10-04-2016, 02:43 PM
Hi Koen Gh,
thanks for replying so positively to what I wanted to express as a constructive critique.
I find your post on cadmus really interesting; I'll look into that in more detail later (busy weekend). Where is the header illustration from?
Also thank you for your explanation about your use of mnemonics, and your narrative/emblematic distinction. I have no issue with the process in itself, on the contrary, I think it's definitely worthy of consideration.
I do want to draw your attention to one point, which I think is quite important:
In your reply, you mention the fact that the image of Thalia "survived" antiquity, using a 1739 painting to prove it. I just want to warn you about confusing the re-emergence with continuity: the 18th century was the heyday of neo-classicism, which draws on the earlier Renaissance classicism of the 16th C. These movements are so named precisely because they draw on classical sources from antiquity, and emulate their style, in contrast to what was done in intermediate periods such as the middle ages. Finding a classical image resurrected in neoclassical times does not indicate that the image continued to be produced, in the interval.
Coins are a different matter. I am not a specialist of numismatics, but this is what I know:
Contrary to today, coin value was not based on what was imprinted on them (face value), but literally by their weight in the metal they were made from. When people found old coins, they generally saw them for their bullion value, and these were often re-minted. There are exceptions for gold coins, which tended to be generally accepted for trade regardless of their place/time of origin, until the advent of the Florin and Guilder.
"Surviving" coins from antiquity are usually precisely those that were not continuously in circulation but remained hidden in some way (a lot of them were found by excavation, or by underwater archaeologists in recent times).
Side note about collecting: Although there was a practice of ancient coin collecting in Roman times, this disappeared in the early centuries AD. Petrarch is credited with re-launching the trend in the 14th C, but this was a practice limited to the higher nobility, hence the fact that numismatics (this is an 18th C term) was nicknamed the hobby of kings. The first book presenting a history of coins, De Asse et Partibus Eius, was written in 1514.
Regarding coins in Byzantium, I would recommend You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as a starting point, especially for the map of the coins made in various Byzantine mints.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. gives a great overview of the coins in use in various areas/periods (in French, but very visual and easy to use even for a non-speaker I think).
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is a pretty good hub of links to information about medieval money, precious metals and economics.
All this to say, as in my previous post, that although I have no problem with the core premise of your research, care needs to be taken when referring to examples from antiquity beyond authors and manuscripts for which the continuity is often well proven, and that looking into the history of artefacts and iconographies may lead you to be able to determine which kind of person would have been in a position to observe all of the elements you believe served as inspiration for the Voynich.
thanks for replying so positively to what I wanted to express as a constructive critique.
I find your post on cadmus really interesting; I'll look into that in more detail later (busy weekend). Where is the header illustration from?
Also thank you for your explanation about your use of mnemonics, and your narrative/emblematic distinction. I have no issue with the process in itself, on the contrary, I think it's definitely worthy of consideration.
I do want to draw your attention to one point, which I think is quite important:
In your reply, you mention the fact that the image of Thalia "survived" antiquity, using a 1739 painting to prove it. I just want to warn you about confusing the re-emergence with continuity: the 18th century was the heyday of neo-classicism, which draws on the earlier Renaissance classicism of the 16th C. These movements are so named precisely because they draw on classical sources from antiquity, and emulate their style, in contrast to what was done in intermediate periods such as the middle ages. Finding a classical image resurrected in neoclassical times does not indicate that the image continued to be produced, in the interval.
Coins are a different matter. I am not a specialist of numismatics, but this is what I know:
Contrary to today, coin value was not based on what was imprinted on them (face value), but literally by their weight in the metal they were made from. When people found old coins, they generally saw them for their bullion value, and these were often re-minted. There are exceptions for gold coins, which tended to be generally accepted for trade regardless of their place/time of origin, until the advent of the Florin and Guilder.
"Surviving" coins from antiquity are usually precisely those that were not continuously in circulation but remained hidden in some way (a lot of them were found by excavation, or by underwater archaeologists in recent times).
Side note about collecting: Although there was a practice of ancient coin collecting in Roman times, this disappeared in the early centuries AD. Petrarch is credited with re-launching the trend in the 14th C, but this was a practice limited to the higher nobility, hence the fact that numismatics (this is an 18th C term) was nicknamed the hobby of kings. The first book presenting a history of coins, De Asse et Partibus Eius, was written in 1514.
Regarding coins in Byzantium, I would recommend You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as a starting point, especially for the map of the coins made in various Byzantine mints.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. gives a great overview of the coins in use in various areas/periods (in French, but very visual and easy to use even for a non-speaker I think).
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is a pretty good hub of links to information about medieval money, precious metals and economics.
All this to say, as in my previous post, that although I have no problem with the core premise of your research, care needs to be taken when referring to examples from antiquity beyond authors and manuscripts for which the continuity is often well proven, and that looking into the history of artefacts and iconographies may lead you to be able to determine which kind of person would have been in a position to observe all of the elements you believe served as inspiration for the Voynich.