07-05-2021, 07:13 PM
07-05-2021, 07:33 PM
(07-05-2021, 07:13 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Geoffrey, can you tell me how to encipher a text using your system?
Yes. The process is spelled out in detail on pp. 7-10 of the attached draft paper, which is identical to the draft paper I referenced that I have posted on Academia.edu.
Now I may add that there may be additional rules that determine that additional words may be written backwards rather than forwards, which were not included because they had not explicitly arisen at the time of the drafting of the attached draft paper. For example, I now think it is likely that words may also be written backwards in order to make the letter "p" appear first in a word, perhaps as an homage to "Percy" (the family name of "Hotspur" Henry Percy, another York ally and opponent of Henry IV (Bolingbroke)). And the same rule may be applied to make "t" appear first in a word as well, since the character for "t" has a similar shape to "p" -- these are simply the gallows characters. This could explain why they frequently appear in word-initial position but very rarely in word-final position. It is possible that this rule may be extended to the characters for "f, v" and "d" as well, since they are verbose cipher character combinations including the characters for "p" and "t".
All of these rules would help to explain the low entropy of the Voynich MS text: The rules of the cipher are designed to make the first letters of "York", "Mortimer", and "Percy", as well as several other characters that look similar to them, appear in word-initial position as often as possible by writing words backwards in order to achieve this appearance. And the same principle applies in order to make the final letter of "YorK" appear in word-final position as often as possible, and also to make the hated letter "B" as in "Bolingbroke" appear not in word-initial but rather almost always in word-final position. (The latter is the character EVA [m].)
Please keep in mind that if you are not writing or enciphering one-line stylistic epigrams, the Middle English text that you encipher using my system of cipher rules may still not appear to very closely resemble the Voynich MS text. Not only the cipher rules but also the style of writing of the text can both have a very great impact on the final appearance of the MS text.
Geoffrey
07-05-2021, 08:08 PM
Right, so if I encode something using your system and it doesn't look like Voynichese and you cannot retrieve its meaning, this must be because I used the wrong style of text. This makes your theory untestable.
07-05-2021, 08:15 PM
(07-05-2021, 07:04 PM)RenegadeHealer Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Agreed. I'm just trying to help anyone who might not get it, understand a bit better why Geoffrey's Yorkist theory isn't gaining more traction.
One more clarification: The issue of whether the theory is or isn't gaining more traction on the Voynich Ninja forum is not the same as the issue of whether the theory is or isn't gaining more traction elsewhere or in general. I am most greatly appreciative of all the members and participants of the Voynich Ninja forum. But this forum is not the final arbiter of what is right and wrong with regard to theories of the Voynich MS. I have many avenues and means to pursue in order to seek and find scholarly reception, commentary, feedback, and potentially collaboration in the research work in support of my theory. That process may or may not be reflective of the reception, commentary, feedback, and potential collaboration regarding my theory that may or may not be apparent in this thread or elsewhere on this forum. But again, I always welcome the feedback and collaboration of anyone on this forum in particular.
Geoffrey
07-05-2021, 08:25 PM
(07-05-2021, 08:08 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Right, so if I encode something using your system and it doesn't look like Voynichese and you cannot retrieve its meaning, this must be because I used the wrong style of text. This makes your theory untestable.
I am happy to look at any text that you encode or encipher using my system, and I will do my best to retrieve its meaning. Most likely, in fact, that process will be easier for me if you use a standard text than it is for the Voynich MS text itself, because it seems to me that the epigrammatic style of the Voynich MS text is more obscure than most other styles of texts.
But I simply want to point out that even using the same system, there may still be differences in the appearance of the Voynich MS text and the text that you, I, or others may encipher, due to differences in the styles of the original texts. That is all I am saying. Again, I am basing my "collection of one-line epigrams" hypothesis precisely on the well-known "line-based structural features" of the Voynich MS text that analysts have identified for many decades and that many of us are very well familiar with.
Koen, I sincerely hope that you do go ahead and proceed with the enciphering of some text using my system. It will be a good learning experience regardless of whether we or others share the same opinions about the conclusions to be drawn from the results of such a process. I would be most interested to see what cipher text you may produce by this method.
Geoffrey
07-05-2021, 11:28 PM
Koen, here is an idea. Encipher two passages using my system. Then make up two passages of presumably meaningless Voynichese that you think superficially resemble the actual enciphered passages that you encoded with my system. Present them to me in a random unknown order. See if I can tell the difference, and see how well I can read and interpret the passages that you actually enciphered from real plaintext passages. That seems like a fair and reasonable challenge and test of my system and theory.
Geoffrey
Geoffrey
07-05-2021, 11:38 PM
Comparing them with pseudo-text I made up is not the best test, since this just tests how well you can recognize the signs of your own system.
I would gladly present a challenge, but I am (and will be, for the foreseeable future) wrestling with a colossal blog post that is taking up all my spare time and mental energy. If someone else is willing to do it, I would encourage them to do so, otherwise I will have a look at it later.
I would gladly present a challenge, but I am (and will be, for the foreseeable future) wrestling with a colossal blog post that is taking up all my spare time and mental energy. If someone else is willing to do it, I would encourage them to do so, otherwise I will have a look at it later.
07-05-2021, 11:42 PM
(07-05-2021, 11:38 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Comparing them with pseudo-text I made up is not the best test, since this just tests how well you can recognize the signs of your own system.
I would gladly present a challenge, but I am (and will be, for the foreseeable future) wrestling with a colossal blog post that is taking up all my spare time and mental energy. If someone else is willing to do it, I would encourage them to do so, otherwise I will have a look at it later.
Fair enough, understood, thank you Koen.
Geoffrey
08-05-2021, 11:18 PM
Folio page You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. appears to begin in the same vein as the last 7 lines of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. concluded. Here is my reading and interpretation of the first line of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. :
First, a nuance to add to the cipher rules: It now appears to me that EVA [y], which I have represented with the Yorkist cipher letter value "K", may represent not only the Middle English present participle "-ing" or "-ynge", but also the past participle, which may take various forms depending on the verb. Yes, this is another small degree of freedom to be accounted for, but it is fully consistent with the principles of the cipher and its rules as I have analysed them thus far. It is far from just an "ad hoc" new rule. Moreover, as JKP and others are well aware, the character we call EVA [y] is very similar in shape and appearance to the ubiquitous medieval Latin manuscript abbreviation symbol that was also used for a rather large variety of both endings and prefixes. Thus it is not inconsistent to propose its extension from present participles to past participles as well. And once again, from the "Yorkist" cipher perspective, this rule also increases the number of words which may end in the word-final character "K", the same final character as the word "YORK". Thus I have provided not only a means to explain the low entropy of the text, but also a logical reason and motivation for the author(s) to do so.
And so without further ado, the first line of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. :
EVA transliteration:
[ tol shokchy opaiin opaiin chofaly ypar ypal opal opaldaiin ]
Yorkist cipher letter values:
" pOs thOtyK fo fo ydisK Kpir Kpis fis fisso "
my interpretation of this line:
" pos : thouting of fo -- idist ripynge, capias, fis fisoun "
translation:
" pledge : thou'ing of [the] foe [who has] committed pillaging, writs of arrest, farts galore "
Geoffrey
First, a nuance to add to the cipher rules: It now appears to me that EVA [y], which I have represented with the Yorkist cipher letter value "K", may represent not only the Middle English present participle "-ing" or "-ynge", but also the past participle, which may take various forms depending on the verb. Yes, this is another small degree of freedom to be accounted for, but it is fully consistent with the principles of the cipher and its rules as I have analysed them thus far. It is far from just an "ad hoc" new rule. Moreover, as JKP and others are well aware, the character we call EVA [y] is very similar in shape and appearance to the ubiquitous medieval Latin manuscript abbreviation symbol that was also used for a rather large variety of both endings and prefixes. Thus it is not inconsistent to propose its extension from present participles to past participles as well. And once again, from the "Yorkist" cipher perspective, this rule also increases the number of words which may end in the word-final character "K", the same final character as the word "YORK". Thus I have provided not only a means to explain the low entropy of the text, but also a logical reason and motivation for the author(s) to do so.
And so without further ado, the first line of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. :
EVA transliteration:
[ tol shokchy opaiin opaiin chofaly ypar ypal opal opaldaiin ]
Yorkist cipher letter values:
" pOs thOtyK fo fo ydisK Kpir Kpis fis fisso "
my interpretation of this line:
" pos : thouting of fo -- idist ripynge, capias, fis fisoun "
translation:
" pledge : thou'ing of [the] foe [who has] committed pillaging, writs of arrest, farts galore "
Geoffrey
10-05-2021, 11:44 PM
The document attached to this post provides a unified presentation of my Middle English interpretation of the last 7 lines of text on folio page You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the first 3 lines of text on the following folio page You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , followed by a modern English translation of these 10 lines of text.
This is not intended to be a complete presentation of my theory, methods, correspondences, the Yorkist cipher rules, Yorkist cipher letter values, etc. All of that other information can be found in the previous draft paper document I uploaded recently in this thread above, as well as throughout my many posts in this thread to date. This is simply a summary of what 10 consecutive lines of Middle English text on these pages of the Voynich MS look like and read like, according to my theory, reading, and interpretation.
I claim that this interpretation of these 10 consecutive lines of text represents meaningful, grammatical Middle English text, and moreover it represents historically relevant text expressing the viewpoint of the Duke of York and/or a member, adherent, or ally of the House of York in England in 1404-1406: virulently hostile opposition to the reign of the first Lancastrian king Henry IV (Bolingbroke). If you can read and understand these lines of text, it is easy to understand why such text had to be carefully hidden in the form of such an obscure cipher. If the meaning of the text in the attached document had been discovered in the early 15th century rather than in the early 21st century, its author or authors surely would have been executed for treason.
I am curious about the "missing" folio pages You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. through You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. . Perhaps they also contained additional treasonous material that the author or authors feared was too easily identifiable as such, and thus the author or authors (probably wisely) removed and destroyed those folio pages?
Geoffrey Edward Caveney
This is not intended to be a complete presentation of my theory, methods, correspondences, the Yorkist cipher rules, Yorkist cipher letter values, etc. All of that other information can be found in the previous draft paper document I uploaded recently in this thread above, as well as throughout my many posts in this thread to date. This is simply a summary of what 10 consecutive lines of Middle English text on these pages of the Voynich MS look like and read like, according to my theory, reading, and interpretation.
I claim that this interpretation of these 10 consecutive lines of text represents meaningful, grammatical Middle English text, and moreover it represents historically relevant text expressing the viewpoint of the Duke of York and/or a member, adherent, or ally of the House of York in England in 1404-1406: virulently hostile opposition to the reign of the first Lancastrian king Henry IV (Bolingbroke). If you can read and understand these lines of text, it is easy to understand why such text had to be carefully hidden in the form of such an obscure cipher. If the meaning of the text in the attached document had been discovered in the early 15th century rather than in the early 21st century, its author or authors surely would have been executed for treason.
I am curious about the "missing" folio pages You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. through You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. . Perhaps they also contained additional treasonous material that the author or authors feared was too easily identifiable as such, and thus the author or authors (probably wisely) removed and destroyed those folio pages?
Geoffrey Edward Caveney