Voynich theories and Voynich solutions

[MarcoP]

Hi Koen, I am sorry, but I disagree with most of your statements:

We cannot perform any (additional) tests on the artefact.

The artifact still exists. Of course (thanks god) bloggers are not allowed to perform tests on it, but scientists can.

There is no context at all. We know it was moved into Prague, at which time the ties to its origin had long been severed.

The illustrations provide a huge quantity of contextual information (the labelled illustrations in particular). Do you believe the illustrations to be completely unrelated with the text? What do you think "context" means?

We don't know at all where it was made.

We know quite exactly when it was made and we have a number of stylistic hints to where it was made. We clearly don't know exactly where it was made, but antiquarian-archaeological analysis is the kind of activity that can tell us more about this (see Panofsky, Toresella, Sniezynska-Stolot, Touwaide). Do you think it likely that the ms was not made in Europe? Any evidence?

Manuscripts are not necessarily culturally and linguistically consistent or homogenous.

Do you have reasons to be believe that the different sections of the ms are written in different languages? Of course, everything is possible, but the most interesting possibilities are those that are supported by some kind of evidence. Any examples of linguistically inconsistent manuscripts that could parallel the VMS?