Re: VMs: Link between Phaistos Disk & VMs...!?

[Nick Pelling <nickpelling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Wayne,

At 19:00 29/07/2005 -0400, Wayne Durden wrote:
>   Are you aware of how it was prepared or scraped that dates it, because if
> so, I would like to close down an avenue of inquiry?

AFAIK, the only commentator (Robert Babcock at the Beinecke, IIRC?) on this 
suggests a likely 16th century preparation date for the vellum. But his 
opinion isn't yet "beyond reproach", to use your phrase.

> In all seriousness, MS experts and archivists can't conclusively agree on
> the Vineland map whose C-14 datings were finally released in the new
> millenium.

FWIW, I think Professor Robin Clark's Raman spectroscopy analysis of the 
Vinland Map (which indicates a 20th century forgery) is by far the most 
credible and comprehensive of all the analyses done. True, I would have 
preferred a more comprehensive study of all the inks used there: but 
funding is funding, so you make do with what you can get. :-o

> Kind regards, but hoping you might have something a bit more compelling
> about the aspect of the parchment that says it is quattrocentro from 10 m.
> away so that I can shut down this line of inquiry.

In my last posting on this, I did include a list of evidential features 
which support the 1400-1500 dating claim, and there are plenty of others I 
could have appended (which I have posted on the list at various times). 
Which of the former were insufficient for your needs?

My original post noted the symmetry linking two claimed decipherments of 
two different objects, where both claimed that an "Old" (implying 
simplified & stripped down) Eastern European language was in use. To my 
eyes, John Stojko's "Baby God" reading fails to explain the internal 
structural features of Voynichese, and also fails to explain the pictures 
and diagrams at all.

However, this same criticism would almost certainly be true of just about 
any other "Old <x>-ese" plaintext claims that could be made. Right now, I 
would say that the simplest and most compelling explanation we have for 
those same curious statistics and curious structures is that they arise 
from some kind of curious encipherment. This alone would almost certainly 
date it to late medieval (if not early modern) times.

In terms of proof, I suspect you may be treating this as a criminal case 
rather than a civil one. :-) Having said that, I would agree that the 
quality of our expert witnesses is somewhat variable - just as in real 
life. But I guess we take that uncertainty as a given here, not as a signal 
for astonishment and silence (following Foucault). :-o

Cheers, .....Nick "I didn't do it" Pelling..... 


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list