The Voynich Ninja

I think I'll post some images and new information I have about the potential new feature on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. here in one thread, because it's hard to track it in the MSI thread.

Quick background: I was playing with various ways to enhance the multispectral images provided by Lisa Fagin Davis and discovered that when you combine the individual TIFFs using specific weights a certain "squiggle" appears in the bottom right corner of f116v. You can read the other thread starting from this post for more information: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Here's what the feature looks like and its size (there is a ruler next to the manuscript in the original TIFFs, so I used it to overlay a cm/mm grid on the images, it's much easier to see the grid in the full resolution photo: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ).

[attachment=9223]

If you want to obtain the original image of this feature yourself, you can download the TIFFs from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (the link provided by LisaFaginDavis) and get the following Python script to merge them: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The whole feature appears to be about 3x3 cm. It also can be barely seen on individual TIFFs from the MSI set:

[attachment=9224]

It looks a bit like a signature or a short inscription, but, as ReneZ noticed, the strokes are too wide for a pen. One possible explanation that I have: if the scribble was initially written on a wet page, it would make the ink in certain parts of it spread. If this is what happened, then probably the whole thing was immediately washed/rubbed off, leaving no visible traces. Since it would take time for the page to dry out, this could explain why the inscription was forgotten and never repeated.

Is this an actual inscription/stamp/offset of some distinct shape or just some random artifact of the page material, photography or processing?

Arguments for it being an actual inscription/stamp/offset:

1) The model was only trained on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. right margin and appears to detect non-visible or faint ink quite well both on the right margin of f1r and at the top of f116v, suppressing random noise. The darkness of features on the processed image directly corresponds to the probability of text ink according to the model. The model paints parts of the squiggle black, which signifies very high probability of the shape being made with ink.

[attachment=9225]

2) The model only works on pixel values, without any spacial awareness. Each pixel of the result image is completely determined by the corresponding pixel on each of the TIFFs. It's highly unlikely that this model would produce a distinctive shape where no such shapes are present in the original TIFFs (and it's possible to discern them in the original TIFFs).

3) Both sides of the vellum in this particular spot show no visible folds, tears or other physical defects that could produce the squiggle shape.

[attachment=9226]

4) It's quite natural a spot for a stamp or a signature. There is little empty space on the first page (especially if Tepenez's signature was already there), the top of the last page has some writing on it (assuming it was already there too), so the bottom part of the last page is where one can leave some ownership mark or something similar.

5) To me it seems unlikely that this is some artifact of photography (e.g., a reflection of something off camera; matrix or lens defect), since these images are made in a highly professional setting.


Arguments for it being some random artifact:

1) Frankly, it's hard for me to come up with a process that would produce this feature without this shape actually being drawn or imprinted on the manuscript. Could this be a random ink spill combined with some directional rubbing?

What kind of writing utensil could this be written with?

If this is not a stamp/seal, but an inscription, I suppose a normal quill pen will do. If we compare the width of the strokes where they are the most pronounced, they are not that much wider than some of the strokes in normal Voynichese text. Voynichese letters are quite tiny by themselves. Here's a comparison between You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. top writing and the squiggle.

[attachment=9230]

The blurry wide strokes of the squiggle require a separate explanation, but I think writing on a wet surface or a water spill shortly after writing could explain why parts of the inscription are wide and blurry.

I think I need to clarify this: if we assume the whole thing is a single feature (both black pronounced strokes and wide blurry strokes are part of the same inscription or stamp), then the blurry parts are actually physically blurry. As far as I understand the whole pipeline from the imaging to processing, no feathering/dithering/averaging at this scale could be introduced at any stage. So, the ink or whatever left this shape was actually spread on the page by something. Also, the fact that the models pick the ink-like noise all over the bottom right of the page could suggest that traces of actual ink happen everywhere, which may be consistent with wiping off some fresh inscription with a wet cloth or something like this. I wonder, if it's possible to remove fresh ink from vellum by wet wiping? Especially if the vellum was already wet in the first place.

Actually, there is a much simpler way of looking at this: the feature on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. could have been made by the same kind of writing utensil as what was used for You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Tepenecz signature. Both items are magnified to the same extent in the following picture. The width of distinct strokes is roughly the same, it's only the blurred areas of the f116v scribble that are much wider than any part of Tepenecz's signature.

[attachment=9231]

I agree that if it is writing, the closest to it in the MS is the Tepenecz signature.

Is it actually known why this was badly visible even before Wilfrid messed with it?

As far as I understand, Tepenecz wasn't a big celebrity, his bold ownership mark on the first page could be an eyesore for one of the later owners. I don't know what would be the best way to remove an old inscription without scraping (the signs of which are absent in the manuscript, as far as the lore goes). The internet says pumice stone, would it actually work?

I'm trying to think of possible ways to identify the authorship of the squiggle, assuming this is a stamp or a signature. Unless its shape is obvious to someone, the task seems quite hard.

I have a very weak argument that the squiggle could be quite old. It's located next to several holes in vellum, almost right on top of them. If the squiggle is intentional, I'd say this is a very weird choice of location to place it, given there is plenty of space to the left on the page. It's possible that the squiggle was put there before the wormholes appeared in the vellum.

(22-09-2024, 03:57 AM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm trying to think of possible ways to identify the authorship of the squiggle, assuming this is a stamp or a signature. Unless its shape is obvious to someone, the task seems quite hard.

I have a very weak argument that the squiggle could be quite old. It's located next to several holes in vellum, almost right on top of them. If the squiggle is intentional, I'd say this is a very weird choice of location to place it, given there is plenty of space to the left on the page. It's possible that the squiggle was put there before the wormholes appeared in the vellum.

[attachment=9234]
1. The left top corner of the Rosettes foldout.
2. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (your find).
3. The right top corner of f1r.
I think all these three picks have something common. First o all, all of them appear in corners, in quite important places of the manuscript (the first and the last pages, the big foldout with an unknown sheme). As well, the bird-like symbol - we have seen it not once in the hidden notes, as well as the quite obvious ones on f1r. As for the squiggles in the corner of the Rosettes and in the corner of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. they seems to look quite similar. I can suppose they represent the letter R, some kind of it, or we just see the only part of it.
[attachment=9235][attachment=9237]

I can try training a model on the shape you give for the top right corner of 1r, on MSI TIFFS there is also something that looks like a small inscription a bit to the left of it and something that looks like another small inscription at the top of the page, and another shape that looks like a small letter. I'll create a separate thread for this if you don't mind.