VMs: Virgin Mary (was re: VMS: Finding)

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just a few dates that fall into this "crown" hypothesis.

Mary's feast day - July 16
Mary's death/assumption into heaven - August 15
Mary's birth - Unknown, but traditionally celebrated September 8.

Mary's death, canonization and assumption into heaven on August 15
is probably the most important and significant date.  None of
these correspond well with Mary's crown being in Libra, however.

I did make mention of an astronomer (astrologers called themselves
astronomers back then) who placed his signs one month off, for
what reason I still haven't ascertained.  Until I know more about
this it's just too big a stretch to make any connections, other
than my certainty that the crown depicted in Libra is the Crown of
Mary, found primarily in drawings from the Franciscan Order, and
(you guessed it) of English creation and prominance.  Still too
big a stretch to state this all as fact in front of others, but I
thought I'd get it out there so others can be thinking about this
little problem and share their background and views on the
subject.

I'm not generally known for exercising humility (just as my dear
friend Nick '-) ) but on this subject I am way out of my league.
Through my years in Europe I toured museums in almost every town I
visited throughout the many lands.  In every museum there were
hundreds / nay, thousands of christian carvings, statues,
drawings, paintings and portraits, and for every one I viewed the
museums must have had hundreds that were not on display.  Pinning
down the origin of such a poorly drawn crown is, to me, a daunting
task.

I can say that the oldest painting I've viewed to date that has
this *almost* identical crown was painted in 1215, is of English
origin, and is (and has been) a very important piece of art in the
Franciscan Order.  I can't say right now with any real certainty,
but memory says there are one or two drawings in the VMS that may
relate to the Franciscan Order, especially in the haircut area.
And I should also point out that these guys were big in the
hospital running business in the 15th/16th centuries.

As Nick recently lamented however, none of this can be definite,
and therefore may not be at all definitive.  It just seems to me
that when you start building up one may bee after another, these
may bees tend to swarm in the brain, making it one really
irritating place to live, I can tell you.  Well, at least the
noise drowns out all the other voices in there :-)

I'm not pushing the "English origin" angle, as I think this will
come out in another context later.  The case I really wish to push
is the content and context of the VMS.  There just isn't any doubt
in my mind that it was written by a physician, that the contents
are herbal/medicinal in nature, that nothing when taken at face
value in the VMS falls outside the training of such a person, and
that we can expect nothing more or less than this to be discovered
in the Voynich.

This to me answers well enough the question "who wrote the VMS?",
and answers sufficiently enough the question "Why did he write it
in cipher?".  15th/16th century HMO's were religious orders such
as the Fransciscans, and all but a handful of physicians gained
their training through religious orders and religious stipends.
Throughout their servitude, they were bound by the rules of the
order and the local laws governing the actions of clergy.  Choose
whatever personal reason you wish for this, but generally people
find ways around strict rules and watchful eyes.  It could also be
something as simple as wanting to hide secret recipes, but the
drawings tend to say that the author had far more personal reasons
for taking this action.

Consider for instance, the astrological for "Yony", (72r2) with
two young lovers hand in hand.  Perfect for June, but something a
monk couldn't do.  And for me, the most telling of the drawings is
"Septembre", (72v2) with a woman/man? kneeling in front of a
flower, reaching out with one hand and holding a star in the
other.  Talk about symbolism - that is the perfect image for an
astrologer/herbalist of this time period, picking and harvesting
according to the stars.  That one image in itself is enough to
tell the contents of the VMS, and the love the author had of his
profession.

Certainly no single thing can be used to define the VMS, but when
we start adding up all the things we know, a picture begins to
emerge with enough force to become far more than a simple guess.
the crown on 72v1 is a good example of overt christian symbolism,
but I'm willing to bet that if you focused on this tack, more
symbolism would be found that corresponds with other christian
feasts and traditions, and through these a much clearer picture of
the astrological pages would begin to emerge.

None of this is easy, I assure you.  For the last two years I've
done very little other than read book after book on herbal
medicine and treatments from this time period.  I've studied books
on astrology from thier viewpoint and even rare student notebooks
on courses they took in astrology, medicine, etc., the things that
make up the VMS.  I fully understand why many historians shake
their head in disgust when speaking of the state of science in
these centuries, but once in a rare while these scientific
illiterates were able to create something beautiful - the VMS is
one of those rare cases.

While on the subject of astrology - (was I ever on that subject?)
I have remained convinced for quite sometime that the VMS has the
moon as its theme.  Astrologically, it was to the herbalists the
most important planet, as its cycles were responsible for
imparting the influences to herbs.  I've also been convinced that
the nymphs on the astrological pages are related to the moon
somehow, by number and also by some other significance not yet
discerned.

In reference to the "dayes of the moone" taken from the 1583
London Edition of the English bible, and repeated in the almanac
that precedes the King James version of 1610/11 - all months with
31 days have 30 moone dayes, and all months with 30 days have 29
moone dayes, with the exception of February, which has 28 days but
29 moone dayes.

In these two general almanacs the moon days are fixed for each
month, but in true astronomical terms, a 15th/16th century
"astronomer" would have use a more precise method of calculation,
since he would have considered these as "changeynge" and not
"fyxed".  Two things affect this calculation, first, that "all"
(their word, not mine) astronomers began their day at noon, and
not midnight, so Sunday began on Sunday noon and lasted until
Monday noon, and second, the further north you go in the northern
hemisphere, the longer the moon days for each month or sign
actually were, since they were calculated by ascertaining whether
the moon was at least partially visible on these days.  A couple
29's and far more 30's are in keeping with a moone daye calendar
at northern latitudes, but in order to fully substantiate this,
one would have to actually run these against southern latitudes to
determine the difference.  I'm not an astronomer as some of you
are, but I am encapsulating statements made by 15th/16th century
astronomers when I lay this out.  I think this needs to be looked
at in terms of what actually constitutes a moone daye, and how the
calculations vary over the 19 year cycle for each latitude.

I've thrown out a few pieces here, and there's a lot more in my
head that I need to lay out in an appropriate format, but I think
that once you gain the understanding that this was written by a
physician, so many of these pieces begin to fall into their proper
place.  No, Nick, not one single piece is in itself a proof of
anything, but I liken it to reading an old english script.  At
first it is just jibberish, but slowly the writing reveals small
words, and then sentences, and eventually you find yourself
reading as if you always knew what it said.

GC




> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Luis Velez
> Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 10:57 AM
> To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: VMs: re: VMS: Finding
>
>
>
>
> Nick,
>
> It is true that the case for a Christian cross on the
> hand of the nymph
> in the balneological section is at best weak. However,
> I had more in
> mind the one atop the crown in f 72v1 that Glen pointed out.
>
> Depiciting an ecclesiastic/royal authority symbol (a
> crown) with a
> cross may not have been unthinkable for a Jewish
> artist, but it seems
> unusual to me. In any event, I guess this becomes yet
> another small
> proof our artist gives us about his philosophical depth
> - or perhaps
> his evident madness?
>
> Couldn't agree more with you about the multiplicity of
> sources for the
> Herbal section. I think Dana and Philip agree there, too.
>
> Glen, I look forward to learn about any progress you
> make on that
> Tricesimum research - sounds promising.
>
> Luis
>
> ________________________________________________________
> ______________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with
> a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list