(04-09-2025, 04:19 PM)RobGea Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Re: the post above : Zero historical evidence.
Not quite zero...
The three-column table on You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. is clearly someone's attempt to find a substitution cipher. Even if not by Marci (whose handwriting is said to match), it must have been centuries ago.
Marci's letter attached to the VMS states that he showed the manuscript to Rapahel.
Marci's letter and the letters of Barschius to Kircher show that Barschius wanted to know its meaning, so much that he wrote to Kircher for help.
The ex-libris on the VMS, IIRC, was that of Petrus Beckx, head of the Collegio Romano at the time of the fall of Rome.
All the best, --jorge
(05-09-2025, 03:45 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (04-09-2025, 04:19 PM)RobGea Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Re: the post above : Zero historical evidence.
Not quite zero...
The three-column table on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is clearly someone's attempt to find a substitution cipher. Even if not by Marci (whose handwriting is said to match), it must have been centuries ago.
Marci's letter attached to the VMS states that he showed the manuscript to Rapahel.
Marci's letter and the letters of Barschius to Kircher show that Barschius wanted to know its meaning, so much that he wrote to Kircher for help.
The ex-libris on the VMS, IIRC, was that of Petrus Beckx, head of the Collegio Romano at the time of the fall of Rome.
All the best, --jorge
From the time of its creation until the 17th century, there is no evidence of systematic attempts to decipher the manuscript – it was treated more as a curiosity. In 1665/66 Athanasius Kircher made the first attempts at interpretation, but these were more erudite speculations than scientific research. In the 17th–18th centuries the manuscript circulated among Jesuits and collectors (e.g. Marci), and the attempts made were humanistic in nature and unsystematic. Only from the beginning of the 20th century, after Wilfrid Voynich rediscovered the manuscript in 1912, did serious cryptographic and linguistic analyses begin – ones that can truly be called scientific.
I must admit, your consistent defense of a position lacking any real foundation has the charm of a rare, if peculiar, perseverance.