Re: VMs: Folios Incognito

[Rene Zandbergen <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- DANA SCOTT <dscott520@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> It has recently come to my attention, though I do
> not recall where, that the 
> original incunabula discovered by Voynich may not,
> in fact, be exactly the 
> same in content as what is now housed at Beinecke.
> In other words, certain 
> folios may have been removed after the 1912
> discovery. 

That's also mentioned on the mailing list web
site. The comparison made is between the copyflo
(which is the same as the MS) and a listing made
by Newbold some time before 1922. It is possible
that Newbold was mistaken, but Jim Gillogly believes
that Newbold was accurate.
There is no information on precisely which pages 
are affected and what may have happened to them.

Cheers, Rene



I find this posit to 
> be rather intriguing and wonder if we have at our
> disposal the earliest 
> known description of photo copy of the manuscript to
> compare to what we find 
> today? Then perhaps we can somehow determine
> approximately where and when 
> the missing folios were removed.
> 
> Regards,
> Dana Scott 
>
______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx
> with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list