VViews > 04-03-2019, 02:09 PM
Morten St. George > 04-03-2019, 02:13 PM
(04-03-2019, 08:43 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Regarding destroyed buildings it is important to realize that our respect for old buildings is a relatively recent thing. Even outside of the terrible effects of war, people were just too pragmatic.
For example, I just learned that my home city used to have a magnificent medieval city gate close to where I used to live. It's been destroyed as recently as c. 1900 because they wanted to build a road there.
Things like that happened all the time. And renovations are just a s invasive. So many medieval buildings have gotten their current looks only after 1600, reflecting the evolving tastes of successive owners or creative renovations after periods of neglect.
That's why I'm dubious about finding the right visual parallel. Additionally, it would not be unusual if this were a "generic" castle or city image as is found on many medieval maps. That would make looking for its identity based on its appearance even more of a wild goose chase.
Not saying that it's impossible some identity is demonstrated one day. But it won't be easy.
Morten St. George > 04-03-2019, 03:24 PM
(04-03-2019, 02:09 PM)VViews Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Morten,
you say:
"I'd classify those archaeologists as pseudo-scientists just like the Nazi archaeologists who went there searching for the Cathar treasure which was really no more than the VMS prophecies! "
This is outrageous.
The conclusions of the article I linked are confirmed by numerous other studies by various other archaeologists, and have been confirmed many times over. Of course, some details will never be known, but things like the number of towers and layout of the walls and the basic floorplan are well established, and have been since the 1980's. They do not match the Voynich castle.
The plans of the 13th century castle can be found online. I won't put up any more links here, nor provide any more free research for you, since you have decided that anything that contradicts your theory is "pseudo-science". The author of the article I linked earlier is a professor emeritus at the top school of social sciences in France: to call him a pseudo-scientist and compare him to a Nazi is absurd. Ironically, his archaeological work on Montsegur was praised by Henri Paul Eydoux, who was an eminent historian of medieval architecture... and a decorated member of the Resistance during WW2.
I understand it is upsetting to have one's theory dismantled by actual academic research, but if your reaction to facts is to say that it is then the scientists who must be engaging in "pseudo-science" and to compare them to Nazis.... wow.
It takes a lot of bad faith to reach such a conclusion.
I really regret wasting my time digging up facts for you, since you obviously are oblivious to them.
Linda > 04-03-2019, 05:36 PM
Quote:Linda, I think you and the others should know that my theory about the Cathar fortress is not based solely on what we see on the rosettes folio. There are other pointers to the Cathars, including:There is not a smidge of evidence to identify these as Cathars other than your saying so.
i. The men and women of the roundtables.
Quote:ii. The baptismal ceremony of consolamentum.There is not a smidge of evidence to identify these as Cathars other than your saying so.
Quote:iii. Efforts to evade procreation.There is not a smidge of evidence to identify these as Cathars other than your saying so.
Quote:iv. The legend that Christian Rosenkreutz was educated by the Cathars.And this relates to the vms how and proves what?
Quote:And more, a lot more.More of the above? More of nothing but your sayso? All you are doing is picking out visuals, placing a story on them that is not necessarily there, and presenting this as evidence.
Quote:So you see, to my thinking, it has to be Montségur. End of story.Yep i guess that is end of story if you are going to hold onto your beliefs in the face of obvious problems with them being pointed out, supported with actual evidence (I am referring to Vviews' information about Montsegur).
Linda > 04-03-2019, 07:41 PM
(04-03-2019, 02:44 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'd classify those archaeologists as pseudo-scientists just like the Nazi archaeologists who went there searching for the Cathar treasure which was really no more than the VMS prophecies!
Linda > 04-03-2019, 08:43 PM
(04-03-2019, 03:24 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I was working under the assumption that the VMS depiction had some connection to the Cathars who escaped the siege on March 14, 1244, and, having lived there, those Cathars would have had a good idea of what that fortress looked like
Quote:The only medieval image of Montségur that I was able to find does not disagree with the VMS depiction (to the extent of the tower that is visible), and I found nothing in Inquisition records of the siege that would lead me to believe that the VMS depiction was inaccurate.
Quote:Common sense tells me that when there are no ruins (as I said, the stones of the Cathar fortress were removed from the mountain), there is little archaeologists can do. I also know that stone cannot be dated, so if there were any foundations there, it would be impossible to determine if it was the foundation of the pre-Cathar fortress of the 12th century or a post-Cathar foundation.
Quote:And not for one second do I believe that these archaeologists found the original, genuine blueprints for the construction of the Cathar fortress. If such a thing ever existed, the Inquisition would have burned it.
Know that Montségur, like the VMS, is a major field of quackery and scientists are not immune. So let's just leave it that you go your way and I'll go mine.
davidjackson > 04-03-2019, 09:28 PM
Quote: For example, I just learned that my home city used to have a magnificent medieval city gate close to where I used to live. It's been destroyed as recently as c. 1900 because they wanted to build a road there.The Spanish city of Almería has the largest Moorish fortress in Europe, even larger than the Alhambra, and the heart was built in 955.
Morten St. George > 05-03-2019, 01:17 AM
(04-03-2019, 08:43 PM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have since learned there were catapults on the top of the mountain but i dont think the second tower was built by the catapultists as an aiming assist.
-JKP- > 05-03-2019, 01:43 AM
(05-03-2019, 01:17 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
Let's make a deal. You find a tower that looks like that in northern Italy and I'll concede that you guys have a valid argument. Otherwise, you stop nagging me with questions on this matter and we move on to other themes.
Deal?
Morten St. George > 05-03-2019, 02:59 AM
(05-03-2019, 01:43 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is a remarkable statement. You don't seem to think that people have a right to question unsupported or poorly argued assumptions on a research forum?
Wow.