How did I manage not to notice this conference before now? “Secrets and Knowledge: Medicine, Science and Commerce 1500-1800” runs from 15th-16th February 2008 at CRASSH at Cambridge University, featuring such stars as William Eamon (whose epic “Science and the Secrets of Nature” sits by my right shoulder) and Lauren Kassell (with whom I briefly corresponded about the Book of Dunstan back in 2001).
It sounds like a fascinating, fantastic mini-event, and I just can’t wait… even though I’ll probably be the only Voynichologist there. Does anyone else see the VMs as a mid-Quattrocento example of the “books of secrets” genre too? Apparently not… *sigh*
Really, sometimes I wonder if there’s anywhere I can go in this research that you haven’t been before me, Nick.
I thought the Classbook of St.Dunstan was a find of my own, and just wrote up something about it on my blog yesterday.
If you see this .. years out of date.. comment, would you consider putting the gist of the correspondence into a post?
Yours peevedly
Diane
Diane: I’ll have a root around for Book of Dunstan stuff for you, if I can wrestle all the cobwebs off my early Voynich box file (and if I can even find it, *sigh*)…
Nick – given that the proposed ‘Book of Dunstan’ translation by Alexander U. has weed-seeded itself as far as the Yale facsimile volume, and we now find everywhere that his ‘blossom’ is being substituted for ‘flower’ in mentioning the botanical images – would you care to map the history of this idea for us?
In case you haven’t come across Alexander’s paper, here’s a link to the pdf
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1604/1604.04149.pdf
Thanks
Diane: if I said that that paper was not worth the paper it wasn’t printed on, it would be within +/-5% of what I actually think.
Really, it would be several lifetimes’ work to go round the Internet pointing out the holes in shoddy and meritless Voynich theories, let alone constructing cladistic trees mapping how bad ideas get disseminated from one nonsense theory to another, an endless network of nodes within a vast virtual confederacy of dunces.
But don’t let me stop you.
Nick,
I noticed that paper hadn’t been reviewed by you or any of the more respected specialists in linguistics (Emma Smith, Anton Alipov etc.) but then again its ‘blossom’ idea and unexplained invocation of the Book of Dunstan – without mention of you at all – would seem to indicate some sort of theory-agenda or other rationale. Inexplicables always appeal to my curiosity. In like to ask – and if possible get an answer for – ‘Why?’ questions. I think you once said that you prefer questions of other types, though. 🙂
Diane: if it was an interesting paper, I’d happily review it or discuss it. Unfortunately, it neither glitters nor is gold. 🙁
Nick,
Understood – though actually it wasn’t his book but the Book of Dunstan idea I was asking about.
ntw.
I would very much appreciate a reference to the point in the Yale phito-facsimile, where the proposed translations of Alexander U. are reflected.
Rene,
How kind of you to ask. I’m writing a short article – which is why I asked if Nick would revisit his earlier conversations about the Book of Dunstan. When the article is finished, I’ll leave a note and link here.
The Yale volume texts were written and finally reviewed before this article came out…