The Voynich Ninja

You know, that fashion (tight cuffs, very loose around the elbows) must have been really uncomfortable. No wonder it died out as quickly as it did and wasn't resurrected.

The Spanish depicted the Moors for centuries with very loose sleeves, but always with massive cuffs.

Oh, and black skin.

This is reinforced by this image of a Moorish slave in Western costume where he has tight sleeves, as do his masters:

(Both images from the 14th century Las Cantigas)

However, the tight trousers (I forget their name) and the ruffed kilt above them is certainly additional evidence in Koen's picture comparison.

Well, obviously the *myth* of the Golden Fleece comes from the Greeks and one myth is as valid as any other. However the Order of the Golden Fleece played an important role in the history of the Duchy of Burgundy under Philip the Good. It was one of the primary knightly orders of that era. The perception of the myth vis a vis the character of Jason was significant enough that two important Burgundian officials tried making certain changes to the myth, eventually replacing Jason with Gideon and the having a great tapestry produced. It's a tradition that lasted for centuries I don't see that as a poor argument. I see it as a situation where the modern investigator does not fully appreciate the significance perceived by individuals living during times relevant to the matter under consideration.

The beginnings of this certainly occurred within the dates derived from single-source interpretation - just as the clothing does. The investigation of the Golden Fleece is also paired with the investigation of the Agnus Dei (BNF Fr. 13096 f18). The comparison, as usual, is based of structure of the illustrations, *not* on their appearance. And the text in question was in the library of Philip the  Good.

If something that happened in 1420 was remembered and drawn in 1435, are you saying that there is a way to tell the difference from a drawing that was contemporary with the 1420 event?  What is it??

(31-08-2020, 06:53 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So, if Oresme is valid (BNF Fr. 565), if the clothing is valid, if Melusine is valid (Harley 334), if the Golden Fleece is valid, then the date is after 1430 and there are historical connections to the Duchy of Burgundy. VMs as a finished creation comes after the last dated event.

None of these can be used. BNF Fr. 565 is just one manuscript, and there is no evidence that the drawing in the Voynich MS was copied from this one. Same with Harley 334.

With respect to the individual samples, their uncertainty is wider in both directions.
Note also, that the uncertainty of each sample is a few decades, which is almost certainly longer than the time it took to create the MS. This means that individual samples cannot be used for precise dating. It is like measuring the size of a fly with a stick that only has inch markings.

Particularly:
if one sample is dated after another, this does not imply that the sample is newer. It is just 'chance'.

The more samples you take, the greater the chance that any one of them is at one of the far ends of the probability distribution.

One always has to keep in mind that the result of a C-14 dating is not a number, but a probability distribution.

(31-08-2020, 10:11 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The golden fleece existed before the Order of the Golden Fleece, and its iconography existed many centuries before. This is a poor argument to move the date.

Another example of using a vague similarity to support a shift of dates is Rich's discussion of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:

Quote:After much recent discussion about this image, which began when Robert Teague noted a very close alignment of the Oresme illustration with the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Voynich one, I’ve come to realize that the original possibility still stands: That perhaps the artist of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. was a forger, and was intending to imply that this was a spiral galaxy… and that this was the original intention after all.

The proposed date-shift is considerably larger, but the method is the same. Confirmation bias rules!

To picture f68r3
Nice theory...but...

In the middle we see a TO card. Which suggests the earth. What the earth confirms is the starry sky in a cloud inserted around the TO card.
In relation to the drawings where a rotation is indicated, the rotation of the earth could rather be meant.
Possibly he saw an arm of the milky way and drew his conclusions.
So much for the theory.

ReneZ,

Thanks again, I agree with much of what you said about the C-14 dating. The problem lies in the magnitude of the "windows" of uncertainty. My analogy would be a comparison with early telescopes that lacked the power to resolve more distant objects, which might be singular, binary systems  star clusters, or nebulae. And then it required another advance in telescopic power to resolve the nebulae as distant galaxies.

The C-14 situation in the VMs is what it is. The result of the C-14 test is a 'probability distribution'. The C-14 test does nor determine the number of different annual batches of parchment production. Like an early telescope and with only four samples, the C-14 test cannot resolve different production batches that may be separated by several decades. The uncertainty is just too great. The minimal range in the most limited scenario is still over three decades.

Your comment below has me confused.
"The more samples you take, the greater the chance that any one of them is at one of the far ends of the probability distribution."

In my view, if there are two or more non-identical sample results, one will be at the earlier end of the time-line and one at the more recent end. Taking more samples is not going to change this. If all samples come from the same source, more samples should tend to form a cluster, while samples from different sources may tend to extend the time-line, if those sources are sufficiently distinct. There's always going to be a sample at either end of the time-line. The choice of method by which the data is interpreted is also going to have some effect on the results. 

Regarding the illustrations, you said: "[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]None of these can be used." What use can be made of illustrations?[/font]

[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]I disagree. The use that  can be made of illustrations is comparison. The standard cosmic representation in the era of VMs parchment is the geocentric version surrounded by the concentric spheres of sun, moon, planets, stars. A few cosmic illustrations of this time present a more simplified representation. The basic description: A central, inverted T-O Earth, surrounded by stars, enclosed in a cloud-band with 43 undulations, is a description that matches only two examples, the VMs cosmos and the 'Oresme' cosmos produced in Paris about 1410 and originally owned by the Valois duke, Jean de Berry. The date is within the VMs C-14 dates.[/font]

[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]The Valois connection, including the dukes of Burgundy, is significant because (among others) the Valois claimed descent from the mythical Melusine, through the ruling house on Luxembourg, in the person of their mother. The comparison between the VMs image of the pond scene of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is then comparable with the similar scene in f. 57 of Harley 334 - which was produced in Paris, dated 1425-1449 / or/ 1430-1440. It is recorded that a device used to celebrate the tradition of Melusine was present at The Feast of the Pheasant in 1454. The choice of interpretation between Melusine and Minnie, the generic mermaid, is the individual's choice of interpretation. Tradition, however, has its thumb heavily on one side, IMHO. And a long unrecognized tradition at that. And, incidentally, in the latter part of the Hundred Years War, up until 1435 the Anglo-Burgundian alliance controlled Paris. And after that the Burgundians allied with the French, so not booted out then either.[/font]

[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]While the description of the comparative structure of the two cosmic illustrations can be sho[/font]wn to be equivalent, you wouldn't know it by looking. Just starting with the central Earth, Oresme is pictorial; VMs is linguistic. Nothing could be more visually different. It's called a code shift. The same information provided by differing methods. This says a lot about the problems of interpreting the VMs illustrations. One needs to know *what* something is in order to properly understand it according to traditional interpretation. Appearance has been intentionally manipulated to create ambiguity. Heraldic canting also comes into play. And like the nebuly line, one cannot properly interpret something without knowing its traditional name.

As these items suggest the potential consideration of connections to the Duchy of Burgundy during the parchment dates, one can hardly neglect the various investigators that have suggested the interpretation of VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as depicting the Golden Fleece. This is a stronger and more specific connection. And the combination of structural similarities with the Agnus Dei image in BNF Fr. 13096 helps to reinforce potential Burgundian provenance.

The use that I see for these illustrations and their interpretations is that they appear to move the descriptive terms applied to the VMs away from Aztec, Cathar, or Turkish, and toward something that just might be more realistic and based on history and tradition.

(01-09-2020, 09:18 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Your comment below has me confused.
"The more samples you take, the greater the chance that any one of them is at one of the far ends of the probability distribution."

In my view, if there are two or more non-identical sample results, one will be at the earlier end of the time-line and one at the more recent end. Taking more samples is not going to change this. If all samples come from the same source, more samples should tend to form a cluster, while samples from different sources may tend to extend the time-line, if those sources are sufficiently distinct. There's always going to be a sample at either end of the time-line. The choice of method by which the data is interpreted is also going to have some effect on the results. 

This is related to the statistical distribution. What is measured is "fraction of C-14", and this measurement is assumed to have an error that is normally distributed (i.e. Gaussian). If one looks at the point in this distribution, where the probability is 90% that the value is below, and 10% that the value is above, then:
- with one sample the probability is 10% that it is above
- with two samples, the probability that both are below = 0.9*0.9 = 0.81, so the chance is 19% that one or more of them is/are above
- with three samples this becomes 1 - (0.9)**3 = 28%
etc.

In general, every limit is more likely to be exceeded when there are more samples.