Re: VMs: Ryland 228

[Gordon Rugg <g.rugg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Nick,

A lot of interesting points to address!

One thing worth pointing out is that I'm quite prepared to believe that the VMS
is either code or a natural language, or possibly a combination of both. The
main reason that I'm making an issue about hoaxing is that it's often assumed
that various VMS features are too complex to have been hoaxed. In practice, a
lot of its features are quite easy to hoax.

For example, the overall planning of the VMS could be done in the "eight up"
model using one bifolio, in which each side of the bifolio contained notes about
eight quires (16 quires of 16 pages each = 256 pages). The notes could be things
like "this quire to contain images of plants; remember to include a couple of
labels from the 'cosmo' section as if you're referring to the right phase of the
moon to pick the plants". A couple of evenings is enough for a reasonably
complete overview, complete with hoax features to include.

The hoaxer can then plan each quire in the same way, with each "eight up"
section containing a rough sketch of the illustration for that page, a label,
and some notes. That takes about half an hour for one "eight up" page, resulting
in a plan for half a quire - about an hour per quire. That's perfectly
consistent with a lazy hoaxer, and is pretty fast and simple.

My experience of reproducing something like the "stars" section is that it's
fairly brainless work, but can produce something that looks pretty complex. The
notes for my "stars" section include a note to include a rare syllable in a lot
of the labels for individual stars, reminiscent of the "z" in a lot of Arab star
names, and to include an otherwise rare prefix frequently in a lot of the
labels, reminiscent of the "Al" a the start of a lot of Arab star names. There's
also a note about cross-references with labels for other sections. As to whether
a particular individual would find this too boring or not, that's another
question. Remember that Kelly spent literally hours skrying for Dee each day,
for months on end - far more boring than this.

Kelly was also already familiar with cryptography, having seen Dee in action,
and having had access to his books (he even wrote comments in Dee's diary), so
there was no extra effort needed there.

I'm interested in your point about Dee's involvement. I've often wondered about
that. Dee is usually portrayed as being above suspicion, but there's that odd
feature of the suddenly appearing money in Dee's possession just about the time
that Rudolph bought the VMS. Dee recorded a lot of things in his diary, but not
the reason for that money appearing. There's the related issue of their
relationship with Puccius, which involved a lot of money and some unexplained
dealings. It's tempting to speculate that Puccius provided Kelly and/or Dee with
a north Italian manuscript dating from about 1480 as a template for some of the
illustrations and handwriting in the VMS. That, though, is just speculation.

My experience is that most features of the VMS can be produced by one hoaxer
working alone for about three months full time. This includes hoaxing labels. In
practical terms, I think this is consistent with Kelly producing the overall
plans in "eight up" format or something similar, and then handing them over to
an accomplice to finish - he would have enough time to do that, but producing
the whole VMS himself without Dee's knowledge would have been very difficult.
(The same argument is, of course, applicable to other potential hoaxers -
Kelly's the prime suspect because he had the right background and was on the
scene when the VMS turned up.)

As for why the manuscript is so prosaic, that's another good question. I wish I
had a good answer!

Best wishes,

Gordon





Nick Pelling wrote:

> Dear Gordon,
>
> Thanks for your comments - lots of good observations, as normal. :-)
>
> I suppose the #1 problem I have with your conception of the VMS-as-hoax is
> the large number of "it's fairly easy"-type statements that need to be true
> simultaneously in order for it to be consistent with the artefact as exists.
>
> Really, all this comes down to is that I'm finding it hard to empathise
> with your hoaxer (especially if he's Edward Kelly), as that person would
> almost certainly be lazy, wanting to get "money for nothing" (the point of
> hoaxing, surely?). Yet in practice, the picture you seem to be painting
> seems to be closer to that of a top-end cryptographer - devious, iterative,
> desperate to obscure all trace of their methodology, well-informed about
> 15th Century ciphers - with the result of the process not at all obvious
> alchemical, metaphoric or even vaguely fabulous (in fact, "prosaic" may be
> closer to describe most of it).
>
> Certainly, the whole of the (starred paragraphs) end section would seem to
> be an interminably boring and unrewarding exercise for a hoaxer to go
> through. Surely some alembic stills or allegorical / qabbalistic imagery
> would be more fun to do, and worth more?
>
> It's not that I have a wondrous proof that it's not a hoax: but I simply
> ask - why was it necessary to work so very hard to construct a one-off
> hoaxing methodology? I can comfortably conceive of a cryptographer (albeit
> one with too much time on his hands) devising a multi-layered system of
> great complexity - but not a hoaxer.
>
> BTW, I do have a historical concern about the Kelly-as-hoaxer proposition:
> I'm fairly sure (having looked closely at Kelly's numbering at the BL) that
> it's the quire numbers that are in John Dee's hand (this probably came
> first), with the foliation in Kelly's hand (which probably came last).
>
> So: Kelly - the lazy counterfeiter - spends ages hoaxing the VMS, & gives
> it to Dee to look at: Dee numbers the quires in his hasty, impatient hand.
> He then gives it back to Kelly, who randomly reorders some of the folios
> (certainly in the balneological section, and I suspect in several other
> places) *in the work in which he has invested so much effort already*
> before numbering them? ...I don't know about you, but that doesn't really
> work for me. :-(
>
> OK, this in itself doesn't constitute a falsification - but it certainly
> needs resolution by yet another "it's fairly easy" rider. Lots of riders on
> this particular horse... :-/
>
> Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list