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

[proto57]

Without the reference to the Ilyrian,  thenthat  means that 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.

Well there are more descriptions, and I think I've covered them all here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Perhaps I've left something out, but I don't think so. Anyone, let me know if I did forget a mention in the letters, or elsewhere.

(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.)

Yes I would say that is an accurate assessment of the situation. How many, if any, manuscripts would fit the description these men gave, while wearing their shoes to get a sense of what they meant by it all. For instance, what languages were, to them, in "unknown characters", but which would also have stars, what they would see as "chemical symbols", and so on. Not what we, today, would consider fitting those descriptions.

And as I've said before many times, if it is not the Voynich, it may still exist. It may be online, in fact. Or at least, in any of the places that the other Kircher books ended up. I think I looked through some of the Kircher collections, can't remember which ones or how many... but that is something I really want to get back to.

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

That is really wonderful! That's going in my notes, for certain... it's a "keeper".

Rich.