16-10-2016, 03:44 AM
(This post was last modified: 16-10-2016, 04:04 AM by Diane.
Edit Reason: Postscript.
)
Ellie,
Of course, I went into it before even publishing anything on my blog - and also looked to see if anyone had ever mentioned Libri before in connection with Voynich studies. At that time, no one had.
No-one has said anything to me about it, but I daresay that my longest and most assiduous readers did absorb the content. I had to stop posting the 'Wolves' series in which more of the evidence was presented. It was a bad time for pilfering, just then.
I wouldn't speak of my bringing this to notice as a 'Libri theory'; Voynich studies sees lots of fantasy, wishful thinking, idle speculation, points of view which are better informed or otherwise, lots of effort to find things to support an idea/hypothesis - not always properly documented - and a lot of interesting observations and inferences drawn from original study. All of it tends to be mis-called 'a theory'.
I guess I'd accept that " Stolfi's theory" is a thing.
Anyone can now do the same research I did - but I would say clearly that no-one had done before me, or I'd have thanked them for the lead.
My study (with one corrected date, now) was written up months ago, before I put anything online, and forms one of the essays in press.
Postscript: perhaps the point got lost. it is not about what happened, or is speculated to have happened post 1438 which makes this possibility relevant, but the implications it has for things like definition of glyph forms, its ability to explain anomalies in the usual accounts of Wilfrid's finding the Ms, and a single consistent explanation for the many indications in the manuscript of a passage of the present content along the England-Calais-Padua corridor *before* 1438.
I won't elaborate here.
Of course, I went into it before even publishing anything on my blog - and also looked to see if anyone had ever mentioned Libri before in connection with Voynich studies. At that time, no one had.
No-one has said anything to me about it, but I daresay that my longest and most assiduous readers did absorb the content. I had to stop posting the 'Wolves' series in which more of the evidence was presented. It was a bad time for pilfering, just then.
I wouldn't speak of my bringing this to notice as a 'Libri theory'; Voynich studies sees lots of fantasy, wishful thinking, idle speculation, points of view which are better informed or otherwise, lots of effort to find things to support an idea/hypothesis - not always properly documented - and a lot of interesting observations and inferences drawn from original study. All of it tends to be mis-called 'a theory'.
I guess I'd accept that " Stolfi's theory" is a thing.
Anyone can now do the same research I did - but I would say clearly that no-one had done before me, or I'd have thanked them for the lead.
My study (with one corrected date, now) was written up months ago, before I put anything online, and forms one of the essays in press.
Postscript: perhaps the point got lost. it is not about what happened, or is speculated to have happened post 1438 which makes this possibility relevant, but the implications it has for things like definition of glyph forms, its ability to explain anomalies in the usual accounts of Wilfrid's finding the Ms, and a single consistent explanation for the many indications in the manuscript of a passage of the present content along the England-Calais-Padua corridor *before* 1438.
I won't elaborate here.