM-era.

   

This is a more complex story than the views I used to hold, but the VM is a complex document and its imagery cannot all have emerged from the very same background.

But that's an aside in this thread. To get back to our couple, I noticed a few things, and there are still many questions.

There's the Gemini version and the Courtly love version. Is this a continuum and does the VM pair fall somewhere in between? It looks like the VM figures (as well is Virgo and the crossbowman) are taken from the courtly tradition. Many very popular manuscripts about the behaviour of nobles existed, and they all drew their images from the same traditional pool. With enough research, I think we have a good shot of getting even closer to the source (or source type).

If these figures were introduced in the early 15th century when the manuscript was made (which is likely given the examples you summarized), this means that one such manuscript as well as perhaps a Balneis MS was available or known to the illustrator. This might imply a library with some capital.

[-JKP-]

A high proportion of herbal literature originated in the east and central Mediterranean and was brought to Lombardy (when it was larger and included Florence, Rome, and part of the Veneto) via land and sea (mostly sea, as far as I can tell from reading about it, although some may have come through Monte Cassino via Naples and Salerno). From there, they were copied throughout Europe.

Some herbal manuscripts were also brought more directly from the Mediterranean (and Middle East) to England, as a result of the crusades.

So... the illustrative traditions for each portion of the VMS (depending on subject matter), may have different origins and means of transmission (in fact, I'm fairly sure they do).

[MarcoP]

Given my ignorance of German, I am not too qualified to look into this, but I was interested in understanding more of the relevant passage of Hartlieb's translation of De Amore.

The two lovers are illustrated at f11v. The You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. at the end of the book titles that section
von einem büler der zü jung ist an dem
I guess this means something like "about a wooer who is too young"

The next section at f 13r appears in the table as
von den vier stapfeln und graden der mynn
"about the four degrees of love" (I couldn't interpret "stapfeln")

The corresponding passage You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. appears to be Book 1, Chapter IV, 46-60

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. provides a complete transcription of the Italian translation from ms BAV Barb. Lat. 4086
The passage doesn't seem to mention marriage and I couldn't find any explicit explanation for the posture of the two people. In this context, the illustration seems to stand for a generic couple of lovers, but the man and woman in the text cannot even be properly defined "a couple of lovers", since the woman doesn't seem to requite the man's feelings.
Here is the edited output of the google-translate of the Italian passage.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Say that one is very young, perhaps the woman will say: "You are not of that age that you are wise enough to love, so you are much to blame for asking something of which you are not worthy; you must be very wise and have made good deeds before you ask for the love of a wise woman, but what sense is in you, or goodness, I cannot see. If I wanted to love, many would want it who are important and of great wisdom: I could have one of them. So, before you ask for something, do what is needed to deserve it."

The man replies: "If I did not believe that you are joking in order to make me ashamed, I would say that you are very wrong. I confess that those who have done good deeds are more worthy of being served, but this is certain: neither good nor courtesy are possible if they do not come from love. Love is the source and cause of the good learner. So, without love, nobody can be good; which good can exist without the force of love? Therefore, you must give me what I ask, because from you I will have a cause for doing well and being courteous and not vain. You will have a greater honour if you give me your love, or the hope of having it, by grace rather than for a service I have done beforehand, because then you would be obliged to give it, but now it would be by grace only. Also, isn't the teacher who makes an unlearned disciple wise more worthy of praise than him who makes a wise man wiser? Therefore, I who am new and ignorant of love, ask that you teach me your doctrine. What a great honour it will be if you teach me. It suits the ignorant and unwise to serve such love, so that they may become wise."

The woman replies: "Young man, you speak against the reason of love, because love commands: whoever serves is worthy of great honour and of a greater service. But doing as you say would harm those who have done well and it would do good to those who have not done the same thing. You also say that you want to be taught by me; I refuse to do so, because I need to have a wise man, not to form one. Therefore, if you want to learn, go to Paris and not to women. It is too crazy that those who are ignorant of love want to love women who are wise."

To this the plebeian replies: "I very much marvel that you try to subtly confute my words, since you do not understand well what I said, that it would be your greatest honour if by grace you gave me love, rather than for the servitude that I had done to you. If there were two men of the same age, and one had done well and the other could not do it, the latter must not be loved, but him who did good. But you apply this same rule to a younger man, who hardly had a chance to do well, so in this case he must be loved, rather than the one who served, not because he is more worthy, but because the world would have a greater benefit: yes, how it is written of God who rejoices more when a sinner is converted, than if ninety-nine wise men get better. This is because of the resulting benefit. Similarly, a woman who makes good someone who is less than good is better than one who improves someone who already is good. As it is to God, the gain of a converted sinner is the greatest, so it is in the world when one not-so-good is made good, rather than a wise man made wiser.  What I said, that it is preferable to love him who did no good rather than him who served, is not true in the fourth degree of love; love has three degrees before the fourth. If you can not understand this, I will make you understand. Since ancient times, there have been four degrees of love: the first is giving hope, the second is kissing, the third is embracing, the fourth is giving the whole person. ..."

[Koen G]

I think you are right Marco, in that the pose was used for generic lovers (or even generic man-woman).
I even wonder if the hand clasping happened simultaneously with the ring-giving. If not, the crossed-arms version is two wedding rituals condensed into one moment. This would make it all the more remarkable, although perhaps also less understandable for later illustrators.

[-JKP-]

...
The next section at f 13r appears in the table as
von den vier stapfeln und graden der mynn
"about the four degrees of love" (I couldn't interpret "stapfeln")...

I think MHG stapfeln may be similar to modern german Stufen, meaning levels, stages, phases, steps.

of the four phases/levels and degrees of courtly love/fine love (or as they said in the 1920s in English "of courting" to refer to the general process of seeking another person's affections, which is preliminary to any overtures to marriage or engagement).

[MarcoP]

This illustration from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (Guillaume de Machaut, Remède de Fortune, Paris, 1350-1355 ca) suggests that the origin of the "double hand-shake" could be a double exchange of rings. The illustration is titled “Comment la dame et lamant changent daniaus” (how the lady and her lover exchange rings). Since the two lovers are not accompanied by a priest but by a second woman, I don't believe this courtly love scene can represent a wedding.

[Koen G]

Ooh great find Marco! I've been calling it a wedding scene just to give it a name, but it became clear to me that many illustrators were themselves confused about what was supposed to be going on.

It is likely that the exact significance of the scene didn't matter for the person who drew it in the VM. I'm just hoping we'll be able to find out with more precision where exactly the image came from. 

If I'm not mistaken, your mid-14th century French example is the earliest one found of a proper crossed arms image. In the VM the arms are still crossed, but in Alsace they became uncrossed. However, in the Alsatian examples the style, colors, clothing and details are close to the VM.

It seems unlikely that the VM illustrator re-crossed the arms. Hmm..

[Paris]

 I don't believe this courtly love scene can represent a wedding.

I also consider this scene as an engagement, not a wedding.

[-JKP-]

Royal ceremony (tapestry, c. 1520). Note also the fancy container behind-left: