New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?"

[asteckley]

Thank you Rich, for the clarification that the reference to the "other" page is not believed to be the same as the manuscript in question.
I assume that is a common consensus. (If not then my question about why there are not other examples of Voynichese or why Kircher would not know the difference between same and similar, remain unanswered.)

Without the reference to the Ilyrian,  the entirety of the connection from any of the letters to Voynich's manuscript reduces to the following words by Baresch and Kircher (listed down below.)

Unless there are other descriptive words somewhere that I have missed (entirely possible) then these Latin words alone,  however properly translated, must provide sufficient evidence that the two manuscripts are one and the same.
If they do not, then none of the other discussion about possible provenance of the letters or authenticity of them or who knew what, why, or when makes any difference because it would all depend on the less than sufficient evidence being true despite its weakness. If it happens to be true, all the other stuff helps learn some interesting circumstantial facts, but if it just happens that it is not true, then all relevance of the circumstantial evidence evaporates.
I can't stress the above enough, since it seems not to be grasped by many people.

(As to whether the words below do constitute sufficient evidence that the manuscripts are one and the same, I'm making no judgement.
To me it depends on just how common or rare it would be for other manuscripts to be floating around at the time that
could also be plausibly described by these Latin words. And I haven't seen that question addressed by anyone with that expertise, which I certainly don't have.)

I've listed the specific Latin source (in red) and the translated versions below each in green and blue from chatGPT and the philipneal.net site respectively (which agree fairly well - other than "alchemical secrets" vs "chemical symbolism")

Baresch states:
1. Scriptura in cognitorum characterum inutiliter
chatGPT: a script in unknown characters
philipneal.net:  writing in unknown characters

2. Ex pictura herbarum, quarum plurimus est in Codice numerus, imaginum diversarum, Astrorum, aliarumque rerum, faciem chymicorum arca norum referentium
chatGPT:         pictures of herbs, numerous in the Codex, and images of stars and other things suggesting alchemical secrets
philipneal.net:  pi. pictures of herbs, of which there are a great many in the codex, and of varied images, stars and other things bearing the appearance of chemical symbolism

3. herbae peregrinae, in Volumine depictae, notitiam hominum in partibus Germaniae subterfugientes
chatGPT: exotic herbs painted in the Volume, knowledge escaping the people in parts of Germany
philipneal.net: pictures of exotic plants which have escaped observation here in Germany

Kircher states:
4. Caeterum libellum nescio quibus steganographicis mysterijs refertum
chatGPT:          the small book filled with I know not what steganographic mysteries
philipneal.net:   the book filled with some sort of mysterious steganography