[split] Relying on external imagery

[Mark Knowles]

I do not know there was just one author I intend to refer to one author, where it is not important to the argument, for simplicity rather than writing "author(s)". Similarly I often find myself writing "he" instead of "he/she" for simplicity and brevity. Though it is true I think there was essentially one author, who may have had some assistance from those working for him, and that the author was Male, but that is a completely argument and subject.

I personally like to say "makers" and "they". There is agreement about two different hands. Additionally, someone left color annotations. In normal manuscripts, we know that this is done by person a for person b, and most likely this is the same in the VM. So it is safe to say that at least two people were involved (or three if the painter is a different person than the scribes), and we don't know the exact division of labor between them.

Anyway, back to methodology. I personally welcome a multitude of approaches. At the end of the day we want to see this thing solved, so if someone wants to do his research in a way you personally think is not the best, why not let them? 

I often see people conducting "research" that I think won't lead to anything, but I don't mind, they might just uncover something useful along the way.

(It's a different scenario when a ridiculous theory gets disproportional exposure, as we've seen earlier this year...)

I am not saying anyone can't do what they want. My point is to question the methodological culture one often finds in Voynich research and to suggest there is a case for people approaching the manuscript on the basis that recognises the author's originality and one where one questions more whether the loose similarity that one sometimes finds between certain manuscript drawings and drawings in the Voynich might be coincidental rather than indications of a relationship. Also I think methodologically we should be prepared to consider sources other than illustrated medieval manuscript, such is historical sources and others. Don't get me wrong whilst I have not looked at your research with regard to the Zodiac drawings, and therefore I am very reluctant to give an opinion on the subject, it is definitely the case that there is a striking visual similarity between the Gemini drawing and that of the source you found. So I am certainly not saying that one should not compare illustrations of the period with those in the Voynich just stating my concerns regarding the current limited methodological approach employed my many people in this regard.