The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against

[Jorge_Stolfi]

I would believe the Chinese theory in an instant absolutely and without any questions if on the first folio of the manuscript in plain good old Latin the author wrote: "herein you will find my rendering of a few Chinese medicinal books read to me by a Shaolin Monk and written in a script of my invention" or anything similar

Sure, that would have solved the problem.  But the fact that such a plain intro is missing does not imply that it was meant to be a secret.  

As long as the book remained in possession of the author, such an intro would be totally unnecessary. 

Why wasn't such an intro added when the book passed to another owner?  Maybe it was, but then it probably was a separate sheet of paper.  Like Marci's letter when he sent the VMS to Kircher.  Which may have easily got lost, or used as tinder or birdcage liner, ... Or removed by a book trader who thought he could get more money for the book if he claimed it was Roger Bacon's.  (No, I am not referring to Voynich, but to Widemann.  Or maybe to Voynich, who knows...)

Or maybe the book left the Author on his death, like when it went from Barschius to Marci.

In library archives one finds many manuscript books from the time which have no such introduction.  That is where paleographers justify their salaries...

All the best, --stolfi