Here is Ethel Voynich's Preface information from "The Gadfly" which mentions her research at the Marucelliana Library: Regards, Dana Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: Gabriel Landini Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 12:39 PM To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: VMs: new revelations On Wednesday 01 Jan 2003 2:35 pm, Rafal T. Prinke wrote:
> it cannot be convincingly DISproved.
Yes, I agree that it cannot be disproved.
> I said:
> > It is good to keep in mind that there are some
> > pieces of evidence that could not have been
> > 'forged' by Voynich: Marci's printed book and the
> > Kircher correspondence (which is cross-referenced
> > and the index includes the Baresch letter).
>
> But this does not constitute absolute proof - that would
> be either finding the copies from VMS made by Baresch
> or cyclotrone test (or some equivalent) of the manuscript,
> especially the ink(s).
I agree here too. I would be more interested on the ink analysis rather than
the ms itself because it could be just possible to write a modern fake on old
vellum.
We need to find any of the following to make sure that the vms and the known
letters are referring to the same thing:
1. Baresch's 1st. letter to Kircher, possibly sent around Oct 1637. Baresch
never got a reply (he said that in his 2nd letter. So this one may have been
lost before it reached K ore kept separate (and that it is why is not in the
Carteggio). This one had some VMS transcription.
2. Some lines of transcription included in Baresch's 2nd letter to Kircher
(1639). These are not in the letter itself, so either B forgot to write them,
or they were in a separate page also kept separate from the correspondence.
3. The Baresch's "schaedata" (whatever this may be) sent by Marci to Kircher
on 12 Jan 1641. Same story, this is not archived with the K letters.
Regarding the 1st letter that possibly never reached K, either Moretus took it
to K, or he arranged for somebody to take it instead. If Moretus did not go
to Rome in that period (around Oct 1637), obviously somebody else must have
done so.
However, more interesting bits may still be missing, because we do not know
what did K reply to any of these. I wonder whether any letter from K in reply
to B would have been inherited by Marci with the rest of B's library?
So, while Yale could do the ink testing, any of the 3 items above would give
the same indication that the vms is not a modern hoax. Only then, radiocarbon
dating of the *vellum* would be of even more interest.
> But constructing the scenario, consider the following
> facts:
> - 1895 - ELV and Sidney Reilly go to Italy (Rome, Florence, Bologne);
> she works in the Marucelliana Library of Florence and
> other archives (Preface to _The Gadfly_); there are
> 3 Kircher letters to Francesco Redi in the Marucelliana
> (the earliest 1668); Redi is described as "quite a linguist"
Hmm... has anybody considered whether Kircher would send letters to other
people regarding the vms?
Cheers,
Gabriel
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list
|