The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[ReneZ]

As I wrote before, when investigating the possibility of malfeasance by Wilfrid, we must disregard completely everything that he said or wrote, and every piece of material evidence that he could have forged, adulterated, planted, mislabeled, etc.   And, to be safe, do the the same for anyone who may have been his accomplice.  Such as Strickland...

When assuming the malfeasance of Wilfrid, one has to do that. This is when it becomes a conspiracy theory.

When investigating his malfeasance, one has to judge each aspect.

Example: was the Marci letter a good piece of evidence for the Roger Bacon origin of the Voynich MS, worth of all the complications and risk in creating it?

Given that he really wanted the letter to refer to Rudolf I, contemporary of Roger Bacon, and not Rudolf II, my opinion on that is quite clear: he found this letter in the book. Easy explanation. Fits everything we know.

Others may have different opinions... But I would suggest letting it sink in for a while.

Other example to wonder and ponder about:

The evidence that Marci sent the book to Kircher, beside the Marci letter (which would not have existed if it is a fake), is one line in a letter from an unimportant Bohemian named Kinner, referring to 'our common friend Dominus Marcus', asking about an explanation of 'that arcane book'. How does that connect with a 28 years earlier letter, in another volume, from a completely unknown guy describing a book on his bookshelf in Prague? Which does not mention Marci? The most common themes throughout the Kircher correspondence are books and languages and riddles.

For us, with hindsight this connection is possible, because we know the MS exists, we know what it looks like, and we know that Marci sent it to Prague. All of that would not have existed. 
(It is hard to remove this from one's memory.)

In short: in order to create a fake Marci letter, with all the verifiable facts in it, one really should have had the letter in the first place.