The Voynich Ninja

I am completely convinced that the top left hand loop of the gallows characters is a "4" rather than a "q", but I am intrigued as to how much disagreement there is in this.(There could in theory be some isolated exceptions to this I suppose, but overall it seems pretty clear to me.)

This seems an important point in the context of the Voynich script and its origins whether it is "q" or a "4". Also it makes it have something in common with the "4o" character. A "4" would be very consistent with diplomatic cipher alphabets and not with for example the glagolitic alphabet where a "q" shape would be more consistent.

I have an idea as to how this can be demostrated, but it would be worth knowing the extent of the disagreement to this before proceeding.

I think it's possible. I think I may also have blogged about it.

I also think it's possible that someone may have suggested it on the forum, but it's difficult to search the forum for something like that.

JKP: For me this is an important question as it has implications in terms of the script used, some scripts may be more likely to have the kind of angular "4" shape in their script and other might not. It also would mean that anyone who finds a "qp" style looking character has found a different character and not a direct parallel with the Voynich gallows symbol, I have seen images of suggested parallel symbols.

I have mentioned this topic before, but ultimately it is a visual problem which I think can be answered scientifically; essentially do we have a triangle or a circle or put differently do we have an angle or a curve. I would argue that the left hand loop is an angle and the right hand loop a curve.

If one can transform the problem from the context of the Voynich manuscript to just images containing circles or triangles then one transform it into an image recognition problem.

We have a large set of gallows characters with left hand loops in the Voynich, so we have a large set of shapes which can either be triangles or circles. Therefore I think one can analyse them in the aggregate and see on that basis whether one can conclude they are triangles or circles. Of course it is possible in theory that they could be mostly triangles with a few circles, though I think this is probably unlikely.

---

So I think the gallows character with two top loops is a "4p" not a "qp".

(13-05-2019, 07:23 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have an idea as to how this can be demostrated, but it would be worth knowing the extent of the disagreement to this before proceeding.

There are a number of cases where the first leg of [t] is written near the baseline of the text at the same level as [q], and others where [q] has a long ascender as though the scribe started writing [t]. In both cases they suggest that in the writer's mind the shapes of [t] and [q] were linked.

I made this point a while ago somewhere but can't find it now.

Emma: This is just a visual problem and so I hope it can be reconciled. I assume that it is almost universally accepted that we have a "4o" rather than a "qo" and I think we can do the same for the "4p" etc.

I think this is important, because if someone were to say that this is Georgian script, for example, we can question whether that script accommodates the "4" shape or not. For me personally as I associate the Voynich script with the Northern Italian diplomatic cipher alphabets where the "4" character is often used linked to a second letter like "o" or "p" it tallies with the idea of that kind of origin.

In Latin, the 4 character is frequently paired with "o" chars. I've blogged about that too. It's a common abbreviation for quarto, used since the 14th century.

Hi Mark, your description of the problem is extremely confusing. Please can you illustrate with images? I'm struggling to understand what you want us to agree or disagree with.

If I were to draw an individual triangle on each of 100 different pieces of paper and an individual circle on each of 100 different others pieces of paper, so that I have 200 sheets of paper each with one shape on. Then I would say that it is reasonable for another person to be able to visually determine which shapes are circles and which are triangles. I think we have essentially the same problem.

With my own eyes it appears that we have a "4" instead of a "q", but I think this question can be answered more objectively if there is much dispute.