Koen G > 04-11-2019, 07:34 PM
Quote:Dear Mr Gheuens,
Thanks for your message. I have noticed indeed that incorrect information is circulating about my October 14 talk. I'll be happy to answer your questions in writing, via email. If you want to send me a list of such questions, please, do feel free to do so. This email address is correct.
Looking forward to hearing from you, many thanks.
Best wishes
[font=Garamond, Georgia, serif]Alain Touwaide[/font]
bi3mw > 04-11-2019, 07:47 PM
davidjackson > 04-11-2019, 08:17 PM
Koen G > 04-11-2019, 08:59 PM
(04-11-2019, 07:47 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.My question: Do you think that the VMS is rather a composite manuscript of the early 15th century or a forgery of the modern era ?
davidjackson > 04-11-2019, 09:04 PM
(04-11-2019, 08:59 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Alan also leaves open the possibility that it is a 17th or 18th century forgery. I think the real question is along the lines of "Do you think this is a late medieval manuscript created in good faith or one that was created at a later date with a specific intent to deceive?"Quote:My question: Do you think that the VMS is rather a composite manuscript of the early 15th century or a forgery of the modern era ?Something along these lines must certainly be asked, and it is probably the most important thing we'd like to hear some extra info about.
Koen G > 04-11-2019, 09:12 PM
davidjackson > 04-11-2019, 09:14 PM
nablator > 04-11-2019, 10:48 PM
(04-11-2019, 09:14 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Prof Touwaide bought the subject up, and it is commonly known as the SantaColoma modern forgery theory, so I can't see why not. Note that he did not endorse it, but he has seen fit to mention it.Let's clear the possible misunderstanding between "modern" (16th century +) and 20th century.
Koen G > 04-11-2019, 11:25 PM
RobGea > 05-11-2019, 12:07 AM