The Voynich Ninja

(02-05-2024, 07:26 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Edit, just to add a brief summary.


Imagine a 1911 faker who wants to create a fake letter by Johannes Marcus Marci.

What handwriting should he use? If he was really good, and had a lot of time to research, he might be able to find some original Marci handwriting that he could copy.
How could he come up with a handwriting that matches the handwriting of a real letter that only surfaced in 1930, and was not by Marci but by a friend to whom he dictated?

Well that is an easy one to answer: Your claim over the years that the Carteggio was "under lock and seal", and on this thread you wrote something a bit different, but essentially that there was no way for Voynich to have had access to the letters, at all, has never been proven by you. This seems to be entirely speculative, and is the only thing against the possibility Voynich knew of the letters, and could have had access to them.

Years ago I was also told that even the Jesuits didn't have access to the Letters, but on this thread... maybe elsewhere, too, I don't know... you say that it was only Jesuits until "after 1930".

But here's the thing: For over a dozen years... maybe over 15?... I have asked for proof of this, and you never have shown this. Yet you state it as a fact that Wilfrid would have had no access to the letters. Although part of the argument, years ago, was that he didn't know enough Latin to read them, which is of course irrelevent. Another claim was that the shear number of them would have made it impossible to know what was in them... it would have taken too long.

I sense that the reference you found which changed much of this was the same one I have referenced... some account of a Jesuit scholar studying the letters and writing something about them. Then is went from no one could have seen it, to only "non-Jesuits".

In other words, the goal posts move as we find out more, but you never tell us why you know, as a fact, that Wilfrid could not have seen the letters.

Lacking such proof, it is important to relate the true situation with the Jesuits, and Strickland, and the Villa Mondragone: It was an active college, and even a summer residence for various Jesuits. It was also a tourist attraction. And Strickland, who eventually ran the place, had attended there, his brothers had, also, and I believe he even taught there. Strickland was of course friends with Voynich, and Voynich even says he was the one who facilitated the sale... or like that, not in front of me.

Point being, rather than not having access to the letters, it is perfectly plausible, under the actual known circumstances, for the information about missing Baresh Manuscript, with the stars and unknown script and all that... to have been passed along to Voynich, maybe through Strickland. Maybe from a research work by a Jesuit. Perhaps directly from Strickland's interest in the letters.

So you ask us to, "Imagine a 1911 faker who wants to create a fake letter by Johannes Marcus Marci."

OK: Strickland learns, through a Jesuit professor, or because he was poking around in the letters, that they mention an amazing book, which was sent to Kircher eventually. Next time he speaks with Wilfrid... who would go to the Continent to ferret around for books... maybe Wilfrid stopped by the Mondragone? Not unlikely, given their friendship. Or maybe Strickland wrote to him, to tell him of the Baresch manuscript, and the Carteggio. And Strickland simply tells Wilfrid of this lead, to a book, in the letters. And then was even shown the letters, himself... so he could try to track down this very interesting and possibly valuable book. You know, just like Wilfrid was known to do, it was what we all admit he was good at.

We have the connections, we have the interest, we have the timing, we have the (now admitted, by you) Jesuit access to them. And we all can be pretty sure all things Kircher were of paramount interest and importance to them.

Yes this is one of many speculative, but also entirely plausible ways, this could have all transpired. Against the open and reasonable possibility, barring it, is you saying "lock and seal", but never showing the evidence this was every actually the case. It is, from what I can tell, pure speculation on your part, and not, from what I can see, based on the real situation we actually know of.

Rich.

EDIT TO ADD: You gave a parameter of 1911, I don't accept that. My timeline would suggest that Wilfrid became aware of the Letters sometime around 1907 to 1910.
EDITED AGAIN TO CORRECT: my line stating Rene's position on Jesuit access to the Carteggio

The events related to the creation of the MS are now 600 years ago. We know essentially nothing about the where, and who was involved. Finding any evidence about that is extremely difficult both due to the long time that has passed since, and the fact that there is no initial lead to narrow down the search.

Events related to the presence of the MS in Prague roughly span a time of 350-400 years ago. That is already a bit closer to us. In addition, many more records were kept, people used to exchange correspondence, and we have a relatively precise place to start looking. This is much more promising, and it has led to quite a bit of good evidence. In addition, there is a large amount of additional information surrounding the events and the people involved, that allow for different speculative reconstructions, so any further discoveries may extend our knowledge here. The key information in the archives of the Geizkofler family in Ludwigsburg, Germany, was only found in 2019 or so. It was found by going there and leafing through record books, because it is not online.

Now events related to the sale of the MS to Wilfrid are just over 100 years ago, and here we are in a very comfortable situation of finding out what happened, at least relatively speaking. I have been looking into this from before the year 2000, and this was triggered primarily by my wondering whether the pair of items (MS and Marci letter) could have been a fake by Voynich. The other thing that spurred me on was the remark by Mgr. Ruysschaert that he had 'seen something'.
This has been on-going for 25 years now, and everything I present on my web site related to these events is the result of this research. It would not have gotten to the point where it is now without the help from professional researchers in this field.

The single most critical item (which already appears as a short remark in ELV's letter, but is now known in great detail) is that Voynich did not just acquire the Voynich MS, but this was just one of a selection of 30+ valuable illuminated manuscripts.
This changes the perspective completely.

That Voynich faked it remains a story based entirely on a large compilation of "he could have done this" and "he could have done that". No evidence.

For example: he could have carried a contraption into the hidden library of the Jesuits and started copying signatures from one of their letters onto a blank piece of old paper, without the Jesuits objecting. (*)

I don't need to provide evidence that he could not have (but I already made it clear further above how likely it is). We are back at one of my earliest comments in this thread, namely that nobody will get convicted just on the basis that he 'could have commited the crime', with zero evidence.

I am not trying to convince you, Rich, but anyone who is seriously interested in this question has a whole lot of homework (=reading) to do.

- - - -

Note (*): fortunately, we now know that this whole thing is superflous, as the hypothetical faker could create an entire letter using many new words in the original scribe's handwriting, just by eyeballing the original.

(21-04-2024, 01:14 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Of course, I did not include the option that there is some complicity from the side of the Jesuits.
Not sure who wants to go there....

The Jesuits. It's always the Jesuits. Ask Dan Brown.

(02-05-2024, 03:26 PM)asteckley Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And from Rich's description of his experiments and research above, it appears he is the only one here is not "out of his depth".

Flat earthers do experiments.

(03-05-2024, 07:27 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The events related to the creation of the MS are now 600 years ago. We know essentially nothing about the where, and who was involved. Finding any evidence about that is extremely difficult both due to the long time that has passed since, and the fact that there is no initial lead to narrow down the search.

Events related to the presence of the MS in Prague roughly span a time of 350-400 years ago. That is already a bit closer to us. In addition, many more records were kept, people used to exchange correspondence, and we have a relatively precise place to start looking. This is much more promising, and it has led to quite a bit of good evidence. In addition, there is a large amount of additional information surrounding the events and the people involved, that allow for different speculative reconstructions, so any further discoveries may extend our knowledge here. The key information in the archives of the Geizkofler family in Ludwigsburg, Germany, was only found in 2019 or so. It was found by going there and leafing through record books, because it is not online.

Now events related to the sale of the MS to Wilfrid are just over 100 years ago, and here we are in a very comfortable situation of finding out what happened, at least relatively speaking. I have been looking into this from before the year 2000, and this was triggered primarily by my wondering whether the pair of items (MS and Marci letter) could have been a fake by Voynich. The other thing that spurred me on was the remark by Mgr. Ruysschaert that he had 'seen something'.
This has been on-going for 25 years now, and everything I present on my web site related to these events is the result of this research. It would not have gotten to the point where it is now without the help from professional researchers in this field.

The single most critical item (which already appears as a short remark in ELV's letter, but is now known in great detail) is that Voynich did not just acquire the Voynich MS, but this was just one of a selection of 30+ valuable illuminated manuscripts.
This changes the perspective completely.

That Voynich faked it remains a story based entirely on a large compilation of "he could have done this" and "he could have done that". No evidence.

For example: he could have carried a contraption into the hidden library of the Jesuits and started copying signatures from one of their letters onto a blank piece of old paper, without the Jesuits objecting. (*)

I don't need to provide evidence that he could not have (but I already made it clear further above how likely it is). We are back at one of my earliest comments in this thread, namely that nobody will get convicted just on the basis that he 'could have commited the crime', with zero evidence.

I am not trying to convince you, Rich, but anyone who is seriously interested in this question has a whole lot of homework (=reading) to do.

- - - -

Note (*): fortunately, we now know that this whole thing is superflous, as the hypothetical faker could create an entire letter using many new words in the original scribe's handwriting, just by eyeballing the original.

But Rene, you have, again, completely avoided the key point here... you still do not show the proof which supports your contention that it is a known fact that the Letters of the Carteggio were "under lock and seal", or in any way impossible for Voynich to have known about the contents of; and/or had access to.

And as I pointed out in my post, this has been going on something like 15 years or so... you claim Voynich could not have seen the letters, stated as fact. I counter with the simply question, "How do you know this?", and you deflect into other issues... how I am speculating, or something else.

Yes, I am speculating. But so are you. It is purely speculation on your part that the Letters of the Carteggio were locked up from view... now you say from "non-Jesuits until after 1930". Your continuing to state this as known, settled fact goes against your frequent admonitions to me and other to not claim opinion and speculation AS fact... and while I am clear my scenarios are speculative, you break your own rule here... and elsewhere.

Considering that we know that both of us are speculating, I offer that my speculative scenarios are based on the reality of the situation and people and their known associations and behaviors during the time in question, while yours seems to counter those realities. As I wrote previously,

"... it is important to relate the true situation with the Jesuits, and Strickland, and the Villa Mondragone: It was an active college, and even a summer residence for various Jesuits. It was also a tourist attraction. And Strickland, who eventually ran the place, had attended there, his brothers had, also, and I believe he even taught there. Strickland was of course friends with Voynich, and Voynich even says he was the one who facilitated the sale... or like that, not in front of me.

"Point being, rather than not having access to the letters, it is perfectly plausible, under the actual known circumstances, for the information about missing Baresh Manuscript, with the stars and unknown script and all that... to have been passed along to Voynich, maybe through Strickland. Maybe from a research work by a Jesuit. Perhaps directly from Strickland's interest in the letters."

Under these conditions, which are factual, combined with Voynich's known, accepted ability and talent at finding rare books all over Europe, it is not at all implausible, let alone impossible (which you constantly tell us to believe, with no proof of this), that Voynich was told given the information in those letters, and that he could have eventually seen them, himself. Not entirely necessary he had full access, even, but there is nothing barring this possible.

(03-05-2024, 07:27 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Events related to the presence of the MS in Prague roughly span a time of 350-400 years ago. That is already a bit closer to us. In addition, many more records were kept, people used to exchange correspondence, and we have a relatively precise place to start looking. This is much more promising, and it has led to quite a bit of good evidence.

But Rene, with respect, it has led to exactly "zero" evidence so far. Nothing you wrote, above, either addresses my long time request you back up your own speculations with any proof the Letters were "under lock and seal", but also, you substitute this implication that the provenance has already been found, and/or is just around the corner.

You insist that we accept your vision of the Voynich as the "default", in an earlier post. Yet you only offer, still, speculations guises as factual. It is not your facts against my speculations, it is both our speculations based on the same facts, despite the image you try to present. In the case of our speculations about how or if Voynich could have learned of, and seen the Letters, my speculations fit what we know; while yours still do not.

It is like this for most of the defense of the 1420 Genuine European Cipher Herbal: The application of varying, hypocritical standards to accept or reject evidence as needed, and claiming speculative unknowns as fact; while forgery works with consistent standards, and what we really know, and plausibly works within them.

Edited to add:

(03-05-2024, 07:27 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I don't need to provide evidence that he could not have (but I already made it clear further above how likely it is).

Actually, in this case, you do: for you have stated it as fact, many times, that the Letters were "under lock and seal", that is, to counter mine, and the speculations of others, with that absolute. Then, in these conversions, you revert to the claim you are saying it is "likely", that is, not proven fact (which of course, it is not).

But in effect, you have used this version, and I will accept it as your answer: "Lock and seal" IS purely speculative on your your part, you do not know this was the case, at all, and so it is possible that Voynich learned of the contents of the Letters, and may have seen them. You consider it unlikely, I consider it plausible he did, and that is the only difference between our positions.

(03-05-2024, 11:24 AM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(02-05-2024, 03:26 PM)asteckley Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And from Rich's description of his experiments and research above, it appears he is the only one here is not "out of his depth".

Flat earthers do experiments.

And zealots deny the results of experiments.

(03-05-2024, 01:27 PM)asteckley Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(03-05-2024, 11:24 AM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(02-05-2024, 03:26 PM)asteckley Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And from Rich's description of his experiments and research above, it appears he is the only one here is not "out of his depth".

Flat earthers do experiments.

And zealots deny the results of experiments.

I don't know if you are endorsing flat-earth theory or not here, if you are then that would explain a lot.

As a general remark about this thread, it would be good if we could stick to arguments and stay far away from ad hominems. Involving other participants' character, qualifications etc is not going to help us.

That said, I don't see how arguments will help us here either, since the whole thing is so convoluted. If I were to check back here in a month, my money would be on nobody having changed their opinion about the core of the matter.

@Rich
I took a closer look at your picture of the parchment warehouse. Apart from the confusion, where it is already questionable whether it is even possible to keep order for 500 years so as not to mix anything up.
In a period of time where every building undergoes several renovations and thus also moves inventory.
The way the parchment is stored alone would be an invitation and a buffet for insects. It's just too much of a breeding ground. Apart from mould and mice. But I still can't find any traces on the inside pages of the VM.
Consequently, he would have to have read the parchment for his forgery, which makes it even less likely to find clean parchment of the same age, and in the required quantity.
What is your explanation?

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

(03-05-2024, 03:55 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As a general remark about this thread, it would be good if we could stick to arguments and stay far away from ad hominems. Involving other participants' character, qualifications etc is not going to help us.



That said, I don't see how arguments will help us here either, since the whole thing is so convoluted. If I were to check back here in a month, my money would be on nobody having changed their opinion about the core of the matter.

I absolutely agree with you on the use of ad hominems, Koen, and thank you for saying this.

I also agree that there is no changing minds here, but also would say that I am not so sure that is anyone's actual intent. It is not mine. In these discussions, sometimes heated, it is ideas that go head to head. And I think all of use learn how the others think, the evidence they consider, how they form their opinions, what is evidence and what is fact... and so much more.

Even the ad hominems tell me something, even though they are not a good idea and shouldn't ever be used.

But actually much has changed in this discussion. The goal posts have moved in all directions, all over the court, and that actually surprised me. Some of these issues have been hashed out for years, with very little movement, and some have actually moved. That may not be as apparent to some who are newer to the field, or otherwise innocently unaware of some of the more esoteric details of the investigation... but this minutia is all profoundly important, whatever position one holds.

This is the first entire Ninja thread of which I have saved, in fact. It is to me a sort of microcosm of the whole genuine/fake discussion, with almost every type of argument and detail discussed to the best of everyone's best ability. It is fascinating to me, and very valuable, moving forward.

But one other thing: This discussion has not, and will not, change the minds of anyone here... or, I think it will not... but this has drawn a great deal of interest to the Voynich community as a whole, and actually enlightened others to points they were previously unaware of. Several have written to me, personally... a few people I had never heard from before, because of this. And I'm sure it has been the same case for my friendly opposition, arguing against my ideas.

TLDR: No more ad hominems, I agree; and no minds will be changed here; but the conversation has been, and will continue to be, IMHO, valuable, interesting and informative for many, and for years to come.

All the best, Rich