The Voynich Ninja

There are of the order of 100 symbols that appear only once in the MS, but the majority of these 'look like' aberrant or malformed examples of the more standard characters. The few I showed are all clearly formed and do not look like existing characters.

For me, it is precisely the combination of a consistent character set over more than 230 pages, and some individual exceptions, that is a bit puzzling.

Some of them tend to prefer line-initial and line-final positions, but this is far from being a rule, and the first example I showed is not line-initial or line-final. (By the way, in my opinion we do not know if this is a single shape or an i with a flourish. It is not fundamentally different in composition from Eva-r. And either way, this makes no real difference with respect to the question).

There are also other things going on. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has a whole set of characters that appear (almost) exclusively on that page. To me, this gives the appearance of a copy of a source text that also included special symbols, e.g. zodiac or planet signs.

There are always explanations for such single characters. Since it appears to be a cryptogram.
-the scribe falls back into his native tongue. ( fatigue, distracted ).
-The system doesn't open in one position. -What? ( one correction ).
-Thinking, writing in native language.
Example:
Words where Sp, St begin with Schp, Scht, are spoken and spelled the same way in Alemanic.
( Stern = Schtern, Sport = Schport ).
On the other hand, it leaves out the ( ch ). So Schwert = Swert.
These examples seen in a book, written by the same author.
I have also seen the big rounded "E". I think it means "Ergo". But I am not sure, because I don't know Latin and can't read the books.

Does the VM author take this into the VM text ?

By the way, in my earlier post, the word 'mechanism' was intended in a very general manner. Just whatever was used to compose the text.

 @ Rene

If you use the word mechanism in the widest sense, the scribe used a script and the writing and abbreviation customs and rules of the 15th c. The tex is an autograph in he sense some of the Thomas Aquinas mss. are and since we have no other tradition, we are met with the fundamental problems of such a ms.

If you still worry if the ms. has a meaning, I can't help you and no one else can. Of course it has. All the no meanig theories are nonsense

I have told you before that most of the ms. is readable, the problem is to find out what the scribe meant or took down or copied or what else. I have some opinions, what it is bur don't publish them because I am not satisfied myself (yet). And I don't think building statistics is helpful. 

The same for the characters which are 'hapax legomena'. For example, some of the 57r chareacters look astronomical to me, but space science is a field I don't kno much about. We have to find out where they are derived from and what they mean

@Helmut, no worries, I will try to help help myself as best I can.

However, when you write:

Quote:I have told you before that most of the ms. is readable

then I have to counter that there is a complete lack of evidence for this statement.

Furthermore:

Quote:And I don't think building statistics is helpful.

:

Statistics are an excellent tool to test hypotheses. They just have be used correctly and interpreted correctly, and this is where quite often it isn't done in the best possible way.

The presence of such anomalous glyphs for me supports the hope of the significance of the text.
What do the glyphs in Figure 1 and 2 have in common?
They are based on eva-s, only in the first case added ך, and in the second - “e”. Perhaps this was done when checking the text to ensure the unambiguous reading of the word.
As a basis for examples 3-7, eva-v can be considered. The remaining glyphs are obtained by adding one (several) elementary strokes.
For examples 8-11, the base is code 202 v101, which in turn can be decomposed as i + /.
More than 95% of abnormal glyphs can be decomposed into elementary strokes. The difficulty arises with strokes ⌠ , ℓ, °, which appear in the manuscript less than 10 times.
Example 12 also points to the “significance” of the text, where a dark eva-i was added when checking the text, despite the fact that the word does not provide a gap between the letters.
Earlier, I gave 2 examples with a double loop on the right leg of the gallows.
Example 13 is another illustration. Both loops are additionally circled by a single dark outline. If the number of loops does not matter, then why did it, because it is much easier to paint over both loops with a combined blot?
[font=Arial, sans-serif][attachment=4048][/font]

 
 
 

(25-02-2020, 05:18 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....

The point is that it is very clear and deliberate and it occurs exactly once among approx. 160,000 symbols.
There are similar cases, e.g. the first character in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. line 2:



or the first in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. line 15:



What is the mechanism whereby such individual characters appear?

René, my best guess for the two characters that look vaguely like reverse-EVA-s is that they resemble Hebrew lamed.

These are sound vocalizations: and here is why i believe they are.
In the 13th Century, there was an uptick in mystical writing, circles (or to encircle) and vocalization. Based on a 3rd Century manuscript by physician Quintus Serenus Sammonicus called 'Liber Medicinalis" These are incantations and charms used by the Greeks to dispel malaria.
Up for debate, I know, but the 3 letters in the plant on page 4r, translate to 'what i see, is in my hand' and this was the first clue.
All Hebrew letters have meaning unto themselves, and combining them to make words, and creates a magic all its own, when pronounced correctly. 

An example of this, is the believed Arabic term of Abracadabara...
The Hebrew Bara is twice used, which means to "create", Hence:
A = This/Forever 
Bara = create
Cada (not spelled or pronounced exactly like this in Hebrew) = to be seen/to be made
Bara = create

The looping of the upper part of the letter, shows which vocalization to use. Some are used very rarely because they can be of a rare blended combination. When looking at the entire VM you will see how the same glyph, can have small, large or elongated versions. These show what type of sound to utilize. This is why on word like "Ra"  or "RSH" in Hebrew can have multiple variations in sounds and the spoken word or pronunciation, give it its meaning.

The problem with almost all the macro assertions about the nature of Voynichese that tend to get made is that there is no proof supporting those assertions.

In other words: assertions are (very) easy to make, proof is close to impossible to make.

But at the same time, there are numerous "micro-assertions" about Voynichese which it would be good to have a proof for (but which continue to elude us).

I hope that Rene has seen the outline of a proof for one of these micro-assertions.

I think for most of them, we are at the stage of "Where are they?" "What do they look like?" (and they might look like more than one thing).

Like the rest of the text, I don't think we really have any "What does it mean?" data yet but there are some interesting patterns of "oddball" glyphs that show up fairly frequently through the manuscript.

There are also some "tells" that give us clues as to what certain shapes might be.

For example, in Latin scripts, EVA-y is written two ways...

• in line with the rest of the text (so it resembles a "g" but with a slightly different shape and its position is usually at the ends of tokens, and sometimes at beginning)
  
• superscripted (positioned at the ends of tokens)
  

Scribes usually chose one over the other, but would occasionally lapse into the other. Obviously they learned both ways.



Similarly, in the VMS this shape is written both in-line and superscripted, which is almost a dead give-away that this is not based on the "g" letter, and is probably EVA-y shape (Latin abbreviation-shape). Whether this has anything to do with meaning is difficult to tell, but the glyph does not behave like a letter, considering where it is positioned in tokens and how it is sometimes superscripted like an abbreviation (this might be based on how it is intended to be interpreted OR it might show a scribal slip based on how the writer THOUGHT of it or remembered the shape while writing).

Another VMS glyph that betrays familiarity with Latin scribal conventions is the reverse-c.

I know exactly what this means in Latin. I don't know what it means in Voynichese.