The Voynich Ninja

Is this wrong though?
"As far as I understand it was possessed by Voynich, the parchment has been C14 dated, the cover determined to be goat skin, beyond that I believe no further statements of fact can be made or have I missed something? "   Addition - first presented to the public in 1915.

The query above doesn't appear to make it either genuine and old or fake and modern in its production, but the general thrust seems to be the only acceptable vie is that it can ONLY be genuine and old but unusual, not fake or newer whilst retaining it's unusualness.  While for example no one has to agree that a Pisces fish in the VM may also be represented by a wyrm (dragon) type monster, bird or goddess or describe rivers and map, or even references to WWI, someone may find that that is a valid route to follow based on not seeing it as a [font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]genuine, old but unusual manuscript, following a wide range of sources from antiquity up to 1915.  [/font]

[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Bunny[/font]

We can make many statements of fact about the VMS.

(05-06-2020, 04:19 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.We can make many statements of fact about the VMS.

Ive been off the circuit for a while so may have missed any new data.  What is the latest situation with the facts?

Bunny

There are a number of topics that I have continued to belabor.

The cosmos, the critter (VMs f80v), the creature (VMs f79v), the clerics, the use of heraldic canting.

Any that might be of interest?

The facts are these: There is a correspondence between an authentic medieval image and a particular illustration in the VMs. These are currently the best comparisons. The authentic images have historical provenance. The provenance from various investigations indicates an area of mutual connection.

(06-06-2020, 07:13 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There are a number of topics that I have continued to belabor.

The cosmos, the critter (VMs f80v), the creature (VMs f79v), the clerics, the use of heraldic canting.

Any that might be of interest?

The facts are these: There is a correspondence between an authentic medieval image and a particular illustration in the VMs. These are currently the best comparisons. The authentic images have historical provenance. The provenance from various investigations indicates an area of mutual connection.

I agree that there is certainly heraldic patterning and references to Vaticana also.  The heraldic patterning on another level can distinguish different objects like 1, 2 ,3 or a, b, c.  Probably Medici indicators there though, and would be surprised if anyone didn't associate the patterns on the barrels with heraldry and some of the the nymph hats with the Saturno.

Imagery correspondence may still be deliberate though factually similar.  Being concrete fact as in proof seems a bit of a circular argument: the image is similar; the similar documents are vouched for; indicated mutual areas give factual stamp to the VM also being the same, real/old etc.  But as we know it is unique in script and the images are rather badly drawn mish-mash with examples from many sources.

Bunny