(28-03-2019, 04:08 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Morten, you're doing it again. You are making things up.
We do not reject the idea that the VMS is a copy of something. The possibility is mentioned on a regular basis. I don't know anyone who has openly rejected the possibility.
You guys remind me of the US presidency: you say one thing but your actions tell a different story.
From my own experience, and from what I have been reading elsewhere, you guys frequently fight tooth and nail against any suggestion that the VMS script and drawings could have originated prior to the 15th century. It is in fact widely assumed that it all originated in the 15th century, which in effect constitutes a total rejection of Currier's copying job theory.
Recall, for example, the publication of the baths of Naples which was presented as an absolute refutation of my 13th century theory, until I had to point out that it was standard design for the ancient Roman baths which could be found all across the empire.
Over on another thread, I noticed that someone (Antonio of Spain) agrees with my postulation that it is the loss of critical precedent manuscripts that has been leading you astray on the origins of the VMS:
Quote:My impression is that what would explain the VMS are books that have not reached us. Too many Inquisitions and books at the stake.
On more than one occasion I have asked you to provide, on the basis of internal VMS content, a smoking gun that would definitively place the manuscript later than the 13th century and I am still waiting for a response.
I think you have to distinguish two things, copy of content or copy of a piece of writing, Currier spoke of copying a given piece of writing by several scribes, which is certainly wrong, there is only one hand, plus one hand in the non Voynichese marginalia, which could still be te same scribe. I think the ms. comes from the first half of the 15th c., we have the C14 dating and script and style of the drawings fit into this time frame, the marginalia could be somewhat later. If the author copied content can't be decided before we know what the content is
(28-03-2019, 01:53 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
From my own experience, and from what I have been reading elsewhere, you guys frequently fight tooth and nail against any suggestion that the VMS script and drawings could have originated prior to the 15th century. It is in fact widely assumed that it all originated in the 15th century, which in effect constitutes a total rejection of Currier's copying job theory.
...
Morten, I completely agree with Helmut. There is a difference between the age of what was copied and when it was copied.
The VMS most certainly originates somewhere around the time of the radio-carbon dating. That does not mean the
content originated at the same time. Medieval scribes were always copying older manuscripts. In fact, most of them were copied (or at least largely copied).
I don't think anyone has made any pronouncements about when it originated because no one can read it yet. What date did the CONTENT originate? It could be 9th century, 11th century, 13th century... big question mark. We simply don't know yet.
What i understand you to mean is that if Cathars wrote the basis for what was copied, what they wrote cant be older than the 13th century, by definition. So you are looking to prove that nothing in the vms shows anything later, and this will act somehow toward substantiation that Cathars wrote it .
As i doubt you would accept my offerings of 15th century events depicted in quire 13 and 14 as proof of anything, i will just say that if it was a 15th century copy of Cathar writings, inclusion of 15th century stylisms or depictions of anachronistic events would not disprove its being so, it would just put an updated spin on the contents, just like that painting by Jean Fouquet showing la Tour du Temple that didn't exist in 1210, as nablator pointed out. What it did do is show where the place was/is and what it might mean to contemporary or future eyes, since that is the audience, not the people of the past.
I dont think you have anything to gain from your requested smoking gun, nor the lack of it.
(28-03-2019, 02:33 PM)Helmut Winkler Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think you have to distinguish two things, copy of content or copy of a piece of writing, Currier spoke of copying a given piece of writing by several scribes, which is certainly wrong, there is only one hand, plus one hand in the non Voynichese marginalia, which could still be te same scribe. I think the ms. comes from the first half of the 15th c., we have the C14 dating and script and style of the drawings fit into this time frame, the marginalia could be somewhat later. If the author copied content can't be decided before we know what the content is
Helmut, I must admit that you and JP are confusing me to no end. First of all, I see no distinction between the terms "copy of content" (content is what you see in the VMS) and "copy of a piece of writing" provided that the "writing" includes the drawings. I do not dispute that the "copy" was made in the early 15th century, per carbon dating.
I understand Currier's words to imply that multiple people participated in the writing of the VMS. Can you please point me to the professional opinion of paleographers and graphologists stating (with rationale provided) that the VMS was compiled by one person acting alone. Thanks.
For my part, I even suspect that multiple artists may have participated as I detect slight differences in artistic style (or talent) among the rosettes, swamp and large botanical depictions. Many have claimed that the drawings were made first, and afterwards a team of writers came along to fill in the script around (and evading contact with) those drawings.
A team effort, of course, negates theories about the mad scientist of northern Italy, 15th century, which is needed to explain how the VMS managed to evade all historical reference in an environment under the close scrutiny of the Inquisition. A team effort also tends to negate the hoax theories.
Let me clarify something: my theory does not rule out the possibility that the botanical pages (the bulk of the VMS) are an original creation of the early 15th century, that is, not a copy. It may be only the pure text pages (mainly quire 20) and the non-botanical drawings (but not necessarily their accompanying text) that date back to the 13th century.
(28-03-2019, 09:11 PM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What i understand you to mean is that if Cathars wrote the basis for what was copied, what they wrote cant be older than the 13th century, by definition. So you are looking to prove that nothing in the vms shows anything later, and this will act somehow toward substantiation that Cathars wrote it .
As i doubt you would accept my offerings of 15th century events depicted in quire 13 and 14 as proof of anything, i will just say that if it was a 15th century copy of Cathar writings, inclusion of 15th century stylisms or depictions of anachronistic events would not disprove its being so, it would just put an updated spin on the contents, just like that painting by Jean Fouquet showing la Tour du Temple that didn't exist in 1210, as nablator pointed out. What it did do is show where the place was/is and what it might mean to contemporary or future eyes, since that is the audience, not the people of the past.
I dont think you have anything to gain from your requested smoking gun, nor the lack of it.
Linda, My theory, as it now stands, is that quire 20, maybe a few other text pages, the wheel page, and non-botanical drawings were originally made by European Cathars who migrated to the Americas in the 13th century, but the botanical drawings (and a copy of those European writings/drawings) were made by native American converts to Catharism by the early 15th century using bison hide for parchment. Catharism in the Americas, if not already diminished by the Aztec and Inca empires, would have been completely extinguished by the Spanish Inquisition in the 16th century.
I would very much like to learn more about your "offerings of 15th century events depicted in quire 13 and 14." Please point me to where I can find details. Thanks.
So you are saying that in 13th century America, there existed a Cathar-authored book written there, that contained the non botanical aspects of the vms in their original forms, and this was copied early 15th century onto bison vellum by new world native followers of the Cathar faith, with the botanical section authored by them and appended.
If my offerings were accepted, your version could not be so, since none of those involved would have had news of these old world events until much later, unless you are saying they sometimes went back for updates, or that others arrived during the making thereof to catch them up on world events, and they thought it important to include them. Or maybe they were remote viewing? But still the question would remain as to why they would incorporate random old world events into their copy of the 13th century Cathar work. So, that makes me ask, why would you be interested in these interpretations of mine?
(28-03-2019, 10:09 PM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So you are saying that in 13th century America, there existed a Cathar-authored book written there, that contained the non botanical aspects of the vms in their original forms, and this was copied early 15th century onto bison vellum by new world native followers of the Cathar faith, with the botanical section authored by them and appended.
If my offerings were accepted, your version could not be so, since none of those involved would have had news of these old world events until much later, unless you are saying they sometimes went back for updates, or that others arrived during the making thereof to catch them up on world events, and they thought it important to include them. Or maybe they were remote viewing? But still the question would remain as to why they would incorporate random old world events into their copy of the 13th century Cathar work. So, that makes me ask, why would you be interested in these interpretations of mine?
Linda, I am a seeker of the truth and would never continue to propagate a theory that I believed to be false. That's why I need to see your "offerings" so that I can evaluate them. My mainstay theory is that the VMS is the source of thirty-nine Nostradamus prophecies, not that the VMS was compiled in the Americas. Did you find a depiction of the Black Death in the VMS? A depiction of the Hundred Years War? A depiction of a pope or king of the 14th or 15th century? Tell me what it is that makes you think the VMS could not have been compiled in the Americas.
Good job! But i don't really understand lads what else you looking for...only thing which is a mystery, purpose of this book, language, and this "heritage" keepers.
Well the text of 57v
My first conversation with you will be unexpected and very rear in these times. The teacher soul will make you scream, shout and make some huge changes in your arrogant skulls which was filled with the teachings of invented Gods.I have a promotion of the culture of peace and dialogue and i will share that for free but not to everyone.....
There are few names(again) you no need them yet....while you doing "analysis" )))
simple as that, but for me is one of best pages with almost correct grammatic.
(28-03-2019, 09:13 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
A team effort, of course, negates theories about the mad scientist of northern Italy, 15th century, which is needed to explain how the VMS managed to evade all historical reference in an environment under the close scrutiny of the Inquisition. A team effort also tends to negate the hoax theories.
...
No, it doesn't. I looked into medieval hoaxes and they really weren't much different from what happens today... small groups of people are often involved.