25-11-2022, 02:55 PM
(This post was last modified: 25-11-2022, 03:15 PM by Mark Knowles.)
(25-11-2022, 12:02 PM)Mark Knowles wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.When trying to understand the reason for excluding Lauber the argument that presents itself is that:(25-11-2022, 08:32 AM)Koen G wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There is absolutely no way the VM images can have been copied from Lauber.I don't understand this statement at all. It seems to state that there is "absolutely no way" makes little sense. I have seen no justification for this.
The VM drawings date from 1400-1430 therefore given that Lauber's earliest work dates from 1427 and the parallel images from later still then the VM drawings cannot have been copied from Lauber.
However if one now allows the possibility that the VM drawings date from the 1430s then it becomes possible that Lauber was the source.
Koen says:
"Lauber is a bit late, but he does seem to have had access to sources extremely close to those of the VM Gemini."
One is led to ask why "Lauber is a bit late"? I think it comes down to a significant extent due to the preexisting assumption about the dating.