17-12-2016, 11:52 AM
JPK: you are right, it is important to keep in mind that these images were supposed to accompany (and somehow "support") a text. Who knows what kind of text this was - so many have been lost entirely. When you read a text with an image, things that seem cryptic or absurd suddenly make sense.
I am not entirely opposed to the idea that the images may have been "new", after all I am arguing that they are a rather dense composition which may have been tailor made for a particular purpose. I don't think it could have been made without reference material though, but that may not be the most important question. If you say they drew it from memory, that is basically the same as making a new composition based on known sources. Depending on how good their visual memory was
Linda: I really think the focus is on what we would call "astronomy". This is also the most compatible with how you read the imagery (navigation, time keeping...)
I am not entirely opposed to the idea that the images may have been "new", after all I am arguing that they are a rather dense composition which may have been tailor made for a particular purpose. I don't think it could have been made without reference material though, but that may not be the most important question. If you say they drew it from memory, that is basically the same as making a new composition based on known sources. Depending on how good their visual memory was
Linda: I really think the focus is on what we would call "astronomy". This is also the most compatible with how you read the imagery (navigation, time keeping...)