[Design of Marci Letter]

[proto57]

After considering Andrew's work, I was inspired to return to the image I took of the Marci letter on the light table at the Beinecke. I hadn't realized it before, but the tab at the left has small pinpricks, several of which seem to allign quite neatly with the sewing stations of the inner front cover, suggesting that the letter may have originally been sewn to the front hinge of the manuscript (in blue below). There should be a hole next to line 9 of the letter, although it isn't visible in this image (I'll look again the next time I'm at the Library). The cut from the top left of the inner edge to the first hole suggests that someone thought about cutting the letter out of the manuscript at some point, but because there are no other such cuts leading from the edge to the holes, it also appears that the letter was actually removed when the manuscript's covers were replaced, as the hinges would have to have been cut to replace the boards. In addition to the tab used to attach the letter to the front inside cover, two folds (indicated below in red) would have been necessary to make the letter small enough to fit inside the manuscript. It's worth noting that this configuration explains one of the wax offsets, as the fold from the right alligns the two wax stains in the upper margin. After the covers were replaced, the letter was not re-attached but continued to be associated with the manuscript - loosely laid-in, perhaps.

The other folds are either original or were imposed later. Note that these allignment images were taken using my copy of the Siloe facsimile of the manuscript and the letter. The next time I'm at the Beinecke I'll image the actual objects together and will also ask if they'll let me image the inside of the front cover using UV light to see if there are any offsets (since there's no text there to be put at risk, I suspect it won't be a problem). That's a long shot, but definitely worth investigating.

There are unanswered questions, of course, such as how to explain the wax and its offsets.

I from what I understand, Lisa, all of your observations... the possibility of pin prick holes implying a possible binding into the Voynich; the alignment of the seals when the right side is folding in; the order of folding and how it relates to making the Letter fit inside the Voynich; the cutting down of the Letter to the shape and size we see, which might effectuate all this; even the use of the term "tab"; and more, are all already parts of Steckley's hypothesis, in the paper he has shared.

I'm sure Andrew will opine on this.

But how do you think any of Andrews ideas would apply to my Modern Forgery Hypothesis? I mean, I don't mind it being in here, but I assume you think these ideas (most of which I think plausible, and valuable for many reasons) somehow impact my Modern Forgery Hypothesis? It does give me an opportunity, considering the rules here, to relate it to my own hypothesis... but do you believe it does relate, somehow, to Modern Forgery?

Or maybe you put it here as an error, and meant it for the thread in which Andrews's hypothesis is discussed? I mean, again I don't personally mind, because however the Marci Letter WAS attached, and if attached to the binding, or glued or otherwise affixed to the present, or some other cover, has no impact whatsoever on my Modern Forgery Hypothesis.

Rich