Re: VMs: some thoughts/observations

[William Edmondson <w.h.edmondson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Nick et al

On another point....

On 20 Feb 2004, at 10:53, Nick Pelling wrote:

> Hi William,

SNIP


> You also ask why many of us are dismissive of Kelley-as-hoaxer 
> theories: my own opinion is simply that it is hard to explain why a 
> hoaxer would go to the trouble of producing an ms with structure at 
> every level - stroke adjacency, letter adjacency, letter pairs, word 
> structure, word-initial, word-final, Neal keys, line-beginning, 
> line-end, paragraph, page, language. The question also arises as to 
> why they would use a character set which is unsuited to fast writing 
> with a quill (this would seem to be a very poor decision), and 
> non-flamboyant content (as opposed to alchemy or obscure religious 
> symbols). Furthermore, even if you accept that they would be bothered 
> to take all those on as design aims, what was their methodology - ie, 
> how did they achieve them?
> SNIP

I'm not convinced that the effort required to produce VMs indicates 
genuineness at the expense of fake.  Fakers will surely go to enormous 
lengths, if they think it will pay off (that could be an erroneous 
assumption).  Complexity of structure?  Why not, if both Kelley and Dee 
found such things as Enochian easy enough to perpetrate then why not 
VMs???

Go on - try to convince me!

William


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