28-12-2017, 04:11 AM
As end-note to this post.
First, investigation of Fr. Beckx' movements led me to a different conclusion than that which - until then - had been found in every Voynich-related site, including Voynich.nu which until then had strongly asserted and/or implied that Beckx had gone to Austria and therefore that the Vms had been among works obtained ultimately from that source.
Those assertions are no longer included on voynich.nu
No suggestion had been earlier made that the manuscripts which Voynich purchased had only come into Beckx' possession in Fiesole.
This suggestion is now to be seen at voynich.nu, though explained in a different manner.
One is grateful to Rene for making the phone calls or organising the conversations which confirmed that probability that Beckx' did not leave Rome with the Vms.
Once again, however, I would point out that this avenue was one opened by my own researches, hinted at only in two posts of March 2015 (before those conversations/phone calls) and that while Ellie Velinska is credited with having provided most of the information, there is no explanation of how, or why, such an idea occurred either to the owner of the blog, nor to th person named.
The end-result of the way in which the matter was pursued is that an important essay is unlikely to be included by my publisher - not because the research is unsound but because the line of argument was co-opted and published on a page whose date for these additions is so ambiguous that .. for perhaps the fifteenth or sixteenth time as the work has been prepared for publication - the issue of priority (and thus of rights) has been obscured.
The Libri connection is not in the least 'hypothetical' though in the hopes of avoiding such pre-emption (yet again) I led into it obliquely and expressed it in the same way online. The upshot is that while that essay offers new and valuable data which clarifies much about the issue of origin and transmission for the manuscript, the essay in question... and indeed the whole project.. may be cast into doubt. I take this possibility and consequent loss to the study seriously and can only regret others seem unable to consider the issues as matters of common principle not arbitrary preference.
And that, I think, is my last word on this subject or any other in this forum, one which - as I'll admit - I agreed to serve as co-founder on certain conditions which I felt essential if discussion was not to be constantly re-railed into the 'voynich.nu' track.
First, investigation of Fr. Beckx' movements led me to a different conclusion than that which - until then - had been found in every Voynich-related site, including Voynich.nu which until then had strongly asserted and/or implied that Beckx had gone to Austria and therefore that the Vms had been among works obtained ultimately from that source.
Those assertions are no longer included on voynich.nu
No suggestion had been earlier made that the manuscripts which Voynich purchased had only come into Beckx' possession in Fiesole.
This suggestion is now to be seen at voynich.nu, though explained in a different manner.
One is grateful to Rene for making the phone calls or organising the conversations which confirmed that probability that Beckx' did not leave Rome with the Vms.
Once again, however, I would point out that this avenue was one opened by my own researches, hinted at only in two posts of March 2015 (before those conversations/phone calls) and that while Ellie Velinska is credited with having provided most of the information, there is no explanation of how, or why, such an idea occurred either to the owner of the blog, nor to th person named.
The end-result of the way in which the matter was pursued is that an important essay is unlikely to be included by my publisher - not because the research is unsound but because the line of argument was co-opted and published on a page whose date for these additions is so ambiguous that .. for perhaps the fifteenth or sixteenth time as the work has been prepared for publication - the issue of priority (and thus of rights) has been obscured.
The Libri connection is not in the least 'hypothetical' though in the hopes of avoiding such pre-emption (yet again) I led into it obliquely and expressed it in the same way online. The upshot is that while that essay offers new and valuable data which clarifies much about the issue of origin and transmission for the manuscript, the essay in question... and indeed the whole project.. may be cast into doubt. I take this possibility and consequent loss to the study seriously and can only regret others seem unable to consider the issues as matters of common principle not arbitrary preference.
And that, I think, is my last word on this subject or any other in this forum, one which - as I'll admit - I agreed to serve as co-founder on certain conditions which I felt essential if discussion was not to be constantly re-railed into the 'voynich.nu' track.