3 ms·

Largely for historical reasons: The materials that went into it would have been immensely expensive at the time it was written, and people generally had less fr

Largely for historical reasons: The materials that went into it would have been immensely expensive at the time it was written, and people generally had less free time back then. Meaning that the cost to do something like the Voynich Manuscript, in terms of both time and money, would have been much higher back then than they are now. That's not to say that it's impossible, per se, just that, if that's the conclusion we are to draw, then it would perhaps cast the Voynich as being even more singular than it already is.

village-idiot 8y ago
Most people had less time back then, but a few people had a lot of free time. “Bored noble” explains a fairly decent amount of artistic and scientific output before the industrial revolution.
- bunderbunder 8y ago
  There's also the angle that, in the same way that the text doesn't statistically resemble real languages, it also doesn't seem to be a great match for known examples of asemic text (e.g., Codex Seraphinianus), either.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    That’s really beyond my linguistic knowledge to comment on. All I’m saying is that a bored noble would have the time and resources to create an expensive work purely for their own entertainment. Humans have done far weirder things over the centuries than that.
    - bunderbunder 8y ago
      One would have, but there are also cultural barriers to consider. I'm no expert on late medieval or early renaissance Italian culture, but what amateur reading I've done paints a picture of a culture where the nobility may have been literate and able to write letters, but serious writing such as creating vellum books was still considered dull, dirty, grueling work that was beneath their station. Henry Darger (who was, IIRC, a janitor) was mentioned elsewhere in the thread. I think that you might get a more culturally comparable example out of the idea of Sarah Winchester whiling her time away in a manner more akin to how Edward Leedskalnin did.

village-idiot 8y ago

Most people had less time back then, but a few people had a lot of free time. “Bored noble” explains a fairly decent amount of artistic and scientific output before the industrial revolution.

bunderbunder 8y ago
There's also the angle that, in the same way that the text doesn't statistically resemble real languages, it also doesn't seem to be a great match for known examples of asemic text (e.g., Codex Seraphinianus), either.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  That’s really beyond my linguistic knowledge to comment on. All I’m saying is that a bored noble would have the time and resources to create an expensive work purely for their own entertainment. Humans have done far weirder things over the centuries than that.
  - bunderbunder 8y ago
    One would have, but there are also cultural barriers to consider. I'm no expert on late medieval or early renaissance Italian culture, but what amateur reading I've done paints a picture of a culture where the nobility may have been literate and able to write letters, but serious writing such as creating vellum books was still considered dull, dirty, grueling work that was beneath their station. Henry Darger (who was, IIRC, a janitor) was mentioned elsewhere in the thread. I think that you might get a more culturally comparable example out of the idea of Sarah Winchester whiling her time away in a manner more akin to how Edward Leedskalnin did.