16-08-2016, 11:58 PM
Usual or not, the author of the content was a product of his/her time. If the VMS is a "composite manuscript", the authors of the parts thereof were a product of their times. The stuff gets more complicated in that case, though, because layers build one atop another, and later epochs contribute to the content borrowed from earlier ones.
If we discuss methodology, then in regard to particular observed objects or suspected concepts (such as pairing), one (as I believe) should address e.g. the following questions:
- is the object or concept traced consistently throughout the whole VMS or only in a certain part thereof (this might help to detect elements of a composite MS)?
- is the object or the concept characteristic for a particular cultural environment (time, place, culture, tradition...)? If yes, then are the adjacent imagery patterns characteristic for that environment? What if they are not? Is there a way for reconciliation or we are simply mistaken in our interpretation of objects?
I rename the thread to reflect that we are discussing methodology for analysis of imagery.
Will add more tomorrow...
If we discuss methodology, then in regard to particular observed objects or suspected concepts (such as pairing), one (as I believe) should address e.g. the following questions:
- is the object or concept traced consistently throughout the whole VMS or only in a certain part thereof (this might help to detect elements of a composite MS)?
- is the object or the concept characteristic for a particular cultural environment (time, place, culture, tradition...)? If yes, then are the adjacent imagery patterns characteristic for that environment? What if they are not? Is there a way for reconciliation or we are simply mistaken in our interpretation of objects?
I rename the thread to reflect that we are discussing methodology for analysis of imagery.
Will add more tomorrow...