(24-03-2019, 10:56 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.No, as far as I am concerned, the fun will only start after we crack it.
Hi Koen,
personally, I agree with what you write, but obviously it doesn't apply to everyone.
There are people who are interested in the VMS, but not in the text of other manuscripts: they are not attracted by ancient works that can be read. They will lose all interest in the subject, as soon the main problem is solved. In my opinion, this includes much of the "image only" activity: several people use the images to project whatever they want; once that freedom is gone, so will be their interest. The same applies to much of the here-is-my-translation stuff we read daily: those are exercises in creative writing and will find new areas to express themselves when what is written in the manuscript is scientifically known.
Also, when the "formula" is found, there will be a lot of work for researchers with actual competence in the specific language and culture that produced the text. Those who have never read a single medieval manuscript (most of us, myself included of course) will likely be unable to contribute. But I agree that it will be interesting to see what the experts publish
Finally, Lisa Fagin Davis (the palaeographer who currently is Executive Director of the Medieval Academy of America) You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. that she "kind of hopes" that the manuscript stays unsolved. She is one of those people who have the skills to contribute to the research even after the linguistic side is solved. But I guess that, from her point of view, working on the manuscript when it can be read would be "business as usual", not as thrilling as an unsolved mystery.
Yes, I can sympathise with that view. After all, every single one of us was initially attracted by the mystery!
But the more I study the MS, the more I am convinced that even stripped of the alluring mysterious component, it would still be deeply satisfying to study its contents. Even if we understood how it was done, we'd still have this text which was, for some reason, presented in a way that misled humanity well into the 21st century.
Let me put it another way. I can't think of any "solution" that would make me say "oh, was it just that? What a waste of time".
Perhaps the most disappointing outcome would be if someone could prove how the text is a medieval hoax. For example, if the Old Testament was used as a seed to generate mysterious looking nonsense (as in a one-way cipher). This would tell us that the text is meant to be without meaning, and we're just left with the imagery, doomed to have its interpretation remain forever in "could-be" limbo.
But assuming that the text does have meaning, I would want to learn as much as possible about it.
Of course, it is also true that for 95% of all the people who know about the Voynich MS, a successful translation means: 'case closed'.
The most attrative thing about the VMS is that it forces us to think about the human spirit and its history, our history. It's a philosophical problem of the first order. I remember when I was young and read 'Les mots et les choses' by Michel Foucault, and his concept of epistemological periods of history, the diachronic knowledge models, like Khun's scientific paradigms.
My main concern is understand the mentality which made the VMS possible, something that is very difficult for all of us. JKP summed up the problem of my theory: is it possible to fill up more than 200 pages with astronomical coordinates? Well that's what I think based on what I see. I suppose that such a code was very important for people mentality of the XV century.
There are no experts outside this forum. The director of the Medieval Academy of America cited by Marco has given up thinking. I still have doubts and I'll have them until most of the forum is according to my theory.
(24-03-2019, 06:54 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. There are no experts outside this forum. The director of the Medieval Academy of America cited by Marco has given up thinking.
I totally disagree. Lisa Fagin Davis was one of the experts who You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. that was published on the Times Literary Supplement in 2017.
You say you are trying to understand the way of thinking of XV Century people, but how many XV Century manuscripts have you entirely read? Do you seriously believe you (or I) know more about the XV Century than a professional palaeographer who has been working on medieval manuscripts for decades?
(24-03-2019, 06:54 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. There are no experts outside this forum. The director of the Medieval Academy of America cited by Marco has given up thinking.
It would be a tragedy if this were even remotely true. Luckily it is utterly false. :-)
Sorry if my comment could have seemed disrespectful. Far from my intention. I'm sure Lisa Fagin Davis is a competent and brilliant paleografher and medievalist. I wrote that because I read that she says she is interested in the VMS as an object not in solving it.
But for me, and I think for all of you, the VMS is something unique and valuable more for its spirit than for its material. Generations of people have wanted to know the message that hides and the members of this forum feel the same intellectual restlessness.
If I were to seek advice about medieval manuscripts in general, I would ask Lisa Fagin Davis. But if what I want is to deepen in the VMS, I would pay attention to someone who feels passion for it, someone like ReneZ for example.
I am a librarian of the National Library of Spain and I'm used to seeing medieval manuscripts. My impression is that what would explain the VMS are books that have not reached us. Too many Inquisitions and books at the stake.
Quote: There are no experts outside this forum. The director of the Medieval Academy of America cited by Marco has given up thinking.
Antonio, I see that you have already apologised for this comment. But please be aware that ad hominem comments are an infringement of forum rules, especially when being made against the reputation of professional who may not have an opportunity to defend themselves here.
No problem David. It's not my style to attack anyone. It has been a misunderstanding.
Dear Antonio, many thanks for the implied confidence, but I also look at the people who have a solid theoretical and practical background in historical material for advice.
The most interesting and most valuable things I have learned about the MS comes from them.
It may seem like a disadvantage, but it really isn't: they tend not to say a lot, and when they are not sure about something, they say so, and you won't get much more out of them.