The Voynich Ninja

(14-05-2019, 02:36 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In their secret communications, the decoders of the VMS verify that "bruine" in V-35 and "bruyne" in VI-37 are both correct. This is how they did it:



Counting the first three cardinal numbers (excluding the ordinals) we get "eight" plus "Twenty" plus "nyne" (with a y) equals 37, ie. VI-37 where "bruine" is spelled "bruyne". Counting the last three cardinal numbers we get "nine" (with an i) plus "Twenty" plus "six" equals 35, ie. V-35 where "bruine" is spelled "bruine".

Conclusion: For whatever type of encoding employed in the VMS, the decoders, in their output, were clearly able to distinguish an "i" from a "y".

Please excuse me for responding to my own post!

As far as I was aware, the y's and i's back in those days were fully interchangeable. Then, why in the world did they concoct this utterly ridiculous Last Will and Testament just to emphasize that there is a difference between a "y" and an "i". Find the answer to that and you could be well on your way to breaking the code. 

And I think I found the answer. For the fourth letter of "bruyne", the compass had to have landed on Yalgal, Yryston, Yaua, Yestra, Ye, or Ydardycon (I see that Brumbaugh interpreted the "michiton" on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as "michi con" which allows me to suggest "mich(el) (ydard)icon"!).

Meanwhile, for the fourth letter of "bruine", the compass had to have landed on "Ioth". There are no other possibilities for the "i". And that explains how the same word got consistently spelled "bruyne" in one place and "bruine" in another.

For those of you who have no idea what I am talking about, check out the following divinity wheel:



Ironically, in this particular depiction, Ioth is spelled "y" but I can assure you that Ioth is spelled "i" in other medieval texts. You see Ioth (as y) here in the upper right, between Adon (a) and Quyesteron (q).

Like EVA, they used dots to represent blank spaces and you see two of them on top of the wheel. The "h" stands for "Ha". It could be where the "allar" marginalia of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. picks up the silent "h". Note also that the second word after "allar" begins with "h" perhaps as a reminder to stick one in front of "allar", giving us "hallar", the Spanish word for "to find", and indeed we found Ioth.

Let's now look at the VMS wheels:



The second circle from the top is filled with four sets of 17 glyphs, making a total of 68. The sequence is broken with " || " which with view to the divinity wheel can be replaced with "_ h a _" (where the underscores represents a blank space ie. word separators). This brings the number of characters up to 72, the same as the number of names (letters) on the divinity wheel from the first dot all the way around the circle to the second dot.

The VMS wheels have two sets of four pointers: four arms pointing in opposite directions and four scribbles extending from the central flower. The medieval divinity wheel likewise has two sets of four pointers: four outer points marked with a Maltese cross and four corners of the inner heptagon marked with a darkened bar.

Let's suppose, just for the fun of it, that the 72 Latin letters go above the 72 characters of the VMS alphabet wheel, and that a line of VMS text drawn from quire 20 (recall that the marginalia gave us a Rosetta Stone to work with) goes below the alphabet wheel. Many or most of the quire 20 lines have some 60 to 70 characters and will take up most of the distance around the circle. The circle holding the quire 20 text and the circle holding the alphabet glyphs then rotate or oscillate, maybe in opposite directions, maybe only one position at a time. Then, when a pointer strikes a glyph from the quire 20 line at a point where it matches the same glyph on the alphabet wheel just above it, we pick up the Latin letter just above the alphabet-wheel glyph and so on around the circles. Note that several of the 17 glyphs on the alphabet wheel are rarely used in quire 20 so matches will not be as frequent as one might think but they will certainly occur.

I view the discovery of Ioth as a major breakthrough, potentially cutting down decoding time from years to a matter of months or even weeks. Granted that you guys pushed me into discovering Ioth, if this decoding effort turns out to be successful, I suggest that we promote it to the world media as a Voynich Ninja group accomplishment.

A few clarifications on my last post seem in order:

Quote:Ironically, in this particular depiction, Ioth is spelled "y" but I can assure you that Ioth is spelled "i" in other medieval texts. You see Ioth (as y) here in the upper right, between Adon (a) and Quyesteron (q).

Actually, in the Summa Sacrae Magicae (SSM), Ioth is spelled with a "j" (but without the dot) as you can see:



Note that there is only one "j" ("i") so this remains the most likely explanation of what distinguishes "bruine" from "bruyne". 

Quote:The VMS wheels have two sets of four pointers: four arms pointing in opposite directions ...

The VMS graphic depicts six arms but only four of them have glyphic extensions:



The six arms undoubtedly relate to the six directions of space as recorded in the Sepher Yetzirah (SY), here translated by Westcott:

"11. He selected three letters from the simple ones, and sealed them as forming his great Name, I H V and he sealed the universe in six directions.

Five.- He looked above, and sealed the height, with I H V.

Six.- He looked below, and sealed the deep, with I V H.

Seven.- He looked forward, and sealed the East, with H I V.

Eight.-He looked backward, and sealed the West, with V H I.

Nine.- He looked to the right, and sealed the South, with V I H.

Ten.-He looked to the left, and sealed the North, with H V I."

In a prior post, I spoke at great length about the ABOVE (height) direction, sealed with Yod (10) He (5) Vau (6).

In the VMS graphic, the bloke on the bottom has his right hand pointing to the sphere ABOVE and his left hand pointing BELOW the plane of the cardinal directions. The right forearm of his colleague to the right holds the sphere while his darkened upper arm with glyphic extension points in a cardinal direction, probably to the North. 

The word "seal" is significant as surely the Sigillum Dei is key to breaking the VMS code.

Quote:... and four scribbles extending from the central flower.

Here's a close-up view of what I arbitrarily called a "flower":



Again I cite the SY:

"4. These twenty-two letters, the foundations, He arranged as on a sphere, with two hundred and thirty-one modes of entrance. If the sphere be rotated forward, good is implied, if in a retrograde manner evil is intended.

5. For He indeed showed the mode of combination of the letters, each with each, Aleph with all, and all with Aleph. Thus in combining all together in pairs are produced these two hundred and thirty-one gates of knowledge. And from Nothingness did He make something, and all forms of speech and every created thing, and from the empty void He made the solid earth, and from the non-existent He brought forth Life."

The SSM supplies us with a graphic depiction of all 231 gates but, to all appearances, the VMS wishes to work with only eight gates (the eight loops that you see surrounding a circle with a dot in the middle).

According to Wikipedia, a circle with a dot in the middle is, among other things, the symbol of Keter, the topmost sephirot of the Tree of Life (which I view as a mystical derivation of the "stump" of X-56, the "branch" of V-35, and the "fruit" of IX-65).

In the end, we are left with two sets of four directions (the eight sequences of glpyhic pointers). Therefore, to arrive at 72 Latin letters, each of the eight gates would have to be the entrance to nine Latin letters. Indeed, the SSM lends support to just such an arrangement:



As you can see, there are eight groups of nine letters, with each group separated by a dot. There's an extra dot after the first letter which could indicate a movement of one space to the right after each loop around the circle, or, just as likely, that we also need to work in a backwards direction.

Note that the London manuscripts of the Sworn Book of Honorius provide slightly divergent sequences of 72 Latin letters. When and if determined that a variant was published during the epoch of VMS marginalia or not long thereafter, I will be considering it in my decoding efforts.

(01-06-2019, 08:15 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.A few clarifications on my last post seem in order:
...


In the end, we are left with two sets of four directions (the eight sequences of glpyhic pointers). Therefore, to arrive at 72 Latin letters, each of the eight gates would have to be the entrance to nine Latin letters. Indeed, the SSM lends support to just such an arrangement:



As you can see, there are eight groups of nine letters, with each group separated by a dot. There's an extra dot after the first letter which could indicate a movement of one space to the right after each loop around the circle, or, just as likely, that we also need to work in a backwards direction.

...

N • t • oexoraba • laygtiyst • algaonosu • larycetosp • fyomemana • renugarel • atedatono • naoyleyot
N • 1 •    8         •       9     •      9        •    10         •      9           •         9     •      9        •     9

There are 8 groups and most of them have nine letters, but two of them clearly do not. Some people might read this as 9 groups, with three groups that do not have 9 letters (since the first one after the capital-N has one).

(01-06-2019, 09:10 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(01-06-2019, 08:15 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.A few clarifications on my last post seem in order:
...

In the end, we are left with two sets of four directions (the eight sequences of glpyhic pointers). Therefore, to arrive at 72 Latin letters, each of the eight gates would have to be the entrance to nine Latin letters. Indeed, the SSM lends support to just such an arrangement:



As you can see, there are eight groups of nine letters, with each group separated by a dot. There's an extra dot after the first letter which could indicate a movement of one space to the right after each loop around the circle, or, just as likely, that we also need to work in a backwards direction.
...

N • t • oexoraba • laygtiyst • algaonosu • larycetosp • fyomemana • renugarel • atedatono • naoyleyot
N • 1 •    8         •       9     •      9        •    10         •      9           •         9     •      9        •     9

There are 8 groups and most of them have nine letters, but two of them clearly do not. Some people might read this as 9 groups, with three groups that do not have 9 letters (since the first one after the capital-N has one).

JP, In your group of 10, what you interpret as the letters "to" is actually a "k", a single letter representing kyryos who you will find spelled out in full on line 5 of my first SSM citation. All 72 letters correspond to the 72 names in the same order maybe excepting a "y for a "j" or a "v" for a "u". For the 1 * 8, I gave two possible explanations in my post.

While I got you online, I'm wondering if you, like me, see some similarity between the following numbers:




The one of the left is from the SSM (Spain, 1346) and the one on the right is from the VMS. Many other page numbers are also similar looking. In fact, the numbers are similar throughout. Experts are claiming that John Dee wrote the page numbers for both. I had a brief look at a couple of Dee's letters and I'm not completely convinced. Besides that, I have indications that a poet laureate wrote the marginalia, not an astrologer. What's your opinion on all this?

(01-06-2019, 11:07 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.JP, In your group of 10, what you interpret as the letters "to" is actually a "k", a single letter representing kyryos who you will find spelled out in full on line 5 of my first SSM citation. All 72 letters correspond to the 72 names in the same order maybe excepting a "y for a "j" or a "v" for a "u". For the 1 * 8, I gave two possible explanations in my post.

It might actually be "tr" rather than "to". I can't tell without seeing a larger block of text and I definitely can't tell if that is "k" without a larger block of text because that would be a rare way to write k.

You still haven't explained the one that is clearly 8 letters and you seem to be selectively ignoring the first one which is one letter and explaining it with a different explanation, which is a questionable way to do it.

Quote:While I got you online, I'm wondering if you, like me, see some similarity between the following numbers:




The one of the left is from the SSM (Spain, 1346) and the one on the right is from the VMS. Many other page numbers are also similar looking. In fact, the numbers are similar throughout. Experts are claiming that John Dee wrote the page numbers for both. I had a brief look at a couple of Dee's letters and I'm not completely convinced. Besides that, I have indications that a poet laureate wrote the marginalia, not an astrologer. What's your opinion on all this?

They are similar but I also have about 200 samples of text from that time period that are similar and about 10 of them are extremely similar. Many people wrote numbers that way (including John Dee).

Okay, I found a "k" in the larger chunk of script. It might be "k" but if so, it is unusually wide compared to the others.

It might also be lr or tr, I notice he writes the rotunda-r (the humped r) in that way.

But you cannot assume it is k just to make it 9 letters, since some of the others are not 9 letters. That's not good science. It's important to figure out what it is, not to assume what you think it should be.

(01-06-2019, 11:31 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.They are similar but I also have about 200 samples of text from that time period that are similar and about 10 of them are extremely similar. Many people wrote numbers that way (including John Dee).

I agree. It can be hard to distinguish authorship of numbers written in the same general epoch. So that's what we know for certain about SSM and VMS numbering: they were likely written not far apart in time.

I guess handwriting experts would have to consider factors other than design to determine the author, such as the spacing between numbers, the relative height of consecutive numbers in relation to each other, and the points or lines were more pressure was applied.

If anyone would like to compare the SSM and the VMS on marginalia authorship, know that the SSM is available online:

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

SSM marginalia includes alphabetic letters as well as numbers, which might help out in regard to John Dee's correspondence. Let us know what you find!

(02-06-2019, 12:56 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....


If anyone would like to compare the SSM and the VMS on marginalia authorship, know that the SSM is available online:

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

SSM marginalia includes alphabetic letters as well as numbers, which might help out in regard to John Dee's correspondence. Let us know what you find!

I've already sampled the numbers. They score quite well, but there are about a dozen that score slightly higher. Among the ones that are closest to the VMS foliation, it's hard to tell the difference between them but they come from all different countries, so it was a pretty widely dispersed style of numbering.

(01-06-2019, 11:35 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Okay, I found a "k" in the larger chunk of script. It might be "k" but if so, it is unusually wide compared to the others.

It might also be lr or tr, I notice he writes the rotunda-r (the humped r) in that way.

But you cannot assume it is k just to make it 9 letters, since some of the others are not 9 letters. That's not good science. It's important to figure out what it is, not to assume what you think it should be.

A "k" precedes the letters "sp" not only in the SSM but in all the Sworn Book manuscripts as well. It may be an awkward looking "k", but there can be little doubt that the letter "k" was intended.

I don't know the answer to the 1*8 mystery. A third speculation (in addition to the two already mentioned) is that they wanted the first series to include a blank space (to serve as a word separator). I am only now beginning research in this area. Hopefully, I will be able to find a definitive explanation in the Latin text.

Also, I forgot to mention earlier that the eight loops of the central "flower" resemble arches, which often served as gates or gateways during medieval times. Other SSM drawings reinforce that concept. I'm pretty sure we are dealing with eight gates each containing or leading to nine characters. But going from there to a complete decoding may still be a long way off. I'm surely missing something and again, hopefully, the Latin text will provide some help.

(02-06-2019, 01:09 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(02-06-2019, 12:56 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....

If anyone would like to compare the SSM and the VMS on marginalia authorship, know that the SSM is available online:

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

SSM marginalia includes alphabetic letters as well as numbers, which might help out in regard to John Dee's correspondence. Let us know what you find!

I've already sampled the numbers. They score quite well, but there are about a dozen that score slightly higher. Among the ones that are closest to the VMS foliation, it's hard to tell the difference between them but they come from all different countries, so it was a pretty widely dispersed style of numbering.

Thanks, JP, for having a look at it so quickly. I used the number "42" as an example because it was the only VMS page number that solidly overwrites a drawing. As a student of medieval occultism, the number 42 immediately struck a bell as an important name of God and quickly led me to the 72-letter name.

Meanwhile, the first page 42 of the SSM contains a potentially important diagram. That might not be a coincidence. That's why I'd like to know if the marginalia author could have been the same person for both manuscripts.