Re: VMs: Mad Kircher, was (lots)

[Seth Morabito <sethm@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Don Latham wrote:

> I agree with Rene. If it was a hoax, where's the historical horselaugh?  If
> a copy for profit, where's the profit and the original(s)? Too organized for
> psychotic glossolalia, so an organized, encoded/encrypted belief system.
> Don Latham
>  

Do you mean specifically a hoax perpetrated against Kircher, or a hoax 
*in general*?  For the general case, the evidence from the Kircher 
letter itself points to a 600 ducat profit to whomever sold it to Rudolf 
II.  That certainly seems like a healthy dose of evidence, and reason 
enough not to be very public about its creation.

But I agree that there doesn't seem to be much supporting evidence that 
the manuscript was meant to hoax Kircher himself.

-Seth

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