08-04-2016, 08:11 PM
There's a general logical fallacy that one always has to beware of. It's a kind of non-sequitur.
I'm not saying it certainly applies here, but it's just to keep in mind.
One may suggest that some aspect of the MS is unusual for a medieval MS for this or that region, and that the MS is something else instead. However, one should then show that this same aspect is *not* unusual for the alernative proposed place/time.
I have seen this in many forms, in several Voynich MS discussions. I don't wish to highlight any.
In any case, the Balneis MSs already cited many times are full of more-or-less similar unclothed small figures. These are also not overly loaded with Christian imagery.
I would love to see some examples of Paracelsus' "archei" that Singer compared with the Voynich MS nymphs. Even though his work postdates the Voynich MS, they would be interesting comparison materiall.
I'm not saying it certainly applies here, but it's just to keep in mind.
One may suggest that some aspect of the MS is unusual for a medieval MS for this or that region, and that the MS is something else instead. However, one should then show that this same aspect is *not* unusual for the alernative proposed place/time.
I have seen this in many forms, in several Voynich MS discussions. I don't wish to highlight any.
In any case, the Balneis MSs already cited many times are full of more-or-less similar unclothed small figures. These are also not overly loaded with Christian imagery.
I would love to see some examples of Paracelsus' "archei" that Singer compared with the Voynich MS nymphs. Even though his work postdates the Voynich MS, they would be interesting comparison materiall.