| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 643 online users.
» 12 Member(s) | 626 Guest(s)
Baidu, Bing, Facebook, Google, Twitter, Grove, Juan_Sali, Lissu, Mauro, obelus, proto57
|
| Latest Threads |
Voynich Zoom CFP
Forum: News
Last Post: proto57
Less than 1 minute ago
» Replies: 35
» Views: 3,150
|
Water, earth and air
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: Linda
8 minutes ago
» Replies: 55
» Views: 11,598
|
The Book Switch Theory
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: Jorge_Stolfi
5 hours ago
» Replies: 131
» Views: 6,727
|
Can we go further?
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: Battler
5 hours ago
» Replies: 23
» Views: 791
|
No text, but a visual cod...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: Antonio García Jiménez
6 hours ago
» Replies: 1,688
» Views: 1,037,011
|
The origin of Fabrizio Sa...
Forum: Imagery
Last Post: Fabrizio Salani
7 hours ago
» Replies: 4
» Views: 227
|
The claimed Voynich page
Forum: Imagery
Last Post: Fabrizio Salani
8 hours ago
» Replies: 85
» Views: 13,439
|
f17r multispectral images
Forum: Marginalia
Last Post: Bernd
8 hours ago
» Replies: 114
» Views: 44,151
|
Why and how the text coul...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: JoJo_Jost
9 hours ago
» Replies: 87
» Views: 8,120
|
Voynich Marijuana Plant D...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: Bluetoes101
Today, 01:14 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 343
|
|
|
| Ironically, the watermark discussion was ended... |
|
Posted by: proto57 - 30-10-2025, 01:52 PM - Forum: Physical material
- Replies (1)
|
 |
The watermark discussion was ended by Tavie, and so my below response to Rene was not allowed. Perhaps this will be removed, too. But I point out that the issue is not whether or not the topics discussed are relevant to the discussion, but clearly because they rebut the narrative desired by the moderator. Ironically... or not... I actually point this out in the below post, which was never seen because the forum was closed before I could post it.
Mr. Jackson assured me, long ago, that this forum would not be adverse to discussions contrary to the 1420 Genuine European Cipher Paradigm. Since then I have found that is anything but the case. Perhaps Mr. Tavie came from a later date, and so has his own ideas, and feels it is proper and correct to censor content to only that direction... so even a discussion, on topic, about the watermarks on the Marci letter and what that might mean, should be banned.
So maybe this will be removed by Tavie, maybe it will be read by some. I don't know. But for the sake of honesty and completeness, here is the my response... on topic to watermarks... which should be of interest to the discussion:
(30-10-2025, 11:09 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is a good example of what Tavie pointed out: hashed and rehashed.
For an earlier discussion see (among others) here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
especially posts in the 20's+ range.
Well of course there is a world of difference with discussions here, in the Ninjas, as opposed to the raft of outside ideas which properly rebut them. Most of those don't show up here, as the Ninjas is heavily "genuine-centric" and 1420, and resistant to any findings, or interpretations, which point to other reasonable alternatives to that viewpoint. That is fine, of course, and I rarely... despite how it might seem to you... very rarely come here to give my alternative views and opinions and unmentioned facts which counter the narrative here. It ain't easy! It would take a massive amount of time and effort to point out each and every alternative to the readers here (...and I do not have a staff!). But I think it is important for the sake of an accurate picture of what the Voynich really is, so people are not led astray, and have the tools and information to make up their own minds. I see dozens of ideas, which originate here as opinions, which are then later being stated outside these pages as indisputable fact.... sometimes by the same people! Point being, you call it "rehashing" of ideas, I would say rehashing of viewpoints is not always beneficial, rather the introduction of fresh ideas is.
(30-10-2025, 11:09 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Let's stick to the watermark here.
(Had the watermark been from 2 centuries later - or earlier - we would have to have the other discussion).
Any forger in 1910-1912 would have been perfectly aware of the origins and dating of virtually all watermarks. Several very complete and important works on the subject, as we all know, and some have been discovering due to the recent revelation by Lisa, were already published by then. And, you know of course, that Voynich would have been aware of this, and had and sold blank paper from all ages.
So no forger with an ounce of sense, certainly not Voynich, would have used paper with watermarks from "from 2 centuries later - or earlier -". It would be inexplicable to find such paper, IMO: Would not be found in either genuine use, nor forgery use. But, we didn't find that. What was found was age appropriate paper, and so far, seemingly of Italian origin. If it is found in any other Marci letter it is strong evidence that the 1665/66 letter is genuine; if not found, it is evidence that age appropriate paper could have been sourced to create that letter as a forgery, because absence of evidence does matter, and is evidence.
Also on the watermark topic (I hope Tavie agrees), although a different book... you may not know this, but I was researching the 1475 Valturious De Ri Militari copies once owned by Voynich, and which ended up in the Library of Congress. I was... and am curious why Voynich, in his lifetime, only claimed to own one copy, when on his death, two were found. As part of my research I requested to see those copies, and permission was granted. I used a watermark lamp... which is comprised of lit sheet of plastic which can be inserted behind any page, which then evenly lights it and reveals watermarks. This is what I found in one of the copies (and is now in the records in the LOC for this manuscript):
This watermark... a Griffin (or Griffon)... was used in the 1470's, and is therefore not anachronistic for use in the Valturius. Likewise, the "three tasseled hat" watermark is NOT anachronistic to the 1665/66 letter, as you point out. But there is a difference in that we need to find contemporary examples in the other letters of Marci to compare it to. But also... and it seems you are doing this, too... finding the exact source and age of the specific three hat watermark is important, as some examples post date 1666. So there are several important things which can be learned from it, still, for all of us. Age, source, and finding it or not in the papers of Marci.
|
|
|
| The Modern Forgery Hypothesis |
|
Posted by: proto57 - 29-10-2025, 05:43 PM - Forum: Theories & Solutions
- Replies (482)
|
|
(14-10-2025, 01:27 PM)LisaFaginDavis Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I agree, Jorge - it would be great to find another Marci letter with the same watermark, but if one doesn't survive, there won't be any conclusions to be drawn. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It's worth remembering as well as that the letter at the Beinecke was written by Marci's secretary, so that might impact the paper stock that was being used.
Well the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" argument, while commonly used, and also, technically correct, also has serious problems and limitations. It is even considered a "fallacious" argument. This, especially in the case of the Voynich, in which case the limitations are painfully apparent, because, so far, despite thousands of eyes on every aspect of the entire number of existing "other" Medieval works, construction and materials, there are zero acceptable comparisons to the time of the C14 dating of the calfskin, nor any contemporary (to the C14) examples for many of the things noted about it.
Point being, as what point do we have to accept that "absence of evidence" is, indeed, evidence that this thing is unique, with no evidence to back it up as 1420-ish, like the calfskin? Does "zero", or near zero, count for evidence? I think so.
- There is zero provenance: Well, unless one accepts the counter-evidence of the descriptions in the letters of the Carteggio, the supposed 1903 catalog reference, or that Wildman (sp?) reference. These all range from poor and incomplete, to actually working against them referring to the Voynich we know.
- There are zero contemporary examples for You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Yes, I know, Lisa, you made the "absence of evidence" argument here, in pointing out, rightly, that only about 10% of all Medieval manuscripts still exist, so we don't know if one of those other 90% which are now lost did have similar foldouts. But the problem with that is that there is a principle in science, "sampling", which does afford a level of evidence that is acceptable. When, for instance, soil is "sampled", with only a smattering of samples, those results are extrapolated to the entire area, and considered as proof of the condition of the other many tons of soil. In fact, this is what was done in the case of the Voynich, in which only 5 samples were radiocarbon tested, and these results accepted as evidence of the age of the manuscript's calfskin (even, erroneously, as the date of the manuscript itself). And 5 samples from over 100 bifolos is only 5%. Yet we would not say that the "absence" of the "evidence" of sampling from those other leaves proves nothing.
So that 10% of remaining manuscripts is, likewise, a pretty good cross reference to the state of all Medieval manuscripts. So I would and do argue that the absence of any similar examples from them, for the foldouts, for the stitching, or any number of other construction methods and materials, of any of this 10%, is certainly "evidence of absence".
- Also, materials. For instance, two samples of the Voynich ink contain titanium... a question as to why has been frequently posed by me, and others, and has always been ignored. But interestingly, in the case of the Vineland Map, it is of great interest, and considered evidence of forgery. Yes, there seems to be a great deal more Ti in the Vineland map, and arguable over a greater area, both in and outside the ink (although this is heavily disputed). You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., used to show how RARE the finding of Titanium is in Medieval manuscripts. He tested or used the tests of 120 samples from 50 manuscripts, and only found titanium in the ink of one or two of them (unclear if it was two samples from one manuscript, or from two):
And, by the way, if that [those?] manuscripts include the Voynich, we have NO examples. Zero (I've written Hark three times, over several months, to find out, and he has not answered me so far). So in this case we see this use of "absence of evidence" very clearly being used as evidence, that the Vinland map is fake and modern. Conversely, no one would argue, as is done for the Voynich, that Mr. Hark's argument is flawed, because "we still have not tested the other of the 10%, and do not have the 90% to test, therefore we do not know if titanium was in these other samples. Yes, technically correct, but no, we have the test run, the sampling, and yes it is "evidence of absence".
- Virtually Zero contemporary (to the C14) examples for style, content, animals, plants... crosshatching, dress, zodiac iconography, "jars", and on and on.
So my question would be, again, just how much "absence of evidence" do we need before it becomes "evidence"? My answer you know, that this virtual abject dearth of such evidence is very loud evidence, in itself. And how much longer can we continue to argue that the supporting evidence is out there, we just have not found it yet?
I would also point out that the only way one can claim that any remaining evidence properly supports to the 1420 Genuine European Cipher hypothesis is to winnow out all of the great number of examples of evidence pointing to modern and fake: The striking examples in illustration to animals, plants, devices, styles, techniques, materials, construction methods, many noted by experts of the past, and even, by experts of today... acclaimed botanists, medievalists, paleographers, and even some from Yale's own expert staff!
That is, in order to claim "absence of evidence" for post-Columbian, and even, post 1900, is to not address that high number of instances of evidence pointing to these. So, as a result, we have, I argue, "Absence of evidence of 1420 Genuine, and a plethora of evidence of modern and illegitimate manufacture, and the only way to argue the former is to ignore the evidence for both".
And one more thing, topically pertaining to this watermark issue: I've seen the argument used here, in this case, (I even predicted that the proposed "scribe" would be so used in this manner, along with using them to "explain away" the many problems with the Marci letter) That, (paraphrasing), "Marci had other paper we will never see, and anyway the scribe wrote that 1665/66 letter, and we don't know how much paper the scribe had... heck we don't even know who that scribe was", and so on and so forth...
This, until we saw all the paper, by all these people, and could... technically... STILL argue "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"? Well it would still be technically correct, because always, that one piece of "three tasseled hat" watermark might have been on that one sheet of paper...
But I strongly disagree... if we don't find one in the Carteggio, or in any of the imaginary scribe's papers, or never learn who that scribe was to begin with... It is still, to me, and scientifically acceptable practice, to accept that this is evidence that other contemporary paper was used for this letter, and used to fake it. And, I would add, such evidence would be far from alone, as the content, style, fold lines, seal placement, and faulty Latin cannot not be ignored, and are part of the bigger picture here.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
|
|
|
|
| Deception by combination |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 28-10-2025, 09:53 PM - Forum: Imagery
- No Replies
|
 |
One of the reasons that VMs imagery is hard to interpret is that it was intended to be obfuscated and disguised by the combination of two otherwise separate, artistic elements. This sort of idiosyncratic merger creates a visual version of two factor authentication that has withstood a century of modern investigation. This has been due to a failure to recognize the VMs artist's choice of visual terminology, until the presence of adequate internet information and interested investigators, who were able to discover the various historical elements that make up the oxymoronic pairings in the most apparent examples of the VMs.
1. The VMs cosmic structure corresponds best to the historical illustrations of BNF Fr. 565 primarily, (with the 43 undulations) and to Harley 334, which has been placed inside an altered version Shirakatsi's wheel with curved spokes. As far as I know, there is no historical alternative to this structure and the historical possibilities are better than you might think.
2. The VMs mermaid and her companions correspond to the generic mermaid of Harley 334, primarily, and to the mermaid illustrations in Lauber. But here in the VMs, there is no generic mermaid. Instead, it is the changeling, mythical Melusine of Luxembourg, not the flying dragon, reputed ancestress of Bonne of Luxembourg, who was the mother of the Valois line - prominent in the VMs C-14 era.
3. The VMs critter corresponds to a representation of the Golden Fleece (start. 1430), much like the second example where a 'personality' is placed inside a structure. Here there is a very particular relationship with the structure of the Agnus Dei illustration in a particular text (BNF Fr. 13096) and its Burgundian (Valois) provenance.
Each of these combinations either makes sense or fails to make sense depending on the investigators' familiarity with the underlying reality. And for much of modern investigation, that underlying historical reality has been too obscure. The examples also show the VMs artist's intentional use of combined elements to create hybrid images. Combination to create deception. This is not the only form of VMs deception. With pairing to mark a proper path.
|
|
|
|
| How do paragraph-initial gallows effect a paragraph? |
|
Posted by: Skoove - 28-10-2025, 03:41 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (7)
|
|
Has anyone done a statistical analysis of whether which of the four gallows (or no gallow at all) is used as the first glyph in a paragraph effects the paragraph? I know that the gallows have varied paragraph initial frequency but it isn't immediately obvious to me what their effect on their paragraphs. Especially since different gallows are used as paragraph-initial on a single page.
I have always wondered if it is simply random, topic relevant, perhaps even marking which key to use for the following paragraph? Probably many more theories that one could (and likely have) come up with.
|
|
|
|
| The Voynich Manuscript as an Iberian-African Voyage Record |
|
Posted by: Kaybo - 27-10-2025, 03:17 PM - Forum: Theories & Solutions
- Replies (34)
|
|
I want to share some information with you, that may help others.
I think the manuscript is part of an early version of the Roteiro de Guiné, a travel report of the first travels of the Portuguese along the west coast of Africa. The book itself is from around 1500 (the Roteiro) and some researchers think its based on earlier encrypted reports.
Around 1400 the Portuguese started to travel at the west coast of Africa. The information were so valuable that the reports of the travels were encrypted. The Voynich manuscript could be a report that is a transcript of an early travel report. That would mean it could be a homophonic substitution ciphers, with special nautical words have their own letter combination (maybe indicated in the letter columns of the book, were one word is next to 2 letters). Because of the valuable information Portugal was leading in encryption at that time.
What are the hints that can be found in the manuscript. Nautical reports of that time consist of 3 sections a descriptive part of what has been found. Nautical travel information section and a section with the pure log book.
First, the plants that are shown in the manuscript have similarity with plants in Africa. For example the plant on page 34r is a protea. There are many other plants that have similarities, however since it is probably a transcript by a writer that has painted it from oral information transfer they all look like fantasy plants.
Naked woman at that time were a symbol for Africa and it is normal for that time that they are painted in white. It should show the difference between norther world and Africa.
The star section of the book (last pages) are probably the transcript of the log book. It contains a lot of repeating information in short paragraphs that are marked with a star. Its very similar to the log book of vasco da gama You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
In the nautical travel information section we find a lot of circles with stars and compass roses. The compass roses have a typical wind god face in the middle which indicates in which direction the wind blows typically in east direction (shown by the direction of the face). This is absolut typical for Portugal around 1400. We found a very similar face in the compass rose of the well known Cantino_planisphere You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. . Which was stolen by "Italy" from Portugal around 1500.
However, the most important hint is in the zodiac sign section. There are two circle diagrams of aries. One is with woman that have clothes and the other one is naked. This round diagrams have been used for the astrolabe that has been used to navigate at that time in Portugal. However, if you travel around the west coast of Africa traditional Astrolabe made for the norther hemisphere became useless. You have to mirror the stars to navigate in the southern hemisphere. This was the key point and key secret that aloud Portugal to travel south. The both circle diagrams of aries show the two astrolabe versions, woman with cloth for the northern hemisphere and woman without cloths for the southern hemisphere.
The jars that are shown are typical jars from Sierra Leone of that time. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Why its so hard to decipher the manuscript. Probably because of the homophonic substitution cipher paired with a very telegram style nautical log book style, maybe with a lot of
abbreviations and special nautical words. Maybe some special nautical words have there own combinations.
The paragraph sign is P or variant of the TT, which maybe indicates a new word, or that the TT is a P (for paragraph) or a C (for chapter). However, I am not a linguist. I just wanted to share the information that the manuscript could be a nautical report from the area of Henry the navigator.
Maybe you find other hints that support this theory, I am happy to discuss my findings. Sadly I have no access to very old books from Portugal, it would be interesting to read this copy of the Os mais antigos roteiros da Guiné Valentim Fernandes, Duarte Pacheco Pereira.
|
|
|
|
| Raymundi Lulli und Folio 67v |
|
Posted by: JoJo_Jost - 26-10-2025, 05:18 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (20)
|
 |
I found this wheel in Raymundi Lulli's book ‘Testamentum duobus libris vniuersam artem chymicam complectens’, published in 1566, and it reminded me of 67v of the Voynich Manuscript, only in a version that was 100 years younger and therefore more modern. But Raymundi Lulli lives 1232 / 1316.
To recognise the similarity, one simply has to imagine placing the two Voynich pages on top of each other, so the idea goes. Here we have the four elements: air, water, fire, earth, and the terms in the Voynich Manuscript in the four corners of the page could be the same words.
Chemical processes are described, for example: washing the black into the white (air), and then the various possibilities are described in the circle, for example through distillation, extraction, etc.
I then translated the page in its entirety and compared it with the texts in the rays on the second page – in the somewhat desperate hope of finding a key, but unfortunately I found nothing. Nor did I find anything in the other inscriptions, but perhaps someone else here will discover something I overlooked (which is certainly not unlikely)... But it could just as well be something completely different...
|
|
|
|
| The Voynich is for espionage and uses a key cipher. It has no inherent meaning. |
|
Posted by: Ransom - 25-10-2025, 03:09 PM - Forum: Theories & Solutions
- No Replies
|
|
Just sharing a possible way to reframe the VM - what if it's not a 'text' but an espionage tool?
There's a reason it defies linguistic analysis - like a Soviet numbers station, it relies on temporary keys for externally imposed meaning.
Think about it. The Holy Roman Empire or one of its constituent states needed spies, and few people could read or write. Memory was far more critical then as it is today - so the system it represents was ingeniously designed to enable even illiterate people to memorise, encode and transmit vast amounts of intelligence securely.
This would have allowed for widespread espionage in an age of low literacy, so anyone regardless of education level could reliably spy for the state.
I posit a three-part system:
(1)
Illustrations: Functioning as topical reference guides, forming mind maps and vivid memory aids to organise information visually and unambiguously.
Observe the resemblance of the plants to the modern pedagogical tool:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The plumbing and human figures could well be organisational charts for mapping out the structure and management system of say, a church, a city or a village. Think Renaissance LinkedIn.
Astrological charts may have been used to denote periodic patterns or strategic timing. This explains why they don't map to reality; they're meant to be memorable and 'sticky' to viewers, yet encode information in specific ways.
(2)
Text: A set of code words with familiar linguistic properties that make them easy to recall under pressure, yet meaningless without external keys.
Consider the song "Prisencolinensinainciusol" (1972), which is gibberish yet follows English cues and so is easy to memorise. This explains its resemblance to natural language and following of Zipf's Law.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(3)
Keys: The temporary and disposable assignment of meanings to the code words, ensuring operational security. There is therefore no 'sense' to be found in the text itself, and this explains the lack of punctuation and failure to 'decode' it.
Any written keys would have been memorised and destroyed, and any written references using a codename — thus explaining the Manuscript's uniqueness and lack of attestation.
Excerpts would have been copied for field use from this master volume, then used and destroyed on mission completion or periodically.
Crucially, this framework appears to satisfy all five of Lisa Fagin Davis' criteria (first principles, reprodicibility, accounting for linguistics and codicology,text that makes sense and integration with the illustrations).
More details on my Substack here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
|
|
|
|
| Inside the Voynich Network: graph analysis |
|
Posted by: quimqu - 24-10-2025, 11:35 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (104)
|
|
Hello all,
You may know I’ve been working on the Voynich Manuscript using machine learning and data science. Lately I’ve started a new line of research: the study of the Voynich through graphs.
Graph analysis is still quite new in languages studies, but it’s becoming a powerful tool in machine learning. It lets us see how words connect and interact. The idea is simple: each word (token) becomes a node, and we draw edges between them whenever they occur near each other in the text. Those edges can have weights (how often the pair appears), directions (which one comes first), and other information. When you do this, the text becomes a network, and that network has a structure we can measure.
In my case, I built co-occurrence graphs using a sliding window of 5 tokens. Two words are connected if they appear close to each other. I also repeated the same process for several other texts:
- Latin (De Docta Ignorantia, Platonis Apologia, Alchemical Herbal),
- La Reine Margot and Old Medicine French texts,
- Catalan (Tirant lo Blanch),
- Spanish (Lazarillo de Tormes),
- English (Culpepper),
- and a sample of the synthetic text generated by Torsten Timm.
Once you have the graph, you can study things like community structure, modularity, and assortativity: basically, how tightly the vocabulary groups together and how predictable those connections are. Well, yes, it looks this crazy...
The Voynich graph has thousands of nodes and over a hundred thousand weighted connections. It’s not random: it shows clear clusters of related tokens, similar to topic domains in real languages.
When comparing modularity (how strongly the graph is divided into communities) the Voynich ranks around 0.25. For context:
- Scholastic and alchemical Latin texts are around 0.28–0.33.
- Narrative texts like Tirant lo Blanch or La Reine Margot are only 0.14–0.19.
So the Voynich has a structured, technical-style network, closer to medieval treatises than to prose literature.
Nothing new here: I looked at entropy, which measures how predictable the next word is from the previous ones. Lower entropy means the text is more repetitive or rule-bound.
In this comparison, the Voynich again behaves more like Latin scholastic or medical texts, highly structured and formulaic, than like natural flowing prose.
To visualize everything together, I used a radar plot combining graph properties (modularity, assortativity) with token and character-level entropies. Each text forms its own fingerprint.
When we plot entropy (what should be the syntactic freedom) against modularity (what should be the lexical structure), each text takes its own position in what you could call a complexity space_
The Voynich lands right in the middle, between the tightly structured Latin technical and medical compilations, and the more free-flowing narrative works like Tirant lo Blanch or La Reine Margot. It’s not as rigid as scholastic Latin, but not as loose as prose either.
The same pattern appears when comparing character entropy (morphological freedom) to modularity: again, the Voynich sits halfway between those two worlds. This suggests the manuscript has an intermediate level of organization: structured enough to follow internal rules, but not fully regular like formal Latin treatises.
It might reflect a controlled or encoded version of natural language, or simply a writing system with its own conventions. It’s also interesting that the same language can produce very different results depending on the type of text: a Latin medical recipe and a Latin philosophical dialogue, for example, can have completely distinct structural profiles. That gives a sense of how much “style” and “purpose” shape the internal geometry of a text.
It’s also worth noting that the Torsten Timm generated text, which is algorithmic, shows a very similar position in this “complexity space.” That means internal consistency and structured co-occurrence can emerge from both linguistic and mechanical systems. So, these results don’t demonstrate that the Voynich encodes a real language, only that it behaves like a text with rules, not pure randomness.
As always, any thoughts are welcome!
|
|
|
|
| Pale texts |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 23-10-2025, 06:52 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (1)
|
|
Regarding faded ink and various retouchings: Here is a page of fairly pale text, but it does have scattered darker portions and does not appear to be reworked.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
|
|
|
|
|