Re: astrological iconography

["Rafal T. Prinke" <rafalp@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Rene Zandbergen wrote:

> The notebook suggestion has been made before. I was never
> a strong believer in this, because it didn't seem sensible
> to me that it were written on vellum, even, as sometimes
> stated, good vellum. 

Perhaps it was a clean copy of what he actually noted
down during lectures? Not that I am convinced, though!

> The other reason why I'm skeptical is that it doesn't at
> all help us in explaining the script and its relation to the
> underlying language. To me the VMs looks like the result
> of a deliberate effort.

Yes, this is a much stronger argument against the notebook
hypothesis.

> As I have explained before, in this area I still see a good
> chance for finding a lot of cribs (plus evidence that the
> VMs is not meaningless), based on an unproven interpretation
> of the zodiac nymphs. I wonder if you, Rafal, think that
> she would be willing to answer a few specific questions,
> which would tell me if my above-mentioned unproven inter-
> pretation makes sense or should be committed to the dustbin.

I hope so. I have replied to her and asked what she thinks
about the cypher or script in the VMS. When I receive
a reply, then we may try other questions.

> > Thus she confirms the opinion of Panofsky (and my own
> > amateurish feeling) that the VMS should be dated
> > to mid-15th Germany/Poland/Bohemia.
> 
> Now here's a question: the famous zodiac month names are not
> written in Latin but in some apparently Romance language.
> Perhaps they are from a later owner, but in the above
> scenario the VMs was never very far from Prague until
> Marci sent it to Rome. Czech is notorious for having unique
> names for the months. Was that already so in the mid 15th C?
> I.e. can we exclude that the month names were written by
> a Bohemian, who would have used Cerven, Iunius or Juni,
> but not Yony (for June, obviously)?

I do not know when the present day Czech names of the months
were introduced - but the language went through considerable
evolution. The old Czech was germanized after the 30 Years War
under Habsburg rule and then there was the 19th c. national
revival when it was "cleaned up" from German elements.

Also remember that it was the Europe of scholars and the fact
that someone wrote a word in French or Spanish does not
mean it happened in France aor Spain - it may well have
been in Sweden or Hungary. Those people travelled around Europe
and spoke many languages (besides the obvious Latin) so
one cannot exclude a native Bohemian writing in Italian
or an Italian in Prague writing in old Czech.

Best regards,

Rafal