Yes, I see. I wonder what is holding Beinecke back to have more physical tests done to the MS. I bet we can all think of some extra tests that would clarify some issues. Maybe it's not worth the cost just to compare some paint samples?
I do see the community at work all the time, and they do perform amazing work from all kinds of angles. I'm a bit disappointed by the lack of experts seriously dedicating a study to the manuscript though. Bax was one, and immediately people flocked around him, I think partially because his level of dedication and genuine interest was so great.
Understandably, there's been a number of botanists looking at it, but given the way the MS deals with plant depictions, I'm not sure that they are a suitable "first line of attack".
I am glad that quite a number of people are doing various kinds of quantitative analyses on the text - that's some of the little solid data we can get.
However, when it comes to the imagery and the provenance of the manuscript as a whole, it's the community doing most of the work, and most experts limit their involvement to a passing remark or a relatively "first sight" opinion. It would be great if some more historians tried to really pick it apart. But I think they have better things to do
I do see the community at work all the time, and they do perform amazing work from all kinds of angles. I'm a bit disappointed by the lack of experts seriously dedicating a study to the manuscript though. Bax was one, and immediately people flocked around him, I think partially because his level of dedication and genuine interest was so great.
Understandably, there's been a number of botanists looking at it, but given the way the MS deals with plant depictions, I'm not sure that they are a suitable "first line of attack".
I am glad that quite a number of people are doing various kinds of quantitative analyses on the text - that's some of the little solid data we can get.
However, when it comes to the imagery and the provenance of the manuscript as a whole, it's the community doing most of the work, and most experts limit their involvement to a passing remark or a relatively "first sight" opinion. It would be great if some more historians tried to really pick it apart. But I think they have better things to do