- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
[split] Taccola spillover thread
- [split] Taccola spillover thread
-
[split] Taccola spillover thread
JustAnotherTheory > 06-10-2026, 05:25 AM
The one issue I'm having with this is the Taccola connection. Why would it be necessary to copy some obscure bridges or sun faces from an obscure personal sketchbook, when you readily have hundreds if not thousands of manuscripts with nice illustrations available at libraries, to be inspired from?
I see no point in having to copy two images from a personal sketchbook. If some some reason that sketchbook is important; then why did the artist not copy more pictures, like tens, or more? Why just 2?
It makes no sense. Unless you're a relative of Taccola and have eyes on his manuscript every day.
Otherwise, why not just go to the library and take one of the many engineering books, or Konrad Kyeser instead?
_______________________________________
Edit KG: I am hijacking the first post to add this overview of Taccola-related MSS by Ed:
(5 hours ago)DG97EEB Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.TACCOLA — AUTOGRAPHS
- Munich, BSB Clm 197,II — De ingeneis I–II + "Notebook" (c.1419–c.1450; KdiH gives 1441) — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- Florence, BNCF Palatino 766 — De ingeneis III–IV, dedicated to Sigismund (c.1431–1433) — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- Munich, BSB Clm 28800 — De machinis (completed 1449) — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
COPIES OF DE MACHINIS
- Paris, BnF lat. 7239 — Paolo Santini copy (1459?, Venice; before 1475) — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- New York Public Library, Spencer Coll. MS 136 ("Codex Wilczek II") — 15th-c. copy, exact date not established — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- Venice, Marciana Lat. VIII, 40 (=2941) — later excerpts, date not established — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
DERIVATIVE COMPILATIONS
- London, BL Add MS 34113 — excerpts from De ingeneis, De machinis and Francesco di Giorgio's Codicetto (2nd half 15th c.; additions dated 1612) — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- Dresden, SLUB — military-technical miscellany with drawings after Taccola, Valturio, Francesco di Giorgio (c.1440–1460, per Handschriftenportal) — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
RELATED
- Vatican, BAV Urb. lat. 1757 — Francesco di Giorgio, Codicetto, free copies after Taccola (c.1465–1470/76) — You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- Florence, BNCF Palatino 767 — later excerpts (date not established) — no link -
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
Koen G > 06-10-2026, 09:45 AM
They wouldn't have only taken the basic composition from the Taccola page, but also learned from the way he draws steep shores - kind of like undulating ravines with vertical line patterns. There have been suspicions before that this "hatching" was influenced by some (proto)-renaissance technique. The Voynich artist, being unexperienced at drawing, seems to have explicitly absorbed such techniques, expressing them with varying degrees of success. The one Taccola page is simply the smoking gun, a copy of more than just the general technique.
My view is as follows:- One or two persons did the VM art. These may or may not have been scribes (irrelevant to the current point). I will use the neutral "they", even though it may have been one person.
- They were not trained as an artist and did not have much experience drawing
- They had a project (the VM) which required them to draw a lot.
- Given their justified insecurities, they relied on whatever examples they could find, often awkwardly adapting them. This is normal and expected; for example, "swiping" is a common practice in comic book illustration You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- I consider the rainbow bridge a strong "swipe" because not only are various elements of the composition recombined, but also parts of the drawing technique (how to draw steep shores).
The fact that the VM artist clearly also copied from other types of sources is irrelevant to judging the Taccola case. If the VM artist was in the mindset of looking for examples they could use in their own art, then any combination of sources is fine. Knowing that the largest proportion of foreigners at the university of Siena were German speakers, we don't even need Marco-Poloesque scenarios to think of someone visiting the university, who may also have had access to common German book types. - One or two persons did the VM art. These may or may not have been scribes (irrelevant to the current point). I will use the neutral "they", even though it may have been one person.
-
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
cencei > 06-10-2026, 09:56 AM
The idea of two political entities called Germany and Italy is a rather modern one anyway. Northern Italy was part of Germany (Holy Roman Empire) from Charlemagne all the way through the middle ages... more or less. Right? -
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
Rafal > 06-10-2026, 11:37 AM
Quote:The one issue I'm having with this is the Taccola connection. Why would it be necessary to copy some obscure bridges or sun faces from an obscure personal sketchbook, when you readily have hundreds if not thousands of manuscripts with nice illustrations available at libraries, to be inspired from?
He hadn't "thousands" of manuscripts available.
Today we truly have access to thousands of manuscripts digitalised online but that was not the case of Voynich artist. He could have easy access only to 10 or 20 illustrated manuscripts available at his library.
Somehow a book of Taccola or more probably some copy of it was among them.
For me referrences to Taccola push a possible date of VM creation a bit later than it was previously expected, maybe to 1440s. In 1440s it was over 10 years after Taccola made his autograph (the original copy) so other copies could appear.
Some later copies have stuff giving me Rosettes vibes that the original doesn't have, like for example this map:
-
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
Rafal > 06-10-2026, 12:04 PM
But on the other hand the "bridge" picture which is most similar to Voynich Manuscript is in the original Taccola (Palatino 766):
(The comparison above is made by me. I picked images from different Taccola copies which I believe represent the same scene. Palatino 766 is second from the left)
So if the Voynich artist was using Taccola, then he was using either the original or some early copy (maybe not existing anymore).
Always remember that 90% of manuscripts are lost so it's 90% possibility that we will never have his exact referrence. -
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
Jorge_Stolfi > 06-10-2026, 06:19 PM
(05-10-2026, 08:46 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The Rosettes have a lot of these "bubbles". I guess most people would agree that they are clouds.
They can be many things, but if I was forced to guess, I would say "raindrops". Or, on the Bio and other pages, just drops of water falling from streams or pipes.
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
Jorge_Stolfi > 06-10-2026, 06:39 PM
(06-10-2026, 05:25 AM)JustAnotherTheory Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The one issue I'm having with this is the Taccola connection. Why would it be necessary to copy some obscure bridges or sun faces from an obscure personal sketchbook, when you readily have hundreds if not thousands of manuscripts with nice illustrations available at libraries, to be inspired from?
There may be chronological problems, but Taccola's "notebook" was copied and circulated often enough for one of those copies to be among the manuscripts that the VMS Scribe had available for "inspiration".
These manuscripts probably came from the personal library of the Author. I suppose that the Author had some role in choosing the figures to be copied and defining the details to be added.
Like, for f68v3 he presumably yold the Scribe to copy the central part from a copy of Oresme's Ciel, with specified text in the T-O map, and to add the eight curved arms and the outer frame, also with specified text.
For f75r, maybe he gave that Taccola figure to the Scribe to show him how to draw the edges of the long pool (the "water slide"). That may well have been the first time that the Scribe tried drawing a pool. And maybe the Scribe misunderstood the instructions and copied also that "bridge" (which I understand as a siphon that could be used to route an aqueduct over an obstacle) without understanding what it was, as well as the narrow channel that connects it to the pool.
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
Jorge_Stolfi > 06-10-2026, 06:53 PM
(06-10-2026, 12:04 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.But on the other hand the "bridge" picture which is most similar to Voynich Manuscript is in the original Taccola (Palatino 766):
I suspect that all three of those images are copies from Taccola's original notebook, made by artists who did not understand his sketches and "embellished" them so much that they became nonsensical.
My guess is that the original drawing depicted a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., a device to transfer water over an obstacle. But the artists who copied that sketch did not understand the concept, and turned it into a bridge that is very nicely drawn but makes no sense.
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
Koen G > 06-10-2026, 08:19 PM
Taccola was into civic waterworks, and at one point petitioned the Emperor to be appointed to such a role. The drawing that is crucial to us depicts a scenario where you want to get water across a chasm so it can reach your city (water availability being one of the main concerns for human inhabitation). From what I've read, most of such drawings are highly conceptual and wouldn't necessarily work in the way depicted.
The three images shared by Rafal are all unrelated to one another. One shows a problem where you want to get fresh water across a river, while still allowing ships to pass through. The one on the right shows a moat kind of situation. These are not failed copies, they just illustrate three different engineering problems.
As far as we understand (Marco also looked into this), there is no known copy of Palatino 766. There may have been a copy or partial copy made for the Emperor, but this is speculative. There may have been other copies made by who knows who at whatever time, but these are again completely speculative. There is no known copy of the images that are the most relevant to us: the Sun face and the "rainbow bridge" with angled river connecting to a larger, vertical stream with steep shores and undulating shorelines.
Marco and I did come across one source which suggested that Taccola may have made his notebook available to students at the University. In other words, we don't need to imagine it as being locked up in his nightstand drawer. For all we known, a hundred plus people could have spent time with the notebook, starting soon after its completion. (In all honesty, I did not take note of this source, so I'm going by memory here).
In other words, IF we consider Palatino 766 a source for the VM (which I almost certainly would), then our starting date is as soon as Taccola completed the MS, and availability could be to anyone visiting the university where he worked.
The one alternative for me personally is that Taccola himself lifted this particular drawing (and the Sun?) from a somewhat earlier source shared by him and the VM. Again completely speculative. -
RE: Rosettes as a ... magic altar
Rafal > 06-10-2026, 10:09 PM
Quote:The three images shared by Rafal are all unrelated to one another. One shows a problem where you want to get fresh water across a river, while still allowing ships to pass through. The one on the right shows a moat kind of situation. These are not failed copies, they just illustrate three different engineering problems.
I disagree. They are failed copies.
I must admit though that I was wrong in calling all of them "bridges". Palatino766 indeed shows not a bridge to walk by but some arch used for water transportation. And what about the others? Let's compare
1. Palatino 766
2. Palatino 767
3. Bnf Latin 7239
-------------
We can see that both 1. and 2. are about water transportation. I marked a relevant area with A. We can see an end of a pipe there and a water flowing out of it.
In 2. a single "rainbow" arch is replaced by an arch with several pillars. Also a town on the right side disappears. But we have in both cases water transportation and some pond on the left.
--------------
3. shares several features with 1. and several features with 2.
It shows no longer a water transportation but a bridge with a moat (and I call it a failed copy). But we have a big stream with similar shape as 1. and a walled city appears again on the right.
As for similarities with 2. they both have a tower on a rock in the background marked as B. In 3. a pond with a small stream on the left is gone but we have instead some tree which shape resembles a bit the small stream on 2. (a failed copy again).
The bridge has several pillars in both 2. and 3.
The relationship between them is complicated for me. It's not that easy that 2. is copy of 1 and 3. is copy of 2. They may be some other copies in-between them. But they all stem from the same root for me.