The Voynich Ninja

Dear VMS - fans,

I´m new here, so I don´t know this forum enough to do everything right. If my thread was a theme before, then, please, show me the old thread, and I will immediately delete this one. 

And sorry for my very bad English!   We, Germans, should not do this! 

The Voynich Manuscript accompanies me since my school time (now: for nearly ten years). Back then I played a very little role in a detective series episode (Pater Castell: Das Voynich Manuskript). Since this time, I tried to find at least the language family the Voynich Manuscript belongs to.

I´ve only studied German and History after my school, but I have written my final exam in a subject called "Language History". So I think, I can say, that I know how words changed over the years. But that isn´t enough to decode the VMS. 

You have to know at least to which family or families of languages it could related to. I have a founded idea now for one VMS language family, which is based on some translation attempts of the VMS plants section, and a check by a "native speaker" of (one of) the last possible descendants of the possible language family.

But before I can follow my theory of a double- (or: maybe triple-) language provenience of the manuscript, I have to check, if there are any problems with the central hypothesis. So I ask you for the following helps:

1. Are there any language families, which are completely impossible as VMS language and if yes, why?

2. Is it possible, that the VMS, as we know it today, could be a copy of an older book?

3. Are there any living or dead language families, which are "hot candidates" for the VMS language and if yes, why?

4. Could you imagine, that somebody from the "Old World" (Europe, Asia, Africa) would "encode" a manuscript, at the time around 1000 - 1500 AD, to hide discoveries in the "New World" (America)?

5. Is it absolutely clear, that Rudolf II. and Jacobus de Tepenece were the first owners of the manuscript or do we know more about the VMS owners today?

To make it clear: 

I have an idea, where the VMS could be from, but I´m not a native speaker of these languages. Furthermore I don´t have a full VMS decoding alphabet, but maybe enough letters to translate some pages, but only in the plant section. My system definitely doesn´t fit for all sections. If I´m right with my theory the plant language is dead today and the other one may lives, but I´m not really sure. If anybody wants to know which languages I suspect, he can write a personal message to me. I could write it here, too, but I don´t want to influence the discussion more than necessary. 

Hi Gavin,
here is my point of view:

(28-01-2019, 06:01 PM)Gavin Güldenpfennig Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.1. Are there any language families, which are completely impossible as VMS language and if yes, why?

Nothing is "completely impossible", but I think that American languages are nearly impossible. I tend to totally ignore that option.

Quote:2. Is it possible, that the VMS, as we know it today, could be a copy of an older book?

Yes, of course. Why not?

Quote:3. Are there any living or dead language families, which are "hot candidates" for the VMS language and if yes, why?

I believe that reduplication (the exact consecutive repetition of one word, like daiin daiin) is a linguistic feature of Voynichese. I consider languages with extensive reduplication somehow "hotter".

Quote:4. Could you imagine, that somebody from the "Old World" (Europe, Asia, Africa) would "encode" a manuscript, at the time around 1000 - 1500 AD, to hide discoveries in the "New World" (America)?

No, but my imagination is quite limited.

Quote:5. Is it absolutely clear, that Rudolf II. and Jacobus de Tepenece were the first owners of the manuscript or do we know more about the VMS owners today?

They are the first documented owners, but, before them, there must have been several others, during the 200 years between the creation of the manuscript and Rudolf's times.

I think the most important thing to observe is the order in which the Voynich glyphs occur within tokens.

Some are mostly at the beginning. Some are mostly in the middle. Some are mostly at the end.


This is significantly different from natural languages. Even though every language has certain letters that occur more often at the beginnings and ends of words (for example, vowels are more common at the ends of words in some languages), the letters, in general, "move around" much more than in Voynichese.

Hi MarcoP,


first, thank you for your answer!  

Quote: Nothing is "completely impossible", but I think that American languages are nearly impossible. I tend to totally ignore that option. 

Why do you think, that American languages are nearly impossible and what do you mean by "American languages"? Only indigenous languages? 

Quote: I believe that reduplication (the exact consecutive repetition of one word, like daiin daiin) is a linguistic feature of Voynichese. I consider languages with extensive reduplication somehow "hotter".

The reduplication is a big problem for analysists of the VMS. It makes it nearly impossible to find a language that matches with that phenomenon. But I´m also thinking, that these phenomenon could help us to find sentences in the VMS. You know, there is no punctuation. 

Quote: They are the first documented owners, but, before them, there must have been several others, during the 200 years between the creation of the manuscript and Rudolf's times. 

I don´t know, if it where 200 years between Rudolf and the creation of the VMS. Personally I think that there are only 140 years between both. At maximum 165 years.

Hello Gavin and welcome to the forum!

Quote:Gavin Güldenpfennig Wrote: 1. Are there any language families, which are completely impossible as VMS language and if yes, why?

MarcoP wronte: Nothing is "completely impossible", but I think that American languages are nearly impossible. I tend to totally ignore that option.

Just to annoy MarcoP   I'll remind him that some people* say that if you consider a syllabic based language family then Hawaiian is a close match. 

*I'm not one of them!

I think we can forget about agglutinative languages. Voynichese has a very regular distribution, we don't see vords running together.

Quote: 2. Is it possible, that the VMS, as we know it today, could be a copy of an older book?

Indeed it could be. In fact, it has been argued that due to the low correction rate, it certainly is a copy of some text, rather than being made up "on the fly" (although the counter argument is that anything being copied tends to be error prone, due to human nature being what it is). Even if this only means it has been copied from draft notes. And if there are different scribes involved in the making of the book, then it certainly is a copy from either a master work or a draft.

Quote: 3. Are there any living or dead language families, which are "hot candidates" for the VMS language and if yes, why?

It is indisputable that Voynichese glyphs were designed by somebody with knowledge of European and Latin medieval scripts. This does not mean that it was based upon such a language. So no, not that I know of.

Quote: 4. Could you imagine, that somebody from the "Old World" (Europe, Asia, Africa) would "encode" a manuscript, at the time around 1000 - 1500 AD, to hide discoveries in the "New World" (America)?

No. If this is a book about discoveries in the New World then it would be based upon an extensive exploration of the territory, and such an expedition would be state sponsored. It would not have petered out and never been heard from again.

Quote: 5. Is it absolutely clear, that Rudolf II. and Jacobus de Tepenece were the first owners of the manuscript or do we know more about the VMS owners today?

It is not "absolutely clear". Rather, the balance of probability shows that the manuscript went through their hands. For more on this subject see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Any previous owner is unknown, and as it stands, unknowable.

Opinions vary wildly on the forum, but my impression is that the majority here thinks the VM was made before Columbus' Voyages. Since the MS contains European Zodiac symbols, this means that any indigenous American content must have come through much earlier Viking explorations, which is a bit of a stretch. This is why you'll see many open minded researchers here who still exclude any American theory.

The reasons to date the MS to the first half of the 15th century are many, and of different natures. Of course there is the scientific dating of the parchment. My own focus is on the imagery, and I have found that the clothing of the Zodiac figures strongly confirms the dating to the early 1400's.

Of course one can construct scenarios where it is still possible to have American influences in the VM, but these would be a huge stretch.

Quote: I think the most important thing to observe is the order in which the Voynich glyphs occur within tokens.
Some are mostly at the beginning. Some are mostly in the middle. Some are mostly at the end.
This is significantly different from natural languages. Even though every language has certain letters that occur more often at the beginnings and ends of words (for example, vowels are more common at the ends of words in some languages), the letters, in general, "move around" much more than in Voynichese.

Quote: I think we can forget about agglutinative languages. Voynichese has a very regular distribution, we don't see vords running together.

@davidjackson & @JKP:

It is understandable, that you have doubts about a natural VMS language or about an agglutinative one, but I don´t think, that both aspects you mentioned are not worth it, to discuss about.

Imagine a language, in which you agglutinate not necessarily words, but rather affixes or suffixes.

An example: .....you know the "89" - problem in the VMS....

What if:

dy .....is a case marker

qokedy .....is a suffix with a case marker, which is standing in front of a noun

qokeedy ..... is the same suffix with another case marker, which is standing in front of a noun


And now imagine, that the language does the following in a sentence:

(suffix + case marker) 1 ..... [font=Times New Roman](suffix + case marker) 2 ..... [font=Times New Roman](suffix + case marker) 3 ..... noun 1 ..... noun 2 ..... noun 3 ..... verb .... subject ..... object.    [/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]Ok, you´re right, this could also be an artificial language, but I think far back in the past, languages were much more easy then today.[/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]And in today´s German language we have for example these kind of sentences:[/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]"Den (case marker) Frauen, Männern und Kindern (nouns) wünschen  (verb) wir (subject) viel Erfolg (object)."[/font][/font]


[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]@ davidjackson[/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]

Quote: Even if this only means it has been copied from draft notes. And if there are different scribes involved in the making of the book, then it certainly is a copy from either a master work or a draft. 

[/font][/font]

Personally I think, that the VMS is a copy of a master work, which is much more older than the VMS. Maybe 500 - 700 years. The correction rate is very low, with the exception of mostly readable (latin) letters. (for example at f. 2v)

Quote: It is indisputable that Voynichese glyphs were designed by somebody with knowledge of European and Latin medieval scripts. This does not mean that it was based upon such a language. So no, not that I know of.

But it is very likely, I think, that the origin of the manuscript is very near to European monastries, even if it is written in an isolated language.

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]

Quote: No. If this is a book about discoveries in the New World then it would be based upon an extensive exploration of the territory, and such an expedition would be state sponsored. It would not have petered out and never been heard from again. 

[/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]Interesting opinion from an completely other view than mine, but it is possible. What do you think, the writer of the VMS would do, if he would risk a ban by the church for his explorations and his country has the strongest allied force of the church against itself? Would the work then also be state sponsored? I don´t think so.   [/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]

Quote: Of course one can construct scenarios where it is still possible to have American influences in the VM, but these would be a huge stretch. 

[/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]@Koen G[/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]Yes, maybe it would. But, what if the country of the VMS writer was able to send people to the American continent before Kolumbus?[/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]@ davidjackson[/font][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][font=Times New Roman]There could also be a trading advantage which could be an explanation for the ciphering of such a manuscript. Maybe it is a guide for the dealers? Money makes people and especially kings stupid   [/font][/font]

(29-01-2019, 01:44 AM)Gavin Güldenpfennig Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Quote: I think the most important thing to observe is the order in which the Voynich glyphs occur within tokens.
Some are mostly at the beginning. Some are mostly in the middle. Some are mostly at the end.
This is significantly different from natural languages. Even though every language has certain letters that occur more often at the beginnings and ends of words (for example, vowels are more common at the ends of words in some languages), the letters, in general, "move around" much more than in Voynichese.

Quote: I think we can forget about agglutinative languages. Voynichese has a very regular distribution, we don't see vords running together.

@davidjackson & @JKP:

It is understandable, that you have doubts about a natural VMS language or about an agglutinative one, but I don´t think, that both aspects you mentioned are not worth it, to discuss about.

...

I did not not say I have doubts about a natural VMS language. I said that Voynich glyph position within tokens does not match natural language patterns. These two issues must be kept separate.

The rigid and unusual glyph position makes natural language less likely and it makes a substitution code EXTREMELY unlikely, but it does not completely rule out natural language possibly being encoded in a different way from what most people expect. It may mean the structure has to be interpreted DIFFERENTLY from a simple substitution code.

And it might mean it's not directly natural language... it might be symbols, numbers, positions, or steganography, but I have not made a decision one way or the other as to whether it might be natural language, only that it is certainly NOT a simple substitution code for natural language.

Quote: Imagine a language, in which you agglutinate not necessarily words, but rather affixes or suffixes.

Then it's not strictly agglutinative. It is synthetic. Synthetic languages form words by affixing a given number of dependent morphemes to a root morpheme. (Most Indo-European languages are synthetic).

Furthermore, let us say it is a fusional language, rather than an agglutinative language. Morphemes in fusional languages are not readily distinguishable from the root or among themselves. Several grammatical bits of meaning may be fused into one affix. For example, the Spanish verb comer ("to eat") has the first-person singular preterite tense form comí ('I ate'); the single suffix -í represents both the features of first-person singular agreement and preterite tense, instead of having a separate affix for each feature. (See You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).

So this fits with Stolfi's core / crust  / mantle theory - we are seeing modifiers to the stem. Agglutinative languages (think of German or Inuit) tend to produce very long words, which isn't what we see in the VM corpus.

Quote: Ok, you´re right, this could also be an artificial language, but I think far back in the past, languages were much more easy then today.

Actually, the opposite is often postulated to be true. Compare a modern language like English with Latin or Hebrew, Assyrian or ancient Turk. The subject is far too complex for me to boil down to a couple of sentences over my porridge, but it is often the case that the older a language is, the most rigid and complex it becomes.

Quote: Interesting opinion from an completely other view than mine, but it is possible. What do you think, the writer of the VMS would do, if he would risk a ban by the church for his explorations and his country has the strongest allied force of the church against itself? Would the work then also be state sponsored? I don´t think so.   undefined

An often suggested view of the medieval (pre 1400's) Church, but not one that is really backup up by historic evidence. The European Church was fragmented and often in hock to local political leaders, it was not a supre-European power state capable of instilling terror into local rulers. Heck, they couldn't even stamp out the local cults that they hated such as the Adamists.
And why would the Church have tried to ban exploration? They never did before. Indeed, they supported Spanish and Portuguese exploration - European expansion carried the power of the Church with them. I've certainly never heard of a Church decree against exploration, quite the opposite.

(29-01-2019, 01:44 AM)Gavin Güldenpfennig Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Quote: Of course one can construct scenarios where it is still possible to have American influences in the VM, but these would be a huge stretch. 

@Koen G

Yes, maybe it would. But, what if the country of the VMS writer was able to send people to the American continent before Kolumbus?

I think that qualifies as a huge stretch   
Unless you count the Vikings. But this scenario is impossible. There is no indication of either Nordic or Pre-Columbian culture in the VM.

On the contrary: the script apears to derive from common central European 14th and 15th century scribal habits. And the images have a lot in common with manuscript genres found in Europe and around the Mediterranean, like herbals, De Balneis Puteolanis and Aratea.

Any American theory must pile one incredibly unlikely assumption on top of the other, to the extent that the only option left is to slash the whole thing with Occam's razor.