The Voynich Ninja

Mark, I'm not going to argue this. I spent several YEARS looking at every alphabet on the planet, looking for similarities.

The only one that is close is Latin, and it is very close, not only in shape, but in terms of the position within tokens, and also in terms of the abbreviation symbols that show up every several pages or so.


No, we do not know if "a" is Latin-a or c + i combined (it's just important to keep in mind that it could be either), but MOST of the shapes are consistent with Latin and NOT consistent with other alphabets.

I don't assume anything beyond that. I do NOT assume the shapes have anything to do with their meaning.

At this point, having spent years searching alphabets and learning about two dozen languages well enough to read simple text in those alphabets, I came back to Latin because it's the only alphabet that's overall similar. But at least I KNOW that from investigating all the alphabets I could find.

So, my primary interest now is deciphering it, regardless of what shapes are used.

JKP: You seem generally to have replied to a completely different point to the one I made and that point is filled with words in BLOCK CAPITALS. However if you can say that the symbols are closest to the latin alphabet then similarly it should be possible to address the question as to whether the "4" symbol in the Voynich is closest to the "4" number symbol.

---

JKP: If you are not interested in what the symbols look like that is fine, so you should probably comment on a different thread.

Does it look like Latin "4"?

Yes, it does, EXCEPT for the long stem (as I mentioned in a previous post). They didn't usually write it with a long descender.


The l character is written exactly like the older style of Latin 4 (both styles were in use in the 15th century).

JKP: The long stem aside, which is probably longer to fit with the other aspects of gallows characters e.g. the long "p" shape, though anyway it doesn't seem that long to me. By the way, what is with the BLOCK CAPITALS?

I am not so focused on what it represents, but rather what it looks like. I would say that it is same shape as the "4" shape in "4o" and the same "4" shape that we see in diplomatic cipher alphabets that is what I am concerned with, visual parallels.

I don't see the point in getting in an argument for the sake of it, if it is a topic you have little interest in.

(15-05-2019, 11:06 AM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.JKP: The long stem aside, which is probably longer to fit with the other aspects of gallows characters e.g. the long "p" shape, though anyway it doesn't seem that long to me. By the way, what is with the BLOCK CAPITALS?

I am not so focused on what it represents, but rather what it looks like. I would say that it is same shape as the "4" shape in "4o" and the same "4" shape that we see in diplomatic cipher alphabets that is what I am concerned with, visual parallels.

I don't see the point in getting in an argument for the sake of it, if it is a topic you have little interest in.

I don't argue for the sake of it, Mark. I have no interest in that. I debate issues to get clarity.

I don't know how many times I've told you, it looks like a Latin 4. The diplomatic ciphers also look like Latin 4. Why do you keep asking the same question? Do you want samples? I've posted numerous examples in blogs but I can post more if that's what it takes.

JKP: You are replying to my thread not the other way around, I am answering your points. If you don't disagree with the premiss of my question then there is nothing more for you to say or to have said long ago. And then the onus is on me to address any other people's objections if you don't object.

I am sorry, but you engage me not I you, but you often seem to act as if I have engaged you.

JKP: You don't need to feel obliged to reply to every comment I make or to every thread I have started.

I've never met anyone else on this public forum who thinks he can tell other people what they may and may not say. Don't ever tell me what I can or cannot say. If it were your forum, it would be different, but it's not. You don't set the forum rules. I am permitted to express my opinions (within forum rules) regardless of who starts the thread, and so are others.

...............
Now back to business... since you didn't answer my question (do you want more samples?), I will offer this information instead since it is directly relevant to your question and will probably also be of interest to other forumites:

• I have the Italian Diplomatic ciphers open on my lap.
  
• I have the Yale VMS facsimile open on my desk.
  
• I have a French Diplomatic cipher from the 16th century in front of me on the screen.
  

- The IDCs use the number 4 by itself and in conjunction with a number of other characters, including a +, an "o", and a Latin "-is" abbreviation (and a number of others). In the Tranchedino version, the stem on the 4 is not long, but since he copied these characters from various letters, there's no guarantee that all the scribes wrote it this way.

- Most of the VMS stems are long and the 4 shape is not exclusively combined with "o", it is sometimes together with other characters (but it is usually "o").

- The FDC uses a long number 4 by itself and combined with other letters, some of which are "o". When it is by itself, the 4 means "a". When it is combined with "o" (4o), it means "p". Like the IDCs, the FDC is a substitution cipher, but a more simple one. Like the IDCs, it uses letters (mostly Latin and Greek), numbers, and a few astrological symbols.


So...

• All three kinds of documents include the "4" shape.
  
• All three documents have the "4" followed by a number of different characters, but the VMS is more often in front of "o" than the two cipher groups.
  
• Only the VMS has the "4" shape primarily at the beginnings of tokens. In the two cipher groups, the 4 moves around within words.
  
• The stem of the 4 is long in the VMS and in the FDC (but keep in mind that the FDC is 16th century, so it is later than the VMS). The stem is not as long in the Italian ciphers transcribed by Tranchedino (but this may be related to how he writes it and might vary in the various diplomatic documents).
  

JKP: You say: "I have the Italian Diplomatic ciphers open on my lap."

I think what you mean is: "I have SOME Italian Diplomatic ciphers open on my lap." as there are plenty of Italian Diplomatic Ciphers of the early 15th century that you have not seen.

I am talking about the visual appearance, not the usage that is a different discussion.

I don't require any samples, I have and can find plenty of my own.

---

I did not tell you what to say or not to say. What I have said is regarding your angry complaint that I am asking you the same question, which I was not, I was replying to your comments and trying to keep the subject with the bounds of this thread and not get diverted into a completely different subject. I was advising you that if you were agreeing with the basis of the thread then if was probably not worth getting involved in subjects outside the purview of this thread. This is neither of our forum. Yes, you are permitted to comment on any thread that you wish. Maybe I just need to learn not to reply to certain comments.

Quote:Mark Knowles: I am talking about the visual appearance, not the usage that is a different discussion.

Visual appearance: Tranchedino  recorded q characters with short stems and sharp loops.
Visual appearance: VMS glyphs include q character with long stem and either soft or sharp loop.
Visual appearance: French cipher has [font=Eva]q[/font] character with long stem and sharp loops.
Visual appearance: In medieval languages that use Latin characters, the q characters usually have short stems, but occasionally long. Loops can be soft or sharp.