The Voynich Ninja

I really don't see what the point of all this would be. Someone would have to sample every millimeter of every page, including the edges and the interior of the spine, the sewing stations, the sewing threads, the binding, etc. There is absolutely no way that that is going to happen. What would be the payoff? Subject the manuscript to that amount of handling and abrasion on the chance that some of the samples might include human DNA? Then what? It might be interesting, but in no way is the risk to the manuscript going to be worth the very remote possibility of recovering cellular debris that might include DNA that might be identifiable as someone whom we already know has handled the manuscript in the modern era. Even when the sample-gathering is minimally destructive, it is still destructive, especially if portions with ink and pigment are going to be sampled. It is simply unimaginable that those entrusted with the care and preservation of this object would allow it. The manuscript is very, very fragile, especially the fold-outs and the Rose, which can no longer be safely opened without risk of tearing. The potential for actionable results is much too remote to risk damaging the manuscript.

(24-12-2021, 09:23 PM)LisaFaginDavis Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Someone would have to sample every millimeter of every page, including the edges and the interior of the spine, the sewing stations, the sewing threads, the binding, etc.

Why would that be necessary? I don't understand that. 

I would expect there would be DNA, maybe lots of it, from a given scribe on a given page on which that scribe had written. I am not an expert on this, so it seems conceivable that lots of the scribe's DNA would be so degraded by now as to be non-recoverable. However it seems to be more plausible that there is lots of largely intact long strand DNA molecules from all of the scribes distributed all over the manuscript pages. In fact the scribes would have had more close contact with the manuscript than most likely any other individual, so one would think they would have deposited more DNA than anyone else and in places where others might not have deposited DNA.

I found this article from the Atlantic

"Sampling DNA From a 1,000-Year-Old Illuminated Manuscript
Genetic analysis could revolutionize the study of medieval books.

By Sarah Zhang"

To quote from the article:

"Remarkably, the authors say they extracted all this DNA without destroying even a tiny piece of parchment. All they needed were the crumbs from rubbing the book with erasers, which conservationists routinely use to clean manuscripts."

From this article it appears that DNA can be extracted from a manuscript with no significant damage to the manuscript. Now this refers to animal skin, but I don't see why this could apply to human DNA as one would expect them to be intermingled.

(24-12-2021, 09:23 PM)LisaFaginDavis Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Even when the sample-gathering is minimally destructive, it is still destructive, especially if portions with ink and pigment are going to be sampled. It is simply unimaginable that those entrusted with the care and preservation of this object would allow it. The manuscript is very, very fragile, especially the fold-outs and the Rose, which can no longer be safely opened without risk of tearing. The potential for actionable results is much too remote to risk damaging the manuscript.

That may well be, I certainly can't comment on the state of the manuscript or what those in possession of the manuscript would allow, though I note that the Carbon Dating and ink analysis was allowed which could well be more damaging to the manuscript.

This is all speculation on my part and I don't know how degraded the scribes DNA would likely be by now.

The earlier forensic tests on the VMS were done using slivers of blank parchment and very small bits of ink and pigment. Rubbing an eraser over every surface is an entirely different prospect. The time, risk, and expense would not be worth the very remote possibility of finding anything useful in terms of narrowing down the geographical origins of the manuscript. 

There is also the fact that people traveled during this period, often and expansively. IF human DNA were found AND it could be determined that it was approximately the same age as the manuscript AND there were some kind of database to compare the sample to AND a near-enough match were found in that database to provide some evidence about where that person came from (unlikely...you really need evidence like isotopes found in localizable water for that kind of result, which comes from minerals in bones and teeth, not DNA), you still could only conclude that a person who lived in the early fifteenth century who came from a very generalized location was associated with the manuscript. I just don't see how that's any help in terms of understanding the origins of the manuscript.

I don't think anyone is advocating for all pages to be rubbed vigorously in their entirety, just if there is some conservation work ever done, or pieces come off through wear, that the rubbings and/or detritus be tested for an array of dna possibilities, or are at least stored for the purposes of doing so in the future. What a travesty if such rubbings went in the trash because it was thought that to test it would bring futile results not worth whatever expense there might be associated with doing so at the time.

One would not look for dna of specific people known to have contact, but if human dna were to be found, one could possibly test the results against people known to have contact, or their descendants or cousins as the case may be, thereby identifying the uknown dna if it should happen to indicate a match to any of the known possibilities. If it doesn't, then there are many possibilities left over, all of those who touched it that we don't know about. I have no idea if people who view the ms nowadays are logged as doing so, are they? That list, if it exists, could be possibly be checked against as well to eliminate those people. Start that list now if there isn't one, but i can only imagine that one does exist, at least partially, through appoinments for viewing, or signing in etc.

Besides the few people we see listed as having had contact (i am sure there would be far more) one could include the known researchers since Wilfred, unless it is known they never had actual contact with the ms. I don't know the status of dna tech or how well they can tell how old a sample might be, but who knows what the status might be in the future, so there çould well be other clues that come along with the findings that could help identify the nature of it, which may offer more information toward determining where it was made and possibly by whom, at least in some general sense. I don't really think we will know their history per se, but that remains to be seen.

I am actually more interested in the animal dna in the parchment idea, since it would seem the animals would roam the world far less than people do, and haven't since had their bretheren making contact, and so their dna information might supply the location of the early existence of the ms and possibly also provide corroboration or further pinpointing on the timing of its origins. There would certainly be more of it than any trace remains of contact. That in conjunction with databases of other dna results over time, whether human or animal, could supply some further possibilities if the genealogical record of the place is complete enough as well. Knowing the location and timing of the origins of the materials would help formulate likelihoods regarding languages and possibly the historical socio-political climate of the time in that location.

I come up with further ancestors all the time in my own tree as more data is digitised and/or people's various namings within the records are determined to indicate variously recorded people as one and the same. Who knows where all that will take us in the next few decades as the knowledge pool increases. Genealogical dna testing is still in its infancy as near as i can tell, but the passing of time may find it done for everyone in the future, especially if combined with doing so for medical or other reasons. So it is with the possibilities of future abilities in mind that we should think about preservation of what might otherwise just be dust in the wind.

The more I think about it, the more I realise the human DNA testing is absolutely ridiculous. Say a random piece of parchment comes off and is tested. Do you really think the VM maker left their DNA over every millimeter of the MS like a slimy film? They didn't even touch every part of it, let alone leave behind genetic material. 

For all we know, a thousand people have touched the MS since its creation. So let's say some DNA comes up, and some of it is Italian. The Italian DNA is fom a random worker who touched it before the sale to Wilfrid Voynich. People go crazy: Italian DNA found on the VM. Further investigation is done, and all kinds of things are now suggested about the identity of the author. 

Testing the VM for human DNA is not only naive and useless; it would be detrimental to the study. 


Testing the animal DNA of the parchment for matches against a database is much more useful, even if that database is still under construction. As soon as the VM's animal DNA is known, it can be compared to any future entries.

(25-12-2021, 10:27 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The more I think about it, the more I realise the human DNA testing is absolutely ridiculous.

I think a problem here is that none of us, except Michelle are speaking with any expertise on the subject, yet we are all speaking as though we highly knowledgeable in this area. I don't know what is possible I am suggesting what it seems might well be possible. I think there is a problem more widely here pertaining to Voynich research, people are speaking with confidence as to what technologically may or may not be possible without knowing the subject. I am not an expert on this subject of DNA identification nor are many others, so how can they express so much confidence in their understanding of the science?

(25-12-2021, 10:27 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Say a random piece of parchment comes off and is tested. Do you really think the VM maker left their DNA over every millimeter of the MS like a slimy film? They didn't even touch every part of it, let alone leave behind genetic material.

If you just breathe on something you can leave your DNA, so it is not even necessary to touch it. I wouldn't suggest that DNA is slimy or comprises a film, but widely distributed across the pages of the manuscript sounds quite plausible to me.

(25-12-2021, 10:27 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For all we know, a thousand people have touched the MS since its creation.

So it would be necessary to either eliminate the sequenced DNA that one is not interested in by some careful, but time efficient means, or alternatively to collect a sample from the manuscript not containing most or all of the DNA that one is not interested in.

(25-12-2021, 10:27 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So let's say some DNA comes up, and some of it is Italian. The Italian DNA is fom a random worker who touched it before the sale to Wilfrid Voynich. People go crazy: Italian DNA found on the VM. Further investigation is done, and all kinds of things are now suggested about the identity of the author. 

That implies a terrible methodological approach by the scientist in question, why would anyone approach it in such an idiotic way?

(25-12-2021, 10:27 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Testing the VM for human DNA is not only naive and useless; it would be detrimental to the study. 

With all due respect what qualifications do you have to make such a strong statement? My understanding is that you are a linguist not an expert on DNA identification.

(25-12-2021, 10:27 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Testing the animal DNA of the parchment for matches against a database is much more useful, even if that database is still under construction. As soon as the VM's animal DNA is known, it can be compared to any future entries.

I certainly wouldn't suggest it is necessarily an either or situation. I would not think that both could be possible.

(25-12-2021, 10:27 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Testing the animal DNA of the parchment for matches against a database is much more useful, even if that database is still under construction. As soon as the VM's animal DNA is known, it can be compared to any future entries.

I completely agree with you. Moreover, in my opinion, the examination of proteinaceous ink is also a way to determine the origin of the VMS ( see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).

@Mark
Let's assume you would do it this way.
All finds of people give 1000 samples as an example.
Now such are deducted where one could know.
Tepenec, Wilfried, the librarian, and so on.
Not to forget, LFD had it already in the fingers .
Now you need reverence samples from the other 900. Where will you get them from, if you have no idea where to look. Now the whole thing becomes as good as impossible.
The book would be more damaged than the insects could have ever done.

If I take the clues where the book gives me, without any self-interpretation, I already have a good basis. If I would check now still the parchment of the calf on its origin and family tree (what was suggested), then this would be more useful than 900 open possibilities. Looking at the author.

From this point of view Koen is right.

Translated with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (free version)

A few more thoughts:

1) Yes, the Beinecke Library has records of everyone who has handled the manuscript since they acquired it in 1969. In the US, however, that information is absolutely confidential. Anyone who goes to any library to look at any book or document is assured confidentiality. The Beinecke cannot ever release that information, about any of their holdings, not just the VMS.

2) DNA sampling of the parchment is much more promising than looking for human cellular debris, but only if/when there is an extremely large database of parchment of known date/place of origin to compare it to. The current work on assembling DNA profiles of medieval documents is being done using English documents, which isn't really going to do us a lot of good. We would need a database of hundreds of thousands of samples from around the world. Maybe someday, but not anytime soon.

3) The conservators at Yale know what they are doing, and I am certain that they would have saved any debris found in the gutters or on the surface during conservation treatment.