[Book] New book

[proto57]

... there isn't any new evidence or discussion of existing evidence, just blanket denial that there is any evidence of provenance before 1912:

The provenance before 1912 is purely speculative (or fake) and undocumented for lack of evidence.

I've read it (skipped many chapters about historical background and various irrelevant hoaxes that fill 99% of the book) and found no argument: Voynich did it, period.

Well I am in the rare position of agreeing in this case of an argument FOR forgery. But "yes", I agree his argument does not have much, if any, teeth to it. He does not point out the weaknesses and contradictions to the use of the Letters of the Carteggio as provenance, as I do, and feel I have. And he does not point out my recently posted argument that Voynich could have well seen the Letters or references... (although that was posted after his book was finished).

He may not agree with my thoughts on these points, but he has no substitutes for arguing against pre-1912 provenance... he just dismisses the Letter references. Actually, he doesn't seem to mention them! I just searched my kindle copy for "carteggio" and "sphinx" to see if those references are in the book, and I had forgotten he did have them, but they are not. He only relates the given Voynich time line partly implied BY the Letter references, but not the references themselves.

I hope this does not sound like a case of sour grapes on my part. But also, maybe, I am in an almost unique position to make these observations, as the point the author is trying to make is almost exactly the one I have particularly delved in, and for a very long time. I hope it is understood that if I thought he made that case, I would be ready to admit it, as it would back up my own... even if it hampered my own chance at publication. But I genuinely don't feel it does what it set out to do.

Rich.