VMs: Re: Cicco Simonetta / Sartirana / library...?

[Rene Zandbergen <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all,

--- Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Here is the heavily summarised outline argument for
> my main theory about 
> the VMS,  [...]

> (1) The VMS' cipherbet shares a character-pair with
> some Italian ciphers 
> circa 1440-1455
> --> it was probably constructed by the same
> code-maker
> --> it's written in a kind of cipher.

The main problem is that the VMs word structure
is not explained. (See Jorge Stolfi's word
paradigms).
It would be very useful to have some sample
documents written in the 1440's Italian (and 
previously Spanish) ciphers, for comparison.

> (3) The VMS' cipher is more complex than the other
> ciphers
> --> it was constructed after the other ciphers (ie,
> after 1455)

This would have to be correct.

I am very hesitant to pinpoint an individual though.

> (5) The diagrams in the VMS are traced
> --> its diagrams are copies, not originals

This is problematic since there are only very
few 'similar' drawings known to us now. So few,in
fact, that it may be a coincidence.
Without changing too much in your line of reasoning,
the drawings may well be originals, drawn to 
illustrate the original text (which had no 
illustrations). Think of Pliny's herbal.

> (6) The contents of the VMS appear to be varied
> --> it is probably a collection of separate
> documents by separate authors

I like this idea very much, but cannot find any
evidence for it.

> (7) The handwriting is very consistent across all
> folios
> --> it was probably copied by 1-2 persons

Main difficulty is the two sets of herbal pages,
in Currier-A and B. One possibility (based not
on logic but on observation of the character
statistics) is that two men started writing at
the same time, but each developped a different
'encoding' style. When 'B' was ready, he helped
'A' to complete the herbal pages.
A wrote pharma and herbal (in that order) and
B wrote astro/cosmo, bio and stars (in that order).

> (8) The VMS appears not to have been copied from any
> other known document.
> --> the manuscripts it was copied from were probably
> rare (for whatever reason)
> --> the manuscripts it was copied from were probably
> expensive

[...]

> --> (D) The original manuscripts of the VMS were too
> rare for a bibliophile 
> and man of high culture like Simonetta to want to
> destroy - but too 
> politically dangerous (for whatever reason) for him
> to keep. 

The orginals may well have been valuable and rare
(often goes together), and if there were such 
originals, they may also well have been lost 
by now.
The problem of the copier may also very well have
been a much more simple one, that he did not have
permanent access to the documents: e.g. they
belonged to someone else who would not sell them.
Possibly also they were supposed to contain
information alien to the church and the owner
was the church.

On the hidden cellar question I don't wish to
say too much. There is a rumour that such cellars
exist(ed) in the basement of the Clementinum
in Prague, with lots of secret documents of the
Jesuits now lost (and possibly recently destroyed).

In fact, if the Sartirana castle has a hidden
room, why should the VMs not be in it? When would 
it have come out?

Cheers, Rene

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list