04-01-2026, 10:37 AM
This forgery theory is not so subtly shifting the burden of proof.
To claim a forgery in 1910 (so recent!) please explain how the vellum which would be blank and centuries old could be written on and then weathered and show such distress and use without destroying it.
You must also explain the required resources needed for this forgery and the strange counter motive choices made.
He would need a master callirapher, but then choose an artist with Picasso levels of creativity and instruct them to illustrate like a gradeshcooler.
Why would he leave out all references to popular esoteric knowlede?
Seriously, the level of genius and stupidity required not to add a single hieroglygh precludes any possibility of this being a forgery from 1910.
To claim a forgery in 1910 (so recent!) please explain how the vellum which would be blank and centuries old could be written on and then weathered and show such distress and use without destroying it.
You must also explain the required resources needed for this forgery and the strange counter motive choices made.
He would need a master callirapher, but then choose an artist with Picasso levels of creativity and instruct them to illustrate like a gradeshcooler.
Why would he leave out all references to popular esoteric knowlede?
Seriously, the level of genius and stupidity required not to add a single hieroglygh precludes any possibility of this being a forgery from 1910.