01-09-2020, 09:18 PM
ReneZ,
Thanks again, I agree with much of what you said about the C-14 dating. The problem lies in the magnitude of the "windows" of uncertainty. My analogy would be a comparison with early telescopes that lacked the power to resolve more distant objects, which might be singular, binary systems star clusters, or nebulae. And then it required another advance in telescopic power to resolve the nebulae as distant galaxies.
The C-14 situation in the VMs is what it is. The result of the C-14 test is a 'probability distribution'. The C-14 test does nor determine the number of different annual batches of parchment production. Like an early telescope and with only four samples, the C-14 test cannot resolve different production batches that may be separated by several decades. The uncertainty is just too great. The minimal range in the most limited scenario is still over three decades.
Your comment below has me confused.
"The more samples you take, the greater the chance that any one of them is at one of the far ends of the probability distribution."
In my view, if there are two or more non-identical sample results, one will be at the earlier end of the time-line and one at the more recent end. Taking more samples is not going to change this. If all samples come from the same source, more samples should tend to form a cluster, while samples from different sources may tend to extend the time-line, if those sources are sufficiently distinct. There's always going to be a sample at either end of the time-line. The choice of method by which the data is interpreted is also going to have some effect on the results.
Regarding the illustrations, you said: "None of these can be used." What use can be made of illustrations?
I disagree. The use that can be made of illustrations is comparison. The standard cosmic representation in the era of VMs parchment is the geocentric version surrounded by the concentric spheres of sun, moon, planets, stars. A few cosmic illustrations of this time present a more simplified representation. The basic description: A central, inverted T-O Earth, surrounded by stars, enclosed in a cloud-band with 43 undulations, is a description that matches only two examples, the VMs cosmos and the 'Oresme' cosmos produced in Paris about 1410 and originally owned by the Valois duke, Jean de Berry. The date is within the VMs C-14 dates.
The Valois connection, including the dukes of Burgundy, is significant because (among others) the Valois claimed descent from the mythical Melusine, through the ruling house on Luxembourg, in the person of their mother. The comparison between the VMs image of the pond scene of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is then comparable with the similar scene in f. 57 of Harley 334 - which was produced in Paris, dated 1425-1449 / or/ 1430-1440. It is recorded that a device used to celebrate the tradition of Melusine was present at The Feast of the Pheasant in 1454. The choice of interpretation between Melusine and Minnie, the generic mermaid, is the individual's choice of interpretation. Tradition, however, has its thumb heavily on one side, IMHO. And a long unrecognized tradition at that. And, incidentally, in the latter part of the Hundred Years War, up until 1435 the Anglo-Burgundian alliance controlled Paris. And after that the Burgundians allied with the French, so not booted out then either.
While the description of the comparative structure of the two cosmic illustrations can be shown to be equivalent, you wouldn't know it by looking. Just starting with the central Earth, Oresme is pictorial; VMs is linguistic. Nothing could be more visually different. It's called a code shift. The same information provided by differing methods. This says a lot about the problems of interpreting the VMs illustrations. One needs to know *what* something is in order to properly understand it according to traditional interpretation. Appearance has been intentionally manipulated to create ambiguity. Heraldic canting also comes into play. And like the nebuly line, one cannot properly interpret something without knowing its traditional name.
As these items suggest the potential consideration of connections to the Duchy of Burgundy during the parchment dates, one can hardly neglect the various investigators that have suggested the interpretation of VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as depicting the Golden Fleece. This is a stronger and more specific connection. And the combination of structural similarities with the Agnus Dei image in BNF Fr. 13096 helps to reinforce potential Burgundian provenance.
The use that I see for these illustrations and their interpretations is that they appear to move the descriptive terms applied to the VMs away from Aztec, Cathar, or Turkish, and toward something that just might be more realistic and based on history and tradition.
Thanks again, I agree with much of what you said about the C-14 dating. The problem lies in the magnitude of the "windows" of uncertainty. My analogy would be a comparison with early telescopes that lacked the power to resolve more distant objects, which might be singular, binary systems star clusters, or nebulae. And then it required another advance in telescopic power to resolve the nebulae as distant galaxies.
The C-14 situation in the VMs is what it is. The result of the C-14 test is a 'probability distribution'. The C-14 test does nor determine the number of different annual batches of parchment production. Like an early telescope and with only four samples, the C-14 test cannot resolve different production batches that may be separated by several decades. The uncertainty is just too great. The minimal range in the most limited scenario is still over three decades.
Your comment below has me confused.
"The more samples you take, the greater the chance that any one of them is at one of the far ends of the probability distribution."
In my view, if there are two or more non-identical sample results, one will be at the earlier end of the time-line and one at the more recent end. Taking more samples is not going to change this. If all samples come from the same source, more samples should tend to form a cluster, while samples from different sources may tend to extend the time-line, if those sources are sufficiently distinct. There's always going to be a sample at either end of the time-line. The choice of method by which the data is interpreted is also going to have some effect on the results.
Regarding the illustrations, you said: "None of these can be used." What use can be made of illustrations?
I disagree. The use that can be made of illustrations is comparison. The standard cosmic representation in the era of VMs parchment is the geocentric version surrounded by the concentric spheres of sun, moon, planets, stars. A few cosmic illustrations of this time present a more simplified representation. The basic description: A central, inverted T-O Earth, surrounded by stars, enclosed in a cloud-band with 43 undulations, is a description that matches only two examples, the VMs cosmos and the 'Oresme' cosmos produced in Paris about 1410 and originally owned by the Valois duke, Jean de Berry. The date is within the VMs C-14 dates.
The Valois connection, including the dukes of Burgundy, is significant because (among others) the Valois claimed descent from the mythical Melusine, through the ruling house on Luxembourg, in the person of their mother. The comparison between the VMs image of the pond scene of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is then comparable with the similar scene in f. 57 of Harley 334 - which was produced in Paris, dated 1425-1449 / or/ 1430-1440. It is recorded that a device used to celebrate the tradition of Melusine was present at The Feast of the Pheasant in 1454. The choice of interpretation between Melusine and Minnie, the generic mermaid, is the individual's choice of interpretation. Tradition, however, has its thumb heavily on one side, IMHO. And a long unrecognized tradition at that. And, incidentally, in the latter part of the Hundred Years War, up until 1435 the Anglo-Burgundian alliance controlled Paris. And after that the Burgundians allied with the French, so not booted out then either.
While the description of the comparative structure of the two cosmic illustrations can be shown to be equivalent, you wouldn't know it by looking. Just starting with the central Earth, Oresme is pictorial; VMs is linguistic. Nothing could be more visually different. It's called a code shift. The same information provided by differing methods. This says a lot about the problems of interpreting the VMs illustrations. One needs to know *what* something is in order to properly understand it according to traditional interpretation. Appearance has been intentionally manipulated to create ambiguity. Heraldic canting also comes into play. And like the nebuly line, one cannot properly interpret something without knowing its traditional name.
As these items suggest the potential consideration of connections to the Duchy of Burgundy during the parchment dates, one can hardly neglect the various investigators that have suggested the interpretation of VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as depicting the Golden Fleece. This is a stronger and more specific connection. And the combination of structural similarities with the Agnus Dei image in BNF Fr. 13096 helps to reinforce potential Burgundian provenance.
The use that I see for these illustrations and their interpretations is that they appear to move the descriptive terms applied to the VMs away from Aztec, Cathar, or Turkish, and toward something that just might be more realistic and based on history and tradition.