7 ms·
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 be
by 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 agoThere'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 agoThat’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 agoOne 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.