09-04-2016, 02:14 PM
Asking for a match for a whole section is what you have just done above for the balneo, dismissing balneis puteolanis as an inspiration because it doesn't match exactly with the details of the way the nymphs in the Voynich are represented.
But returning to your work, I'd really appreciate it if you would take the time to look into the history of the objects you use for comparison in your mnemonic examples and reference them in a more detailed way.
Showing one unnamed statue or vase of which one detail resembles a Voynich leaf if we rotate it by 90° is not very convincing to me. You have to be able to name this particular vase or statue (current location, collection number?) and show that it was not, say, destroyed or lost in 1AD and then retrieved and pieced back together by archaeologists in the 1930's, but that it was visible at the time you suggest it would have inspired the Voynich artist.
Your You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. about Thalia is an example of this and presents several additional problems: the statues you show are unnamed, we don't know anything about where they were or how the Voynich artist would have seen them. If you mean that the artist would not have seen the images but read a description of Thalia, then provide a text that describes Thalia holding a head with a spiky beard.
Then there is the issue of resemblance: The plant leaf is half-rounded, half spiky, and the head held by Thalia in your examples has no such spiky beard: it's either beardless or has a curly beard or one that has two long wavy ends. The artocarpus fruit example you compare it with is completely spiky, not half.
In any case, how would the artist have both had knowledge of ancient greco-roman statues and thai fruits? Traders were not educated in universities. Also, remember that there was no refrigeration at the time, so many fruits never made it back because they would have rotted before they could reach their destination. If you're claiming the artist would have seen the artocarpus depicted in a manuscript, then reference that herbal manuscript where a description or illustration of artocarpus resembling the Voynich one is visible.
I think that if you start to reference your examples more systematically, you might be able to construct a geography of where and when the Voynich artist would have had to be physically present, or have traveled to, in order to witness them all.
But returning to your work, I'd really appreciate it if you would take the time to look into the history of the objects you use for comparison in your mnemonic examples and reference them in a more detailed way.
Showing one unnamed statue or vase of which one detail resembles a Voynich leaf if we rotate it by 90° is not very convincing to me. You have to be able to name this particular vase or statue (current location, collection number?) and show that it was not, say, destroyed or lost in 1AD and then retrieved and pieced back together by archaeologists in the 1930's, but that it was visible at the time you suggest it would have inspired the Voynich artist.
Your You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. about Thalia is an example of this and presents several additional problems: the statues you show are unnamed, we don't know anything about where they were or how the Voynich artist would have seen them. If you mean that the artist would not have seen the images but read a description of Thalia, then provide a text that describes Thalia holding a head with a spiky beard.
Then there is the issue of resemblance: The plant leaf is half-rounded, half spiky, and the head held by Thalia in your examples has no such spiky beard: it's either beardless or has a curly beard or one that has two long wavy ends. The artocarpus fruit example you compare it with is completely spiky, not half.
In any case, how would the artist have both had knowledge of ancient greco-roman statues and thai fruits? Traders were not educated in universities. Also, remember that there was no refrigeration at the time, so many fruits never made it back because they would have rotted before they could reach their destination. If you're claiming the artist would have seen the artocarpus depicted in a manuscript, then reference that herbal manuscript where a description or illustration of artocarpus resembling the Voynich one is visible.
I think that if you start to reference your examples more systematically, you might be able to construct a geography of where and when the Voynich artist would have had to be physically present, or have traveled to, in order to witness them all.