Re: VMs: Ryland 228

[Gordon Rugg <g.rugg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Dana,

I agree that as an intellectual challenge, a mystery, and a work of art, the VMS
is self-sufficient. For what it's worth, I think that the manuscript is probably
a hoax, but a beautifully elegant one, and I'd still admire it even if someone
produced irrefutable proof that it was a hoax (setting aside the question of
whether a hoax could ever be irrefutably proven, which I doubt).

At another level, the question has some far-reaching implications.
If the VMS is a genuine coded document, with significant content, then it may be
an example of a radically different approach to cryptography, with far-reaching
implications for cryptography and related fields. There are a few examples of
ancient inventions which were centuries ahead of their time, such as the
Antikythera device, and the VMS may be another example.
If it is a genuine non-encoded natural language, then it is a significant find
for linguists, because it has so many features not found in currently known
languages.
If it is a hoax, then someone found a way of hoaxing very complex-looking
linguistic structures which we can't exactly reproduce even with current
technology.

Best wishes,

Gordon

DANA SCOTT wrote:

> Yes, but who cares whether or not it is a hoax? Is that important? If it is
> a hoax is it merely as an empty treasure chest or, if authentic, as a coffer
> full of gold? Is the value of the VMS whether or not it is identified as a
> hoax or has it stood fast the test of time and therefore become more that a
> complex knot to be severed in twain at the stroke of the sword? I for one,
> relish the pursuit and treasure the knowledge gained through experience. The
> end game may bring a sigh of relief at its final resolution, but will the
> discovery of the ultimate truth but lead us into a new realm of discovery?
> Search on ye explorers for the truth for there are still not doubt wonder
> gems of discover still to be uncovered.
>
> Regards,
> Dana Scott
> :-)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gordon Rugg" <g.rugg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 2:11 AM
> Subject: Re: VMs: Ryland 228
>
> > Hmmm..... There are many theories which fit some of the evidence. The
> > challenge is to find evidence which gives us good reason to eliminate
> > possibilities and therefore to reduce the problem space down to one
> > sensible explanation.
> >
> > There are a lot of features of Voynichese which are inconsistent with the
> > VMS being in an exotic, non-encoded, natural language. If it's a code,
> > then it's resisted decipherment for much longer than any other code of the
> > same period. The third main possibility is that it's a hoax.
> >
> > The hoax explanation has tended to be dismissed as requiring too much
> > complexity and time. However, apart from the mechanism for producing
> > Voynichese itself, every other alleged indication of complexity in the
> > manuscript itself can be produced quite easily and quickly using
> > fifteenth/sixteenth century methods. The overall planning could have been
> > done in a couple of weeks, including labels with cross-references between
> > sections; the transcription and illustration could have been done in two
> > or three months.
> >
> > I think that the issue of who might have hoaxed it is a side-issue; the
> > key question is what type of evidence would either disprove the hoax
> > hypothesis, or show that it is the most reasonable explanation for the
> > VMS.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Gordon
> >
> > GC wrote:
> >
> > > Nick wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I think Rafal Prinke is totally correct to strongly
> > > > question the
> > > > Dee-centric view of VMS' history - many of the supposed
> > > > pieces of evidence
> > > > don't quite "stack up":-
> > > >
> > > >          http://hum.amu.edu.pl/~rafalp/HERM/VMS/dee.htm#9
> > > >
> > > > Having said that... I do think the quire-marks are
> > > > Dee's, and the foliation
> > > > is Kelly's: but this doesn't mean I think the "600/630
> > > > ducats" evidence
> > > > links the sale with Dee.
> > >
> > > Of course there's always that *third* option that the manuscript
> > > was from an English source?  Dee bought several books from
> > > dissolved monasteries in England, and if indeed the VMS were ever
> > > in his hands, this would be a much simpler explanation of how he
> > > obtained it.  Even simpler, if it was written by Ascham, then
> > > Roger would have obtained it after Anthony's death, a much more
> > > direct line of transference from author to Dee? :-)  Theories do
> > > indeed abound!
> > >
> > > GC
> > >
> > > ______________________________________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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