The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[ReneZ]

even if I take Bolton as a smoking gun of a forgery. (You probably correctly detect I don't; like a lot of "looks like" theories, I don't see correspondences that are particularly discriminating, and I could just as soon take the looser parallels I do see as suggestive it was the sort of thing Rudolf II would have been interested in purchasing.)

Bolton's book is more of a distraction. It is a fact that Voynich knew of the book and used it.
However, this is after Voynich came into the possession of the MS and the Marci letter.

Some evidence that Voynich used the book is in Rich's blog post. The notes by Voynich he refers to were transcribed by myself, and are now online (and more complete) in the Beinecke Lux archive, see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., footnote 15.

I include below transcriptions (there may be some typos) of a few letters exchanged between Voynich (in the US) and his London staff Herbert Garland. Of course, if Voynich knew all the time who were Tepenec, Marci, etc, he was putting up a show, lying to Garland (and to the director of the Prague archives for that matter) and sending him off on useless errands.
Edit: not sure why this does not appear like a short scrollable window?
Note also that the correspondence with the Prague archives is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

Dr. Raphael is a specific problem. He does not appear in Bolton and he does not appear in the Kircher correspondence. Garland also could not discover who he was. This came from the Prague archives. We lack any explanation how Voynich could have faked the Marci letter that includes his name.

 Letter 2 transcription
{Voynich letter head with the Sessa logo}
14th Feb.1920    [suspicion that the year should be 1921, see below]
2 sheets attached [in pencil] [these would be _202729 and _202742]
Dear Mr. Voynich,
As I gather from your letter that you are in urgent need of materials about Tepenecz, I am sending the results of inquiries up to date to catch today’s mail. In case your lecture is before I can send further details (if any) you will, no doubt, like to have what there is.
In the first place, you will be interested to know that such a person as “Jacobus Tepenecz” existed, though perhaps you already knew that. Also he fits in with the Rudolph circle. The contradictions in the details I have found require clearing up. Perhaps you can consult a copy of the 4 vol. continuation of Born in America. This obviously is an important reference and it is unfortunate that I cannot see it here. I have not had time yet to try botanical biogs.and bibls. I suppose the statement in Bolton that he was Director of the Botanical Gardens is based on something. I cannot be sure that Jungmanna did not simply copy Balbinus about the theological book and I have yet to find out from whom he got the idea of Tepenez being a Jesuit. I have looked in Backer under the various forms of the name, but cannot see him there. I don’t know whether you know Bolton’s book, but though untrustworthy from a scientific point of view, it may be useful to you in other ways.
There is no time to write more. So with best wishes and kind regards.
Yours sincerely,
Herbert Garland.
 
 


 
Letter 3 transcription
{Voynich letter head with the Sessa logo}
22 Feb.1920       [suspicion that the year should be 1921, see below]
Dear Mr. Voynich,
Herewith are some more particulars about Jacub Horcicky y Tepenec. I ont think I shall be able to get anything more here.
I find that the popular book mentioned in my last letter is more of less “written up“  from a work by Josef Svatek. Naturally I am hampered by not knowing Bohemian, but I consulted the only book in the B.M. by Svatek on the subject and skimmed don likely pages for names and succeeded in extracting the enclosed passage. So far as I can see he gives no authorities and it looks as though he may be quoting from Jungmann. His book is perhaps known to you. If not I imagine you ought to see it as it is two vols. of essays mainly about Rudolph.
On the botanical side I have consulted a friend (without of course giving the actual object of my inquiry), a learned botanist, who spends his time mostly pondering  about Kew.  I enclose his letter, which confirms my impression, gained at the B.M., that there is no likely book here on the subject.
It may also interest you to know that a new work based on Jugmann is apparently in course of preparation, the first part being published (dealing with incunabula) in 1910. I suppose the war has suspended operations.  It was being prepared by Dr. Zdenek V. Tobolka, Scriptor C.K.Verenjne a Universitit ni Knihovny v Praze. The work was published by: Prazem, Nakladen Ceske Akademie Cirare Frantiska Josefa pro Vedy, Slovesnort a Uzmeni.
A fantastic idea has struck me. Boton says that when Dee and Kelly went to Prague they first stayed at an inn the “Golden Ball”, whose landlord “Zdenko was one of the greatest gossips in Bohemia” (I don’t know where he gets this as I could not see the name Zdenko in Svatch’s article on Dee and Kelly). In the extract I sent from Balbinus there is a mention of a “Zdenkoni cancellario regis” in the dedication of the Confessionem Catholicam. I don’t know whether the name was a common one at that time, or whether one of the same family had got up in the world, was a friend of Horcicky’s and had given him the Bacon which was stolen from Dee on his arrival!
With kind regards,
Yours sincerely,
Herbert Garland.
A Mr. Savage has just called to enquire how you are as he had not seen you lately at the Café Royal.
 
 
Letter 4 transcription
Cipher MS – Re history of  {pencilled in by A Nill}
February 25, 1921
Mr. Herbert Garland,
175 Piccadilly,
London, W., England
Dear Mr. Garland,
I most sincerely thank you and congratulate you upon the information you found about Tepenecz. Without your help I should have been unable here to discover that Sinapius was Tepenecz. I had all the details about Sinapius as I have the details of everyone connected with the court of Rudolph. In fact I even have the names of the lovers of his daughter, but I never connected Sinapius with Tepenecz. At the time when I wrote you about this I also wrote to Prague about Tepenecz and about a certain Dr. Raphael who is mentioned in the letter attached to my Bacon MS. Now, as you have succeeded about Tepenecz perhaps you will be successful with Dr. Raphael. I know only that he was Dr. Raphael, perhaps Rev. Dr. Raphael and that he taught the Bohemian language to King Ferdinand III. This means that he was in the same set so you ought to consult Balbinus and Jungmanna. At first I assumed that he was a Jew and ransacked the Jewish sources so please don’t waste you time on that. Now I think he may have been Rev. Dr. Raphael, which would make him easier to trace.
Yes, I know Bolton by heart. I am so glad you succeeded about this as the personality of Tepenecz fits like a glove into my story and in addition this is actual documentary evidence that my MS. was at the court of Rudolph.
As my lecture on the MS. will be on the 20th of April there is plenty of time to get all this additional information, although you quite understand that the sooner I get it the better.
I shall also ask you for the following information:
Mardochaeus de Delle – he was a jester poet at the Court of Emperor Rudolph, and wrote funny stories about Dee, Kelly and Sinapius. Perhaps you could consult all his publications, if not in the Br. Mus. then in other libraries, and who can tell perhaps somewhere he speaks about the Bacon cipher MS.
Jacopo di Strada, from Mantua – Perhaps you can find out something about or by this man. His name was changed by patent of Rudolph into Von Rossberg. His daughter lived with the Emperor and was the mother of three of Rudolph’s children.  He died in 1585, just at the time when my MS. came to Prague, while he was Director of Rudolph’s Museum. His son, Octavius, upon the death of his father, becamse the director of the Museum and he was followed in his turn by a famous crook, Dionysius Miseroni. Perhaps something relating to the MS. is mentioned in connection with these people.
The French archeologist, Jules Caesar Boulinger, made a valuation of the gold and other articles in the museum. Perhaps he speaks somewhere about my MS.
As I told you in London that there existed in Rome twelve volumes in MS. of Kircher’s correspondence. These volumes are lost but it appears that in the 18th century one volume of his correspondence was published. I can’t get the book here and who can tell perhaps it contains correspondence with Marcus Marci or about the mysterious personage who bequeathed the MS. to Marcus Marci, and who says himself that he corresponded with Kircher about it. You understand what I want – look through this volume of correspondence for any reference or hint about my MS.
Also please look through the Histories of Rudolph II by Joseph Svatek to see what he says about the discussions between Rudolph and Dee about Bacon.