19-11-2024, 02:02 PM
It is my opinion that the rosettes "map" was created for a specific purpose of the author(s) to illustrate a specific journey that he/she/they took.
Often an argument is presented that it cannot be a map as we have not seen a map of that particular kind from that period. However on that basis of argument the Voynich manuscript cannot exist as we have not seen another manuscript like it. Maps varied quite a lot at that time especially in Northern Italy, so a distinctive map like the Voynich Rosettes is not so unusual. If the Voynich is a unique and distinctive document it seems perfectly reasonable for the "map" to be unique and distinctive.
Why bother to encipher a manuscript that was just a copy of another preexisting unenciphered manuscript? Surely one would expect it to have some original and unique content. On this basis it seems odd to expect the rosettes folio to be a copy of another document rather than an original work.
Often an argument is presented that it cannot be a map as we have not seen a map of that particular kind from that period. However on that basis of argument the Voynich manuscript cannot exist as we have not seen another manuscript like it. Maps varied quite a lot at that time especially in Northern Italy, so a distinctive map like the Voynich Rosettes is not so unusual. If the Voynich is a unique and distinctive document it seems perfectly reasonable for the "map" to be unique and distinctive.
Why bother to encipher a manuscript that was just a copy of another preexisting unenciphered manuscript? Surely one would expect it to have some original and unique content. On this basis it seems odd to expect the rosettes folio to be a copy of another document rather than an original work.
