Expert Opinion

[Mark Knowles]

Rich

You are welcome to consider everybody or nobody an expert on the Voynich manuscript.

On one level this is a semantic question i.e. what is your definition of expert. I clearly have a more exacting standard for what I consider makes an expert. Personally, I prefer, as I have said, to talk about specialists rather than experts. I want to ask what is the person's specialism and what do they know about the subject.

Again, we are actually in total agreement on the point of individual definition of who would constitute an expert or not. No argument on that, and there never was, from me. I do think your standard is "more exacting" than mine, and that of many, as you would say this person should be able to read and identify the Voynich (If forget your exact words), and that's great. So specialists, experts, knowledgeable people, and so on... everyone's prerogative, and I respect yours, of course.

But to reiterate, this issue does not alter my points here, or on my blog post, one iota, and only demonstrates those points in action. But I would ask, while I have you, would you consider a book cataloger an "expert on the Voynich"? Because on my list of pre-C14 experts, all are now off the list except for Lehmann-Haupt, book cataloger. He remains (well I think Rene introduced another, not in D'Imperio) the only pre-C14 dating "person" who guessed the age of those tests. If he is off the list, the tally is zero... or at best, one.

Would you retain his opinion? Its a genuine question, not trying to be annoying. There is a reason I ask.

Rich.

My point is that one may have specialists in related disciplines to Voynich research, but I don't think there are yet people who could be said to be expert on the Voynich manuscript.

I would have to know more about Lehmann-Haupt to determine what precise knowledge they have to bear. There are certainly specialists out there with relevant knowledge to the Voynich manuscript, but I suspect very few of them have been consulted. Generally, the individuals opinions we rely on are the ones who come to Voynich research not those we seek out, which gives us a very limited pool of expertise.

Have you consulted relevant specialists on forgery? If you had a number of specialists in forgery who endorse your analysis I for one would find that persuasive.