A match for the containers? 16th-17th century ivory vases

[proto57]

That doesn't make sense. So much effort for a forgery—far too much effort. And some of these are very rare books—it's not very plausible just because he had access to libraries. Back then, even if these books existed, you still had to find them...

And what a lousy forger he must be, completely missing the point of what the times demanded—he can't have had much of a clue—after all, he went to all that effort for nothing....

You would quickly be disabused of these notions if you pored through a few old catalogs of these booksellers! I have... of several booksellers of his time, including Voynich's own catalogs, which I requested from the New York Public Library. Hundred, if not thousands of books are listed in there, written up by his book catalogers. Like Sowerby, who wrote about working for Voynich at 69 Shaftsbury, and the process of doing so. I also spent additional hours reading through dozens of Joseph Baer's catalogs of his Frankfort business. And others...

Me and Baer:

   

No, rare books were very well catalogued in collections, as well as illustrated in a great many books and catalogs. How about Bella De Costa Greene, managing, with her staff, the purchase and cataloguing of the collections of Morgan?... of booksellers, and libraries. Sure the internet vastly speeds things up, but the idea that it would have been very difficult at all to walk into a library in 1910, and not quickly find anything one wanted to... I did, in fact, as I did much research on various topics long before the internet. Card catalogs were set up to find any work on any topic, and included "q.v." references for related topics.

But Voynich did not just have access to libraries, he had these collections of his own. That picture I posted, the black and white of all the bookshelves, you know that was of his "Libreria Franceshini", in Florence, right? It had over 500,000 items of all types... books, brochures, magazines, newspapers.

But here is another thing: It is an error for one to apply the "difficulty" in finding a comparison between an object or illustration, to a Voynich illustration, in order to project that it "would have been just as difficult" for him to do it. This is not correct, because if said item was used by him, as a forger, he didn't have to look for it in the same way... he plucked it from some source he liked, and probably found at hand. It is US who then have to try and find that connection... and that of course is more difficult. He just needed to turn to a shelf and pick a pretty picture.

Also, many of these sources I feel are used are limited... I mean, it is only four books on microscopy which cover many of the illustrations I and others have suggested as being in the Voynich... like maybe a dozen in those four books... NOT a dozen books, I mean.

As for the "effort for nothing" you mention... if you mean "because he could not sell it", then, sure that was the outcome. But how would he know that WOULD be the outcome? And also, part one of forging something is fooling people, second is selling it (if they want to... he did, but not all forgers create for profit- some do it for art or political reasons or the fun of it or the challenge). He achieved the former (if I am right), and only failed at the latter because, in part, people found the result too questionable to invest in. So it was stuck in limbo... good enough to fool many, but poor enough to keep them from putting their money where their mouth was.

What I mean is, his inability to sell the thing... and Kraus's inability, too, by the way... is really a damning trait to authenticity, because people want proven authentic items before they pull out their wallet. Look at the Vinland Map forgery: I think it was Mellon who bought that for Yale, and I believe it is thought he gave them $300,000 for it... a staggering sum. But he had a stipulation, and that was that Yale authenticate it at first. So they controlled access to the map to those who would write a favorable review. They even published a beautiful, large book attesting to just how real the thing was. So the donor said "yes" and rolled out the cash for that dog.

... the Voynich Manuscript had no such backer. Why? Did Kraus first want them to buy it? Kraus had to hand it over to Yale for free, or for a tax write off, probably. Hey I just realized... if he did, how much did he write it off for?

Peas in a pod?:

   

[gerrydelasel]

Exacltly, why would a forger go to such trouble to produce something so badly? Mediocre handwriting, child-like drawings, what's the incentive? They produced a curio, not a valuable object.

[JoJo_Jost]

Not everything that might make sense in theory is necessarily true...

[JustAnotherTheory]

FYI, you can find digital images of Voynich's La Sfera here:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Some of its imagery reminds one of the VMS:

   

[DG97EEB]

FYI, you can find digital images of Voynich's La Sfera here:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Some of its imagery reminds one of the VMS:

I posted this a couple of months ago

[R. Sale]

If you look at the content and structure of the VMs cosmos (f68v3), you will see that it does not conform to the relevant standards of the era. [15th C. 1st half] There are no depictions or references to the classical planets.

The VMs cosmos is built from the combination of two disparate elements by an artist that was familiar with both. Was it Jorge's 'clumsy copyist'? Or was it someone who knew what they were doing? What the VMs artist was doing was testing the reader's knowledge. Does the reader see the game that is being played? It is a game of pairing, allegorical interpretation, heraldic canting, and structural confirmation. It is obfuscated by a lack of artistic skill and intentional visual diversity - the appearance of ambiguity. 

The VMs cosmos is only one example of the artistic tricks. The investigation of White Aries (f71r) clearly shows the intentional creation of structural duality. Identification depends on interpretation. Historical perspective is essential. Melusine replaces the generic mermaid. Nine Muses can be hidden in a half-arcaded pool. Trickery exists throughout. The trick is to make a connection with the linguistic content of the VMs. The clue is as plain as day.

[JustAnotherTheory]

If you look at the content and structure of the VMs cosmos (f68v3), you will see that it does not conform to the relevant standards of the era. [15th C. 1st half] There are no depictions or references to the classical planets.

I also noticed that. Very strange. Another clear missing element in that section are the month, year, or computistical tables. Diagrams of the spheres and the cosmos were (almost) always accompanied by tables. 

Where are the planets, where are the tables?

[JoJo_Jost]

I don't quite understand what this sale by La Sfera is supposed to prove? It is not disputed that Voynich was an antiquarian, that is, a dealer in old, rare books and manuscripts. That is, first and foremost, the reason why he acquired the “Voynich” manuscript and also tried to sell it. Nothing more.

To conclude from this that he forged the book because he had access to medieval illustrations is, at first glance, a circular argument that neither refutes one claim nor proves the other.

In fact, given that he possessed this knowledge, he could just as easily have believed the book to be genuine.

After all, these circular diagrams were very widespread in the Middle Ages. In the tradition of medieval teachings, they can be traced back, among others, to Iohannes de Sacrobosco (*De Sphaera*) and certainly also to the *Ars Magna* of the Mallorcan philosopher, logician, and theologian Ramon Llull.

But the roots of these diagrams go back much further. Zodiac signs in the form of a circle can be found in Egypt, Arabia, and elsewhere.

But the depiction of maps in circles is also ancient: One of the oldest T/O maps (year 560 / 630)

   

"A T and O-style mappa mundi (map of the known world) from the first printed edition of Isidore's *Etymologies* (Kraus 13). The book was written in 623 and first printed in 1472 in Augsburg by Günther Zainer (Guntherus Ziner), making Isidore’s sketch the oldest printed map in the Western world.”

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I don’t see where this discussion is going. Or am I misunderstanding something here????

[proto57]

I don't quite understand what this sale by La Sfera is supposed to prove? It is not disputed that Voynich was an antiquarian, that is, a dealer in old, rare books and manuscripts. That is, first and foremost, the reason why he acquired the “Voynich” manuscript and also tried to sell it. Nothing more.

To conclude from this that he forged the book because he had access to medieval illustrations is, at first glance, a circular argument that neither refutes one claim nor proves the other.

But the reason, the point, of demonstrating Voynich's access to all these materials was not to "... conclude... that he forged the book..."- of course it does not, and I don't, and I know of no one who says this.

Ironically the reason was to counter your very own, earlier claim, in this very thread, in which you had written,

That doesn't make sense. So much effort for a forgery—far too much effort. And some of these are very rare books—it's not very plausible just because he had access to libraries. Back then, even if these books existed, you still had to find them...

When you wrote this, I and others were explaining that, in fact, he had ample access to hundreds of thousands of books, many of them his very own. But I see you actually do agree with this level of access now, with, "It is not disputed that Voynich was an antiquarian, that is, a dealer in old, rare books and manuscripts."

Yes, and that is the only point here, to dispel any claim he would not have had easy access to the necessary sources, not at all to say this alone means he had forged the Voynich. Those are different arguments entirely.

But I also note that, in this very thread in fact, we see an example of my "Voynich Theorem #1" being borne out... for most of the examples being discussed are admittedly and demonstrably either owned by Voynich, or somewhere he is known to have visited, and even, a couple, a short stroll from his Florence Libreria. That is another important aspect of this... it is not just that these comparisons are compelling, it is that they were either in print by 1910, or somewhere he plausibly, or is known to have, visited.

[R. Sale]

IMO, there is a sort of categorical difference between the standard T/O representation with Asia in the top half (etc.), which is a geographical map, and the *inverted* T/O representation, with water in the *bottom half*, depicting three elements, as in BNF Fr. 565 and Harley 334, both produced in Paris.

The VMs representation is an *inverted* T/O structure. However, it is not a pictorial representation. The VMs representation is literary - based on vords. The structure remains the same. Any similarity of appearance is totally gone. In comparison, this is called a code shift. The structural connection between 565 and the VMs cosmos is confirmed by the matching count of 43 undulations in the cosmic boundary. It's the same cosmic structure.