Over the time this blog has been running, I have responded to ten or twelve readers asking where they might find my argument, or where I outline my ‘theory’.
Until now, I’ve replied separately to each, but to save others the trouble here is a reply for all.
Dear [ insert name]
Thank you for your interest, and for having followed my posts for as long as […….], which takes some persistence, I should think.
I’m sorry that you cannot find any sign of my hypothesis and/or ‘argument’, but this blog is a little different from most other Voynich blogs in that respect.
I did not begin from any hypothesis, and have no intention of creating one for which I then try to find support, in order to produce a plausible, or a convincing argument.
What I am doing here is explaining the imagery on each folio, and each section, in the hope that there may be some direct link between the pictorial and the written text, and in that way my explanation of the imagery may assist those working on the text’s written part.
At the time of writing (July 2015), I have reached certain conclusions about the evidence, and find the evidence itself denies some of the more prevalent and seemingly plausible theories, but if someone told me tomorrow that our present manuscript was owned by a Spanish Franciscan, or a Jewish cloth-merchant, or even at a pinch an earlier medieval pharmacist I should be as willing to believe these as a number of other appropriate suggestions.
I cannot believe that the work is by a seventeenth-century occultist, or that it is a twentieth century fraud, or that it is the composition of a single European author. The primary source forbids.
Anyway, thank you again for writing. If I do develop a theory which I think will account for every detail that I’ve treated in this manuscript, I’ll certainly post it, and then call upon the past seven years’ work if I need examples and evidence to cite in support.
At the moment, I am fairly much inclined to the view that most of what is in the manuscript, as a fifteenth century copy and collation, may have been gained from works that had belonged to oriental Jews, which group includes the Sephardic /Mizrahi.
Jews from inner Asia and India appear to have migrated to southern Europe and North Africa as early as the ninth and tenth centuries.
By the mid-fourteenth, makers of the new rhumb-gridded charts evidently had links to at least one of the fold-out sections, viz. folio 86v.
I’d suggest that the best way to make use of this blog is to search for the folio you want to study, and then read my analysis and explanation of its imagery. I haven’t treated every folio, so if nothing comes up for the folio (use the Beinecke foliation), you might like to search by subject.
Hope it helps.