24-06-2019, 04:39 AM
It's universally agreed that Roger Bacon had nothing to do with the VMS for obvious reasons, but what's less clear is why that was ever supposed in the first place. The theory's origin can be traced to Mnisovsky via Marci's letter to Kircher:
"Dr. Raphael, tutor in the Bohemian language to Ferdinand III, then King of Bohemia, told me said book had belonged to the emperor Rudolf and that he presented to the bearer who brought him the book 600 ducats. He believed the author was Roger Bacon.”
It's also generally agreed that there's nothing in the contents of the MS itself to suggest a Baconian origin. All the 20th century scholarship on the subject was clearly a post-hoc contrivance predicated on this letter. Had there been no such letter it's entirely likely that no one would have ever thought to mention Bacon.
What I'm curious to know is why did [font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Mnisovsky assume it to be the work of Bacon in the first place? If we accept that there's nothing to indicate Bacon in the VMS itself, then we must assume that the theory arose for other reasons. I believe the most likely alternative is that he was either told this by somebody else and was merely passing on the information to Marci, or that he himself made the assumption based on circumstances of the MS's arrival in Rudolf's court. Either way, I find myself returning the same individual: John Dee. At the time, Dee had the world's largest known collection of Bacon's works at his home library in Mortlake, and held him as a personal hero. Dee was an associate of Edward Kelly who himself had a working relationship with Karl Wideman. I know positing Dee as the seller has long been out fashion, and that's not the point I'm trying to make. Dee may not have been the seller, but I cannot think of a simpler, more compelling, explanation for the origin of the Bacon theory as other than having something to do with Dee. [/font]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Dee may not have ever touched the VMS in his life for this to still be true. It's entirely plausible that it was sold to Wideman via Kelly sometime after Dee's departure from the continent. He could have easily claimed that it came from Dee's Bacon collection which would have been perfectly consistent with his well documented charlatanism. Regardless of whether or not the VMS was in the possession of Dee, I'd like to know if there is a more compelling source of the Bacon theory other than stemming from the world's most prolific Bacon devotee who happened to be in the right place and right time for such a idea to catch on? For if not stemming from Dee in some way, why not claim a Czech or German author? Or a scholar from anywhere but England for that matter? [/font]
"Dr. Raphael, tutor in the Bohemian language to Ferdinand III, then King of Bohemia, told me said book had belonged to the emperor Rudolf and that he presented to the bearer who brought him the book 600 ducats. He believed the author was Roger Bacon.”
It's also generally agreed that there's nothing in the contents of the MS itself to suggest a Baconian origin. All the 20th century scholarship on the subject was clearly a post-hoc contrivance predicated on this letter. Had there been no such letter it's entirely likely that no one would have ever thought to mention Bacon.
What I'm curious to know is why did [font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Mnisovsky assume it to be the work of Bacon in the first place? If we accept that there's nothing to indicate Bacon in the VMS itself, then we must assume that the theory arose for other reasons. I believe the most likely alternative is that he was either told this by somebody else and was merely passing on the information to Marci, or that he himself made the assumption based on circumstances of the MS's arrival in Rudolf's court. Either way, I find myself returning the same individual: John Dee. At the time, Dee had the world's largest known collection of Bacon's works at his home library in Mortlake, and held him as a personal hero. Dee was an associate of Edward Kelly who himself had a working relationship with Karl Wideman. I know positing Dee as the seller has long been out fashion, and that's not the point I'm trying to make. Dee may not have been the seller, but I cannot think of a simpler, more compelling, explanation for the origin of the Bacon theory as other than having something to do with Dee. [/font]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Dee may not have ever touched the VMS in his life for this to still be true. It's entirely plausible that it was sold to Wideman via Kelly sometime after Dee's departure from the continent. He could have easily claimed that it came from Dee's Bacon collection which would have been perfectly consistent with his well documented charlatanism. Regardless of whether or not the VMS was in the possession of Dee, I'd like to know if there is a more compelling source of the Bacon theory other than stemming from the world's most prolific Bacon devotee who happened to be in the right place and right time for such a idea to catch on? For if not stemming from Dee in some way, why not claim a Czech or German author? Or a scholar from anywhere but England for that matter? [/font]