I am not convinced by the provenance history of the VMS

[Koen G]

Because of the presence of the Marci letter and Tepenecz signature, we can be confident about the manuscript's Prague period and the fact that it was sent to Kircher. These aspects are so clear, that only conspiracy theorists tend to doubt them.

Everything before Tepenecz is unproven and becomes increasingly uncertain the further you move back in time. For example, we have no evidence that Rudolf ever saw the MS or even personally knew about it. Maybe it existed in the spheres around the court without ever having been in his official collections. Or maybe he loved it and read it every day. We don't know.

But we do have good evidence that Tepenecz owned it, and that Baresch/Marci corresponded with Kircher and eventually sent it to him.

Why not mention the ladies? Google the title page of Kircher's Oedipus Aegyptiacus. They had no problem with nude breasts and the allegorical use of female figures. There are ways Baresch could have mentioned them without raising suspicion. Why he didn't provide a full catalogue description and focused on the plants, we don't know.

Maybe because the vast majority of the imagery is about plants? Maybe because he was convinced that the plants are the most important and useful part of the book? Maybe because he knew that Kircher received lots of these requests, and he thought this angle might grab his attention? We can only speculate.

Edit: anejati, I hadn't seen your reply before writing mine, I see I repeat some of your points. So, well said