VMs: Re: Introduction

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

Petr Kazil wrote:
> 
> > a) it is a natural language and a natural script of probably a quite small
> > population somewhere in Europe that left no other trace of its script
> > except this MS.
> 
> Among the many hypotheses this one might be testable. But this would require
> a big detour through secondary literature. There might exist some books on
> vanished European (sub-)cultures. Two were discussed extensively - the
> Cathars and the Bogomils. Another example is the Coptic language. However I
> can't think of an isolated cultural center that would produce such a mature
> artifact - Spanish Islamists, Greek Byzantine Monks? The problem becomes
> even worse if you follow the hypohesis that the VMs is not an "elite"
> artifact but a "popular" artifact - then it must have been a large
> subculture. Still I would be very interested if someone produced a list of
> vanished European subcultures and their dates.

But note that on the whole it does not seem to be an original creation
- rather a compilation (perhaps with some modifications) of general
knowledge. I have just read an article (in Polish) about a newly
discovered 17th c. manuscript of an alchemical treatise which
was written partly in Latin, partly in Polish, and partly
in Armeno-Kiptchak language using the Armenian alphabet.
The author was a Pole of Armenian descent living in Lvov, which
had a sizable Armenian community. It has no resemblance to
the VMS - but shows how languages, writing systems and
cultural identities were mixed in Central Europe.

Best regards,

Rafal