The Voynich Ninja

The VM was written on 14th century velum, and was picked up by King Philip a couple of hundred years later. If it were a working document for someone who could actually understand it, it became unusable when they died. So, where would someone salt away a useless manuscript for two hundred years only to have someone come along and acquire it because they know their boss, the king likes this kind of stuff. I would think it would have gone into a library. Would a commoner, or anybody but clergy or royalty be afforded the luxury of having something archived for a century or two? Who would even want it? Were encrypted books a thing back then?  Puzzles without a key get thrown in the fire.

Forum members have shared numerous illustrations suggesting that the VM was largely copied from other and better works. In the absence of artistic ability, the writer uses nymphs as some sort of all purpose symbolism. If manuscript was for personal use, the rough and ready finish would be understandable, the perfection in the script is just that, too perfect. 

I guess what this is getting to is that it seems common that old books can be traced right back to their source. In fact isnt the authorship of a book a status symbol. Then we have the VM, no author, no key, no meaningful link between sections. I think if it was a recipe book, where are the numbers? Sigh!

14th century? King Philip?

King Philip was a secret nickname of Emperor Rudolf

I missed the name and others missed the point. I stand corrected, but no better informed yet.

I'm not that much concerned with the provenance and the vellum dating, so I wasn't triggered by these inaccuracies (frankly, while I caught the wrong century, I just went huh? when you mentioned King Philip, but couldn't remember the right name at all).

My general approach to researching the VMS is first to assume that people that have been working in various lines of investigation knew what they were doing, and if they haven't found anything that would "crack" the Voynich mystery so far, then I should look elsewhere. My attitude towards Voynich is that this is a real object with some ink writing and drawings that could have been made by some alchemist or some crackpot or Santa Clause or little green men or Voynich himself, doesn't really matter as long as there are some rules and principles telling which sequences of glyphs to write.

Having said that, your post makes a lot of assumptions, that I feel are unwarranted:

> If it were a working document for someone who could actually understand it, it became unusable when they died.

Unless they told someone how to read it. But eventually this information was lost, this is true.

> So, where would someone salt away a useless manuscript for two hundred years only to have someone come along and acquire it because they know their boss, the king likes this kind of stuff.

Cupboard? Literally, you could keep it anywhere. Given it was partially eaten by the worms that attacked its old (presumably) wooden cover, I suppose at least for some part of its history (pre-Rudolph or afterwards) it was just tucked away somewhere and neglected.

> Would a commoner, or anybody but clergy or royalty be afforded the luxury of having something archived for a century or two?

"Archived" as in "kept in the attic" - easily. It could have been lost and rediscovered this way a few times. Would actually explain very well why no information of provenance was kept and passed over together with the MS.

> Who would even want it? Were encrypted books a thing back then?  Puzzles without a key get thrown in the fire.

Pre-internet time was different. I remember keeping various odd books and magazines, that I didn't need, just because I knew that I wouldn't be able to easily find them again if I lost them. I cannot reliably imagine what it would be like living in the 15th-16th century, but I suppose I'd keep the VMS if I stumbled upon it. It does look curious.

> Forum members have shared numerous illustrations suggesting that the VM was largely copied from other and better works.

With all due respect to Koen and Marco and other researches working with images, but no. I haven't yet seen a single piece of strong evidence suggesting that any part of VMS was copied from any other known work.

> If manuscript was for personal use, the rough and ready finish would be understandable, the perfection in the script is just that, too perfect.

What do you mean by the perfection in the script?

> I think if it was a recipe book, where are the numbers?

Some people think it's all numbers   Really hard to tell what it is with no ability to read it.

I think it was usable for a few generations, that's why there is so much time missing between the carbon dating and clothing styles within and the first people known to have owned it. Since we don't know where it was before the known history, we don't know the circumstances of the original owners, it is all just part of the mystery. Was it found when new owners of a house cleared out the attic, library or closet? (We don't know what kind of house it would have been, maybe just a box or bag). Was it confiscated or stolen, and the actual owners really missed it afterwards? Was it sold because the only family left that it was handed down to was a cousin that wasn't privy to the secrets within, or just didn't care? Who knows. 

Who would want it? I would, in any time, I imagine. The curious. 

Who could afford to keep it? Anyone who could keep it dry and away from fire and pests I would imagine. With other things or not. For all we know it did stay in a private library for a century and a half or so, things are still discovered that way today.

Somebody knew the emperor would like it? Firstly, we don't really know that he ever even saw it, much less owned it. Even if he did, maybe someone thought it was encrypted to foil the government, reported as a suspicious document. Maybe the owners thought it should go as a gift, or as a prized historical document, but the accompanying letter was lost along the way. Many ways it could have gotten there. Might have moved from smaller authorities to larger ones over time.

People keep repeating about perfect script with no mistakes, but it's not perfect, several different versions of transliteration and/or parsings exist and likely there will be more versions to come. Perfect writing isn't misinterpreted in various ways. There are parts that seem to be overwritten, unknown if by the original makers or a later owner trying to recreate fading text. Plus, if one can't read it, how can one know whether there are mistakes or not? By the way, it reminds me of how I wrote the year I had a picky teacher who favoured neat handwriting. My real handwriting is completely different but i decided to write super small that year as it kept my writing neater. Perhaps it was the job of the youths in the group to sharpen their scribal talents by slowly and carefully transcribing paper crib notes.

Re similarities to other manuscripts, I don't know about that, maybe for the zodiac emblems, maybe for some of the cosmic stuff, maybe sometimes an overlap of style, the ephemeral stuff they were all exposed to if they saw a lot of manuscripts. But I think they had a uniqueness about themselves in the way they set out their information that doesn't come from another manuscript, or comes from many exposures to many manuscripts. Sometimes i think the script comes from mistakes in writings they have had to transcribe in their time, shared mnemonic ironies. It is why I was thinking one author until the five hands were identified, but I could see it being a more widespread endeavor, so I can accept that finding.

I think if you encrypt your entire manuscript, you are not looking for an audience, nor are you looking for status through its existence. You are trying to foil any such potential. I can see links, it all has to do with knowledge, but I doubt there are recipes per se.

(15-01-2025, 03:09 AM)GlennM Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Then we have the VM, no author, no key, no meaningful link between sections.

Indeed, there is a lot that we don't understand about the manuscript. No one topic, variable quality of illustrations, variability in language and writing, general untidiness.

It strongly suggests to me that the manuscript was not written in one go. That each section was written to be a separate piece of work and that the sections were then later bound into one volume. Bound together for the convenience of having all works in the unknown writing in one manuscript.

(17-01-2025, 10:40 AM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(15-01-2025, 03:09 AM)GlennM Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Then we have the VM, no author, no key, no meaningful link between sections.

Indeed, there is a lot that we don't understand about the manuscript. No one topic, variable quality of illustrations, variability in language and writing, general untidiness.

It strongly suggests to me that the manuscript was not written in one go. That each section was written to be a separate piece of work and that the sections were then later bound into one volume. Bound together for the convenience of having all works in the unknown writing in one manuscript.

Agreed, and also bound jumbled up, since it was unknown. I think that only adds to the confusion, that things are out of order. I think quire 14 is folded wrong,  and quire 13 is completely out of order with some folios also requiring a flip amidst the shuffling. I imagine that is the case for other parts as well, especially the ones with different parts on one bifolio. Had the pages been bound by the makers, we might have seen at least the sections in more understandable groupings, and some better page order, both of which might have provided more context.

(17-01-2025, 03:35 PM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.quire 13 is completely out of order

Analysis suggests that the majority of the manuscript sections were written sheet-by-sheet and not in book page order. To those of us like myself who have come to the conclusion that the text of the manuscript must be meaningless it really makes little difference if some of the sheets are not in their original order.

(17-01-2025, 05:48 PM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.To those of us like myself who have come to the conclusion that the text of the manuscript must be meaningless it really makes little difference if some of the sheets are not in their original order.

Why do you think it must be meaningless? Is it mainly because all attempts of finding any meaning have not been successful?