How exactly are you going to fund your trips to these far-flung libraries where you need to do your research? Enrolling in a Ph.D. program wouldn’t help you much. Being a Ph.D. candidate doesn’t guarantee you funds for your research.
I think that what you need to do first is to contact some of the experts on the Voynich Manuscript and explain to them your theories on its translation. What you need most of all is not a degree but a dialogue with other people interested in the subject. You need someone who knows the work done on the manuscript and is willing to tell why your theory is reasonable and worthy of further research or is silly and obviously wrong. They might be able to tell you whether it’s useful to get a degree in some related subject.
You start with the most respected writing on the topic and that will lead you, via the bibliographies, to an ever-expanding list of resources. But you must read the most respected writers on the topic as your starting place.
You also use indices and databases, which have not only gotten better, but are much more computerized.
When I did my undergrad and garduate research in physics, I used **Physics Abstracts, Science Citation Index, Chemistry Abstracts, ** and even the Cumulated Index Medicus. These listed papers by topics, and you could find the research you were interested in. Once you found a paper, you could follow its references back to other references. You could also find relevant papers from recent books on the topic. And, of course, working with people in the field and talking with them at conferences got you links to still more information.
When I wrote on mythology, I was very frustrated – there were humanities indices, but they weren’t as comprehensive as the scientific indices. I actually went through entire runs of some journals by hand, issue by issue, to search for references. And it’s not just recent books that are useful – I found that A.B. Cook’s monumental Zeus was a treasure trove of obscure references (on all myths, not just Zeus).
Now, of course, you have computerized databases. Web of Science (probably accessible at your local college library) encompasses the Science Citation Index and several of those other indices I used, and it will automatically list the citations of papers, but also which papers cite the paper you’re ;looking at. And there are plenty of other databases.
And the humanities databases are infinitely improved even over what they were when I was researching my book. The JSTOR files are particularly useful, if you can get on to them. I can through my membership in the Classical association, and also through the Boston Public Library.
Finally, Google Scholar is the Poor Man’s Database, accessible from any internet-linked computer. You can’t downloaad most of the articles (for free, at least), but it’ll help you identify them, and who cites them.
Well, yeah, I understand that. But being in a PhD program could at least give a person a chance to get a research-ship (not sure what to call it) somewhere. Besides, the one I mentioned, the Vatican Film Library, is not even 2 hours away from where I currently live, but they wouldn’t just let some random person in, would they?
Both of these are great ideas, and also ones that I have been doing for the past couple of years. I’ll probably just continue doing these sorts of things (and also stay enrolled in some class or another at some University wherever I end up moving to so I can continue to have access to their library’s JSTOR and other things).
A great idea. I HAVE done this, though my theory is not well-thought-out at all or anything, and as far as I can tell most of the experts are just interested amateurs like myself (though there are exceptions to that). However, I mainly began this thread not for specifics, but for more general ideas that I could apply to other subjects as well. Any ideas on getting in touch with experts on subjects that are way more obscure: things that are barely mentioned in Internet searches and have only brief mentions in one or two books or news clippings of the time?
I guess if anything, this thread has assured me that I DO NOT want to go into a doctorate program. It seems there is no guidance that the professors would provide that an interested amateur could not find out for himself.
The last line is no doubt there to discourage the merely casually curious and such skills are exactly what you’d expect formal training to provide. However, even if you can’t read medieval Latin handwriting, but turn up with a considered, specific request like “I’d like to see the illustrations in this, this and this” then, in this case, I would expect them to let you, particularly since their holdings are on microfilm.
Of course, if you don’t have such skills, you may want to consider how useful you efforts are likely to be.
That depends very much on the professor. In my field, which changes fast, I see people present papers all the time on things that had been worked on 25 years ago, and which were published in conferences or journals older than what is put online by IEEE. An experienced professor with lots of connections can suggest avenues you might not think of yourself. One with a new Ph.D might not.
One thing your advisor/professor can provide you is a conduit to getting published. He/she will either be an editor or know the editors of relevant reputable journals and that can be helpful in getting a paper published or at least peer reviewed. When you are in a PhD program you’ve joined an academic community that’s connected through conferences, symposia, etc. where like-minded people are engaged in research and idea exchange. Being on the outside is not the same thing.
It’s certainly possible to get into research libraries without a relevant degree. I wanted to read the manuscript of a C. S. Lewis book that’s in the Bodleian Library at Oxford University. I frequently go to conferences on the writings of the Inklings (which are a mixture of academics working on the subject and enthusiastic amateurs), so I know some professors who are known to be experts on the Inklings. I asked the Bodleian Library if I could read the manuscript when I was visiting there. They asked me to bring along a letter from someone who could attesting to my interest in the subject, and I got a professor who had written a book relevant to the Inklings to write a letter vouching for me. The Bodleian let me read the manuscript. This is why it’s useful to get into contact with the people working in your subject. (And, of course, I paid for all my own travel.)
However, as I said, it’s very unlikely that any university will give you money to travel to libraries where you can do research on manuscripts. They have some teaching assistantships for their students, but those are hard work and don’t include extra money for travel. They have a few fellowships, but those are very hard to get. You’re not going to get money for travel.
I actually suspect that there will be grant-giving bodies out there which would, in theory, consider giving a grant to someone without a doctorate. One should not underestimate the range, variety and quirkiness of the grants which are available. It would be just a question of not looking in the obvious places.
But no one is going to give money to a research proposal which is merely well thought-out. No, the standards are far, far higher than that. They would not (necessarily) be looking for detailed conclusions. But what they would expect is that you have a very clear sense of how you might reach some such conclusions. Unless you could show them that you had already established where most of the manuscript materials of likely relevance were located, that you had thought very hard about which of them were likely to be of most relevance and that you had a detailed strategy for how to go about consulting them, your proposal would be a non-starter. Whatever your credentials. And that is even before they considered whether your topic was more worthy than those of all the numerous rival applicants. That you haven’t understood this is another reason why you would be wasting everyone’s time expecting someone else to fund your research.
True. In the sense that the information is all out there and that a big part of what professors do for their doctoral students is to encourage them to find out what they need for themselves. But the all-important difference is that the professor can point out to the student what they could have worked out for themselves but haven’t. It is the easiest thing in the world for the novice researcher to overlook the most elementary tricks and then never suspect what they’ve missed.
I, too, am following research which, I believe, could lead to a major change in understanding of an ancient mystery. I have done lots of research unaided for past books, but those books were not proposing a new theory. I would suggest that the backing of an academic supervisor is invaluable (‘professor’ is used in a much more restricted way in Australia). All of what** APB **says, and more.
My supervisor is helping me structure and focus the research. I have so much material supporting the theory that I can’t contain it into publishable segments. She is also ensuring that I present at academic seminars, in a number of disciplines, to get the feedback to polish the work and ask the questions to clarify my argument. She has approached experts on my behalf. That formal approach has forced them to look at my theory and respond. The university then gave me a substantial travel grant - travel from Australia overseas is always expensive. Using the university’s name, I could gain access to research facilities and to curatorial assistance. Plus I have the assistance of an expert academic librarian who is confirming my sources, causing me to reject some - very important. She also has the skills to confirm that my theory is original and ensure that I am using the most respected and most recent research.
You may not want to do a PhD, which is fine. But the advantages of the company of these research experts must not be underestimated. I have read some stuff which has come from researchers outside the academic structure, on my topic, and they are clearly invalid, just because they didn’t know of the details of the topic which would have shown them that their argument could not be substantiated.
You know, this is very interesting to me. One of the people I have been in most contact with is someone from Australia who has done a lot of academic research into stuff like memory systems, archaeoastronomy, and navigation in ancient and medieval times…of course I realize that Australia is a big place, and I actually have no idea where this person is specifically located, but I wonder if you have ever talked with her at all. Just a funny little thing.
(By the by, I just did a quick search on your posts and on the second page read something that I guessed probably had something to do with the general subject of your research.)
My research certainly involves memory (and knowledge) systems in oral cultures, and thus archaeoastronomy and navigation. I don’t delve into medieval times though, other than to know about the memory theatre and art of memory - my work is entirely to do with non-literate knowledge systems and the application in archaeology. I can’t place contact with you - unless it was on a skeptical theme - the area for which I am better known. If so - I will reply to your last email very soon! I am intrigued! If it is not you, then I am very keen to know the Australian with whom I share so many research interests. My profile links to the real me. Maybe a PM? I don’t want to derail this thread!
You may actually be right, as far as the Voynich manuscript is concerned. I think that should tell you something.