17-01-2021, 09:47 AM
(This post was last modified: 17-01-2021, 09:54 AM by Mark Knowles.)
(17-01-2021, 08:25 AM)davidjackson wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You can't build up a list of events from a specific time period from Wikipedia and then try to match to the voynich.
If there was anything that obvious the many specialists and informed amateurs would have spotted it by now.
Anyone doing that is just running the risk of confirmational basis - this nymph looks a bit like a pope so must be the anti pope.
You seem to make all sorts of incorrect assumptions about what I trying to do. I have said nowhere that I am trying to match a timeline with the Voynich.
What I am trying to do is much more indirect than you suggest. I think a historical timeline for the period is interesting and overall relevant to the Voynich.
Quote:
Anybody who wants to study the Voynich should instead take a holistic approach to the history of the period, trying to understand more about the social, political and economic life of the time across Europe. That gives you a much better insight into the mindset of the possible creators; you can then try to see if they were reflecting momentous events in their work.
It's not an either or situation. I have nowhere suggested that a historical timeline is the only way to study the Voynich, but rather that it is relevant. This is one aspect of the backdrop to the Voynich manuscript. I have not suggested that people should not study the social, political and economic life of the time across Europe. To me this is like commenting on a thread about plant imagery and saying that this should be studied in conjunction with the zodiac imagery, the materials from which the manuscript is made etc. Studying one thing does not preclude the study of other things.