(06-12-2018, 05:56 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In support of their New World theory, Janick stated: '“Simply put, there is no way a manuscript written on vellum that contains a sunflower and an armadillo could have been written before 1492.”
It most certainly could have been written before 1492 if the vellum derives from bison, a close relative of domestic cattle. In fact, bison and cows can interbreed and produce healthy offspring that can also procreate. One must therefore conclude that bison and cows have similar proteins and, presumably, produce similar vellum.
The bison theory is supported by a VMS drawing that looks more like a native American teepee than anything else recognizable. Note that teepees and bison hunting go hand in hand: the bison were always on the move and the teepee provided mobile housing.
Meanwhile, as far as I know, your evidence for cow vellum consists of nothing more than a very dubious claim that 'mich' means 'milk'.
(06-12-2018, 05:56 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Unfortunately, there is not much support for his idea that the plant and animal are unequivocably a sunflower and an armadillo. Most people familiar with armadillos think the animal looks more like a pangolin (plus there are other possible interpretations) and those who know plants know that sunflower is not the only possible identification.
A serious problem with your pangolin theory is that this animal did not live in Europe (nor even close to Europe) where you are alleging the VMS was compiled. You can lend support to your theory by finding an entry for the pangolin in a medieval zoological catalog from either Europe or the Islamic world.
Many species of armadillo have become extinct, possibly due to people eating them. One species without bands is still extant and there were undoubtedly others. If we remove the bands, would most people still think the VMS depicts a pangolin rather than an armadillo?
(06-12-2018, 10:55 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It most certainly could have been written before 1492 if the vellum derives from bison, a close relative of domestic cattle. In fact, bison and cows can interbreed and produce healthy offspring that can also procreate. One must therefore conclude that bison and cows have similar proteins and, presumably, produce similar vellum.
The bison theory is supported by a VMS drawing that looks more like a native American teepee than anything else recognizable. Note that teepees and bison hunting go hand in hand: the bison were always on the move and the teepee provided mobile housing.
Meanwhile, as far as I know, your evidence for cow vellum consists of nothing more than a very dubious claim that 'mich' means 'milk'.
I have never said anything about the VMS vellum. Only those with access to the manuscript (and pieces of the manuscript for testing) can speak intelligently about that.
Plus, I don't think the text on the last line of 116v has anything to do with the vellum.
And the interpretation of "mich" as milk is not mine, but it is a valid one because I know there were areas where the vernacular had a lot of dropped syllables, so, for whoever suggested it, it's not unreasonable. I doubt if whoever suggested it was trying to connect the interpretation of the word to the vellum production.
Morten Wrote:A serious problem with your pangolin theory is that this animal did not live in Europe (nor even close to Europe) where you are alleging the VMS was compiled. You can lend support to your theory by finding an entry for the pangolin in a medieval zoological catalog from either Europe or the Islamic world.
MORTEN, I DON'T HAVE A PANGOLIN THEORY. YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT.
The point is LOGIC.
One cannot make
logical claims, as Janick and Tucker have done, that it is a New World manuscript based on faulty identifications that have EQUAL OR BETTER analogs in the Old World.
I'm not saying the critter is a pangolin. I have a fairly long LIST of things it might be. What I am saying is that researchers
cannot claim it is an armadillo if it looks MORE like a pangolin. You see? That doesn't mean it's a pangolin. It means the
LOGIC is faulty. This same logical flaw permeates all their research claims.
(06-12-2018, 06:03 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Do you realize how truly weird this statement is? ALL letters are various other strokes turned or elongated or shortened. That's how letters evolve. That's how they are designed. The letter b is the letter d mirrored. An ell is i elongated without the dot. A medieval f is a medieval s with a crossbar. Noticing a similarity in shape means nothing. You have to DEMONSTRATE that there is a relationship between them that goes beyond the similarity in shape and you haven't done that. You've only pointed out the obvious.
JP, I was only trying to suggest that the symbol
½ might be a gate and not the Latin letter
y inserted into Voynichese script. But you are certainly welcome to believe it's a
y. It's theoretically possible for it to be a
y.
The theory of gates primarily concerns the conversion of VMS symbols into letters of the Latin alphabet via numerical manipulations. It derives its input from the following schematic:
Three Mothers
Aleph ; 1 ; A,E
Mem ; 40 ; M
Shin ; 300 ; SH,SS
Seven Doubles
Bet ; 2 ; B,V
Gimel ; 3 ; C,G
Dalet ; 4 ; D
Kaf ; 20 ; C,K,KH
Pe ; 80 ; P,PH,F
Resh ; 200 ; R
Tav ; 400 ; TH,T
Twelve Elementals
He ; 5 ; H,E
Vav ; 6 ; V,O,U,W
Zayin ; 7 ; Z,S
Chet ; 8 ; CH
Tet ; 9 ; T
Yod ; 10 ; I,Y,J,E
Lamed ; 30 ; L
Nun ; 50 ; N
Samech ; 60 ; S
Ayin ; 70 ; A,AA,YOL,OL
Tsade ; 90 ; X,TZ,TS,Z
Qof ; 100 ; Q,K,CK
There are not all that many unique strokes in Voynichese so I think they might be working with only mothers and doubles to form symbols. But via the numbers, we can produce elementals as well. For example, the three mothers add up to 341 (1 + 40 + 300) which in turn reduces to 8 (3 + 4 + 1) giving us the Latin
Ch sound as in the word church.
The biggest problem is associating components of the gates with the correct Hebrew letters. I think the three mothers might be the strokes
i, ')' and
l, respectively, but even that is not certain. I'm currently looking around for identification clues. Moreover, gates may combine with other gates on the wheels for even greater complexity.
Keep in mind that this is only theory. It may all come to nothing.
(07-12-2018, 02:34 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have never said anything about the VMS vellum. Only those with access to the manuscript (and pieces of the manuscript for testing) can speak intelligently about that.
I sent an email to the protein gal about the possibility of bison vellum and never got a response.
(07-12-2018, 02:34 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.MORTEN, I DON'T HAVE A PANGOLIN THEORY. YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT.
All I am asking is that you tell me by what name the pangolin was known in medieval Europe. No need to find another medieval depiction of this animal. Just the name would do. The point is that for you or others to suggest that the depicted animal could be a pangolin you should provide evidence that such an animal (which did not live in Europe) was known to Europeans. Back then, people did not travel as freely as they do today, and they would have to cross the Muslim world (where Christians were unpopular) to reach the pangolins. Note that I do not have to do the same for the Americas because the armadillo was a commonplace native animal.
It doesn't have to be a pangolin, but the pangolin is superior in explanatory power to the armadillo. It's simply a better hypothesis since fewer unknowns have to be introduced.
We know the Eurasian continent was extensively interconnected via trade routes.
We know the pangolin is covered in huge scales while the armadillo isn't.
There are no such advantages of the armadillo over the pangolin. So a pangolin hypothesis trumps an armadillo hypothesis.
But the pangolin is just a simple, quick way to show the fault in Tucker's reasoning. That does not mean JKP or myself claim the animal must be a pangolin. In an earlier post here I showed images of imaginary scaled marine mammals from medieval nature books. They have a greater explanatory power than the pangolin still:
We know that they were known to 15th century Europeans.
We know they were depicted with a fish tail, just like the VM critter is.
We know they were depicted without sharp, long claws, a feature which both the armadillo and the pangolin have but the VM critter lacks.
This means that "mythical marine mammal" is a more solid hypothesis than both pangolin and armadillo.
(07-12-2018, 09:40 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Misleading words can blind a person to what is really in front of them. There's no evidence that Voynichese is comprised of words.
I define VMS words as "sequences of glyphs separated by spaces" similar to how English words are sequences of letters separated by spaces. In essence, I am using the word "word" in the sense of the following Merriam-Webster definition:
"(2) : any segment of written or printed discourse ordinarily appearing between spaces or between a space and a punctuation mark"
It is used only to facilitate discussion of the VMS among people who are not experts in linguistics. I am not trying to indicate that any specified sequence of VMS glyphs refers to a particular thing or action as English words do.
(07-12-2018, 10:55 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.We know that they were known to 15th century Europeans.
Radiocarbon dating tells us
when the manuscript was written. It does NOT tell us
where it was written. You have no proof that the VMS was compiled in Europe during the 15th century:
1. The VMS depicts a European castle that I have identified as a heretic fortress that was completely destroyed in 1244 (the 13th century).
2. The VMS depicts an administrative council composed of men and women fully clothed. This is a European scene from c. 1200, not c. 1420. The heretics who gave equal rights to women had become extinct by the beginning of the 14th century.
Meanwhile,
1. The great diversity of plants seen in the VMS, whether real or imaginary, is suggestive of climates more diverse than what is found in Europe.
2. Depictions of naked women bathing in plant-infested swamp water is reflective of a warmer climate that what is typically found in Europe.
These arguments are expandable and go well beyond the mere depiction of a single sunflower or an armadillo.