The Voynich Ninja

I think that we can. Apart from the sudden enlightenment that may visit us at any time, there is that deeper understanding of the "real" Voynichese alphabet and symbol construction principles, obtaining which may turn the tide.

Decades of no success suggest that there's something wrong with the input data - or, specifically, with the way they are interpreted.

(30-12-2016, 10:27 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Decades of no success suggest that there's something wrong with the input data - or, specifically, with the way they are interpreted.

In my opinion, the latter has been a consistent problem in Voynich studies. Often interpretations are made in light of an unproven assumption - like when certain researchers assume that the underlying language is German or Latin without solid evidence.

(30-12-2016, 03:36 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Yes, I agree. We don't know for sure yet how related they are, but I think most evidence points towards a close relationship. For example in q13 paragraphs often start next to a new element in the drawing, giving the impression that each section of the image has its own chunk of text. 

The only other way to explain this is to assume malicious intent on the part of 'the author' but I don't buy into that.

Right.  To begin with, that the text and illustrations would be related is the normal thing that you would expect.  It must be true for the vast majority of manuscripts.  It would be interesting to know if there are counterexamples.  On top of this, there are various indicators in the VMS that the text and illustrations are in fact related, though of course it is impossible to truly "prove" without being able to actually read the text.

But to clarify what I was trying to say above about how closely related the text and illustrations are, I guess a better way to phrase it would be to ask how much redundancy there is between the text and illustrations.  At one extreme, we could consider the hypothetical case where the text and illustrations are completely unrelated, in which case there would be basically zero redundancy.  At the other extreme, I suppose, would be the case where the text is basically just a description of what is happening in the illustration.  For instance, imagine if one of the paragraphs in the bio section were to read: "A naked woman is standing in a tub of water.  She's holding a tube with some fluid flowing out of it..."  That would basically be complete redundancy.  Of course, that is not very likely to be the case either.

What is most likely is that the text and illustrations are intended to complement each other in some way.  In this case, some of the information is contained only in the text, some only in the illustrations, and then some effectively shared between the two.  So the question then becomes whether or not it is possible to understand the illustrations well enough to identify the shared component and then use that to make some sense out of the text.

Sam and Koen

I began by assuming that the manuscript I was asked to comment on was a medieval Latin Christian manuscript, containing a herbal, some astronomical drawings, a zodiac and so on.  I expected, then to be able to provenance it pretty closely within no more than a few days - say a week at the very most.  Medieval European manuscripts of that kind are routinely assigned place and date within a day in the real world.

So my own view isn't just 'contrarian' it's the conclusion I was obliged to reach by the primary evidence, and saying so resulted in a mixture of running the gauntlet, being keel-hauled and tested by fire and sword... from 2008 until voynich.ninja got going. 

I guess what I want to say is that it's not a bit of kite-flying.

The imagery is extraordinarily elegant and condensed - absolutely filled with information expressed so clearly and so economically that I really think most of it needs no accompanying screed.  It also seems to me to imply that the makers placed high priority on economy - in imagery and presumably in script.  I don't expect the text will yield anything as simple as a piece of nicely-rounded lliterary prose or poetry - unless it is something like a religious text, or like the 'pilot poems' which are themselves just as economical and condensed.  three words of poetry can evoke a thousand of prose.

Only the 'roots and leaves' section, imo, is likely to use something  like a close parallel text of the simple sort. Headings are what I'd concentrate on if I were working on the written text and I think I'd start with those in the botanical section.  They are as likely (imo) to reference place names, or classes of good, as much as any plant names - because that's how the botanical images are (i) set in order (ii) constructed.

As a crib, I'd begin by compiling a list of port-names in various local languages, between Guangzhou or the Philippines and around Aden.  But as they existed from c.9th-10thC AD.

So there's me out on another limb.

(03-01-2017, 10:29 AM)Diane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....

I expected, then to be able to provenance it pretty closely within no more than a few days - say a week at the very most.  Medieval European manuscripts of that kind are routinely assigned place and date within a day in the real world.

...

Even if there are dates in the manuscript (e.g., calendars and feast days), the place and date are often not known and the bibliographers and historians will assign them to a quarter (e.g., 15th century 2° or to a half-century, e.g., 2nd half of 15th century) based on the content, physical properties, design tradition, subsequent ex libris dates, and handwriting. The handwriting style (e.g., Carolingian, Merovingian, proto-Gothic, Italic, Gothic book, secretary hand, etc.) is one of the biggest clues when combined with other factors, especially if it is an unillustrated text.

If it's an illuminated text from one of the major studios, they can usually narrow down the date to within a decade.

If it's an astronomy text, they can sometimes figure it out from the charts, but there's always the problem of whether the notes about eclipses are records of ones that have been seen or projections of ones that are expected to happen. A big part of astronomy at the time was predicting eclipses and comets since they were considered important omens and messages from the heavens so guessing the date of the manuscript means interpreting the charts and figuring out whether they are past or future events.



It's rare for an exact decade to be known. I've only seen a small percentage where they knew the date within a few years. The one consistent exception is legal documents, which were usually (but not always) dated. But the European book manuscripts usually require detective work and guesswork.

I've found a small group of manuscripts that have some commonalities with a specific aspect of the VMS and frustratingly, the historians have no idea where they are from. Based on the handwriting, they guessed that they might be from one of the major centers where this writing style was used (London, Prague, Paris, Lombardy...), but they don't know.


Arabic manuscripts are different. It's not uncommon for them to include a date of creation, sometimes even the month and day.