14-09-2016, 06:11 PM
Tisq, Tisq,
I believe the VMs analysis was performed by McCRONE, not McCLONE. That would be toooo punny.
Additionally there are two points that have been raised in the matter of possible forgery, which have never been addressed by the forgery proponents.
1) The blue mushrooms in the recipe section (f91 or there about).
The 'magic mushrooms' of European origin were always thought to be Amanita, which is red with white spots. The effects of Psilocybe species, which stain blue when cut or damaged, were not recognized until the research of Gordon Wasson in the 1950s in Mexico. Some decades later, Psilocybe species were discovered in the Balkan area.
(Investigations by SteveD on VMs-list)
Why are blue mushrooms in the VMs? They would not have have been know to modern science before WMV's death. If they were copied from another source. Where is that source? Wouldn't that source have more value than the forged copy?
2) The Fieschi connection to Roger Bacon
Based on armorial heraldry, ecclesiastical heraldry and a number of positional confirmations, I have made the argument that VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is a representation of the Fieschi involvement in the origin of the tradition of the red galero. Anyone can use the same illustration to make the same arguments. However, in order for appropriate material to be included in the illustration, someone who was familiar with the history of the origins of this tradition needed to take the relevant information and construct the images properly. History records that Ottobuono Fieschi and Roger Bacon knew each other. (Goldstones' "The Friar and the Cipher")
So, given that WMV was promoting a connection between Roger Bacon and the VMs, that the illustration demonstrates valid connection to Roger Bacon, and that the construction of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. requires the knowledge of relevant information, *why* was there never a hint of any of this ever even suggested? No mention of heraldic possibilities whatsoever by WMV. Assuming that he knew what was in the the illustration, having put it there himself, would he never make the slightest reference to this historical connection when it would do so much to support the connection he definitely wanted to prove? It seems very unlikely.
And, again, if copied from some unknown original source, doesn't a greater value reside with the original and not with the copy?
.
I believe the VMs analysis was performed by McCRONE, not McCLONE. That would be toooo punny.
Additionally there are two points that have been raised in the matter of possible forgery, which have never been addressed by the forgery proponents.
1) The blue mushrooms in the recipe section (f91 or there about).
The 'magic mushrooms' of European origin were always thought to be Amanita, which is red with white spots. The effects of Psilocybe species, which stain blue when cut or damaged, were not recognized until the research of Gordon Wasson in the 1950s in Mexico. Some decades later, Psilocybe species were discovered in the Balkan area.
(Investigations by SteveD on VMs-list)
Why are blue mushrooms in the VMs? They would not have have been know to modern science before WMV's death. If they were copied from another source. Where is that source? Wouldn't that source have more value than the forged copy?
2) The Fieschi connection to Roger Bacon
Based on armorial heraldry, ecclesiastical heraldry and a number of positional confirmations, I have made the argument that VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is a representation of the Fieschi involvement in the origin of the tradition of the red galero. Anyone can use the same illustration to make the same arguments. However, in order for appropriate material to be included in the illustration, someone who was familiar with the history of the origins of this tradition needed to take the relevant information and construct the images properly. History records that Ottobuono Fieschi and Roger Bacon knew each other. (Goldstones' "The Friar and the Cipher")
So, given that WMV was promoting a connection between Roger Bacon and the VMs, that the illustration demonstrates valid connection to Roger Bacon, and that the construction of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. requires the knowledge of relevant information, *why* was there never a hint of any of this ever even suggested? No mention of heraldic possibilities whatsoever by WMV. Assuming that he knew what was in the the illustration, having put it there himself, would he never make the slightest reference to this historical connection when it would do so much to support the connection he definitely wanted to prove? It seems very unlikely.
And, again, if copied from some unknown original source, doesn't a greater value reside with the original and not with the copy?
.