The Voynich Ninja

Nothing? Not even the VMs cosmos? I see the structural connection of the VMs cosmos with the cosmic illustrations from BNF Fr. 565 and Harley 334 combined with the dating of both of these Parisian texts within the 1400-1450 time frame as rather convincing, but perhaps I am mistaken.

(27-03-2024, 07:42 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(27-03-2024, 07:20 PM)pjburkshire Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Is it generally accepted...

Nothing is generally accepted.

Right. I should rephrase that.

Has any argument been presented that would refute the claim that "dairol" is the Pole star / North Star (Polaris)? Or has any other idea been suggested for the meaning of page You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ?

I'm not familiar with the armillary sphere. I think is it for teaching about celestial objects. I don't know why it would be with the plants pages. It looks like it should be with the Zodiac pages.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(27-03-2024, 08:12 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(27-03-2024, 07:42 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Nothing is generally accepted.

Remember that time I naively proposed that we try to determine "positions we agree on"? An undertaking to be quickly forgotten...

Everybody accepts that the Voynich manuscript really exists and is not a figment of our imagination. I think everybody accepts that it contains illustrations of real or imagined plants. Similarly, I think there are other generally accepted basic ideas about what some other illustrations represent. I think it is generally accepted that the script is not a well-known or generally familiar script. More than these kind of very basic statements there seems to be no consensus.

I have been feeling a bit despondent recently over the seeming lack of consensus on almost every aspect of the Voynich manuscript. Whether it be doubt of the carbon dating as well as the myriad theories of the manuscript.

How are we going to move forward? Now first of all I accept that many people will probably not even be persuaded regardless of the evidence to change their mind. I can't see Ahmet Ardic or Rich Santa Coloma ever changing their opinions. So it seems increasingly pointless trying to persuade people.

All the different theories can't be true in the same reality(maybe they can in the multiverse). In fact generally they are mostly contradictory and so at most one theory can be true.

To me at this time, the main hope for progress is locating relevant documents in the archives and this is my main focus.

I think that's a good approach, Mark. Dig into a topic that you find interesting/promising. And if it contributes to the study, that's great. Otherwise at least you've had fun and/or learned something new.

I sadly also agree that arguing with theorists is so often a waste of time. Luckily there are also plenty of constructive conversations to be had.

(27-03-2024, 08:21 PM)pjburkshire Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Has any argument been presented that would refute the claim that "dairol" is the Pole star / North Star (Polaris)?

I am not aware of any particularly strong argument that it IS the Pole star.

As far as I am concerned, it could mean "start" or "East" or a number of other things.
It may even say "Tyrol".

(27-03-2024, 08:50 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(27-03-2024, 08:12 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(27-03-2024, 07:42 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Nothing is generally accepted.

Remember that time I naively proposed that we try to determine "positions we agree on"? An undertaking to be quickly forgotten...

Everybody accepts that the Voynich manuscript really exists and is not a figment of our imagination. I think everybody accepts that it contains illustrations of real or imagined plants. Similarly, I think there are other generally accepted basic ideas about what some other illustrations represent. I think it is generally accepted that the script is not a well-known or generally familiar script. More than these kind of very basic statements there seems to be no consensus.

There is another thing that I think is generally accepted; the text is written left to right.

This page is undoubtedly one of the weaknesses of the VM, in the sense that it reveals some particularities of the script system. One of the singularities, apart from the four repeating sequences, are the rare glyphs, seven glyphs that are barely or never seen in the main text. On the same page we see some of them in other circles, always as single characters. They never group together like the others to form words.

Undoubtedly, those rare glyphs cannot be phonemes, letters. If they were, we would see them grouped with the other glyphs. What can they be? They could represent numbers, but I believe they are astrological aspects, that is, angular relationships. In fact, that glyph that looks like an inverted [v] can represent a trine, one of the most important astrological aspects. A trine is the so-called clock on the Rosettes page. And in the VM there is a whole page (f67v2) with drawings of the astrological aspects that the sun and the moon make.

Furthermore, those rare glyphs are on a page that is clearly an astronomical-astrological diagram, which reinforces the idea that these are astrological aspects.

Maybe You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is showing how they looked all over to find letters for their new alphabet that they constructed. I know, wild speculation.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I think the most interesting thing about 57v that I have found so far is that the "F" and "P" switches dictate the "vords" around them. I was sort of shocked no ones mentioned this, apologies if I missed it. I'm assuming that everyone's agreed (as can be...) that this sequence repeats 4 times and starts with "o".

Where there is "F" or "P" there is only F or P, or nothing, no mixes (in the quarters). I would say this is highly unlikely to be coincidence. 

Also I noticed today that "B Language" is extremely precisely constricted to 2 quarters, 1 of F and 1 of P. The highlighted words are searched for by EVA "ed", which is a cool thing I learned today from Rene and Koen "EVA ed = B language". Which, well I suppose we can't call them "Paragraphs" but.. it would sort of be only the second folio to be a divided to half A and half B.. but I'll leave that to the likes of Rene to comment on

(Edit - Looking at the Language B image, it is also very symmetrical on that second ring)