08-10-2022, 10:50 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-10-2022, 10:52 AM by Mark Knowles.)
One thing that I have felt problematic for some time is the lack of specialisation of most people undertaking Voynich research. It seems to me that most people flit from topic to topic, never spending long enough on each topic to make real progress. One day they will be making some statistical analysis of the text and the next day they will be comparing plant images from a herbal of the time with the Voynich and the following day they will theorising about the Rosettes folio and so on.
I think what will help push Voynich research forward is if individuals select a topic to pursue for some time until they can be said to have really advanced our understanding of the topic. Some people may not find that as "fun" as jumping around topics, but it is likely to be more productive. The Voynich does not need lots of good generalists, but rather a variety of specialists in different aspects of the manuscript with of course some collaboration between them.
I have, myself, adopted that approach, so I am not advocating other people do something that I am not doing myself. There are many subjects relating to the Voynich manuscript that I have never investigated at all and only some which I have researched to some degree. My chief specialism is cryptography from the early 15th century. Though I have also spent some time looking at maps of the period and some time matching botanical pictures to herbal pictures and a bit of time thinking about labels as well as time looking at my own theory. Nevertheless I have barely touched the other aspects of the Voynich, though I have read up and thought about the statistical properties. I know nothing of the astrological drawings, almost nothing of the astronomical drawings, very little about the late history of the manuscript, almost nothing about the marginalia, not much about herbals of the time and so on.
Now there are some people who appear to have specialised in certain aspects of Voynich; my thoughts turn to Lisa Fagin Davis and Claire Bowern.
It also concerns me that when researching the Voynich most people confine themselves only to documents they can find online. This leaves out a large quantity of archival material from their research. I admit that tracking down archival material can be hard work and at times it can cost money, but without doing this Voynich research is sadly limited.
I see a new era of progress in Voynich research being advanced by a group of specialists in different aspects of the manuscript sharing their discoveries between them.
I think what will help push Voynich research forward is if individuals select a topic to pursue for some time until they can be said to have really advanced our understanding of the topic. Some people may not find that as "fun" as jumping around topics, but it is likely to be more productive. The Voynich does not need lots of good generalists, but rather a variety of specialists in different aspects of the manuscript with of course some collaboration between them.
I have, myself, adopted that approach, so I am not advocating other people do something that I am not doing myself. There are many subjects relating to the Voynich manuscript that I have never investigated at all and only some which I have researched to some degree. My chief specialism is cryptography from the early 15th century. Though I have also spent some time looking at maps of the period and some time matching botanical pictures to herbal pictures and a bit of time thinking about labels as well as time looking at my own theory. Nevertheless I have barely touched the other aspects of the Voynich, though I have read up and thought about the statistical properties. I know nothing of the astrological drawings, almost nothing of the astronomical drawings, very little about the late history of the manuscript, almost nothing about the marginalia, not much about herbals of the time and so on.
Now there are some people who appear to have specialised in certain aspects of Voynich; my thoughts turn to Lisa Fagin Davis and Claire Bowern.
It also concerns me that when researching the Voynich most people confine themselves only to documents they can find online. This leaves out a large quantity of archival material from their research. I admit that tracking down archival material can be hard work and at times it can cost money, but without doing this Voynich research is sadly limited.
I see a new era of progress in Voynich research being advanced by a group of specialists in different aspects of the manuscript sharing their discoveries between them.