The Voynich Ninja

I searched for a line in which these ‘translated’ words appear several times and used them in the verb form.

Original Eva: f106v.38: okcheody.qokeey.otchey.qokeey.qokeedal.qokchkeey.qol.rody.raiin.oty

With Translations: okcheody(= exsiccatio/ drying out).qokeey(= solutio=dissolve).otchey(= ?).qokeey(= solutio dissolve).qokeedal(= ?).qokchkeey(= a Variant of dissolve).qol(= ?).rody(= ?).raiin(= ?+wasser).oty(= induratio / hardening)

English: drying out [and] dissolve, otchey, dissolve qokeedal.qokchkeey (maybe a Variants of dissolve) qol(= ?).rody(= ?).raiin(= ?evtl. Remove water) hardening


Sounds like instructions for a manufacturing process – interpreted:

first dry (the plant), then dissolve in f.e. vinegar, then dissolve in f.e. oil [...] remove water and harden.

Would fit into a recipe section.

For your consideration, f75r:

qokedy dy c'heety qokedy qokeedy qokechdy lol
qokeedy qokeedy qokedy qokedy qokeedy ldy
yc'hedy qokeedy qokeedy olkeedy otey koldy

(28-10-2025, 03:07 AM)RadioFM Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For your consideration, f75r:



qokedy dy c'heety qokedy qokeedy qokechdy lol

qokeedy qokeedy qokedy qokedy qokeedy ldy

yc'hedy qokeedy qokeedy olkeedy otey koldy

Yes, that's a quite funny passage, i know it. But I don't have a translation of the entire text! But we can run through it if you like. But it is NOT a serious translation - with a lot of hypothese. Just for fun: 


Hypothtesis:

qoke word stem = dissolve

qokedy: imperativ: dissolve!

The word quokeedy is longer, and the doubling of the e indicates that it is softer.

qokeedy =  macera! (soak) / lixivia! (leach) / dilue! (dilute)

qokechedy =  could then be something like, take an excerpt from the solution

qokedy c'heety qokedy qokeedy qokechdy lol
qokedy(= dissolve).c'heety(= ? maybe wait).qokedy(= dissolve) qokeedy(= soak).qokechdy(= exerpt).lol(= lough out loud ?)

dissolve wait dissolve again, soak it, exerpt, and then 

So that would be a kind of step-by-step guide to how to process something.

Such crazy sequences could then make sense – it describes a very precise work process, but as I said, that is purely hypothetical.

PS. However, I would like to point out that my opinion here on the board is that such duplications are an indication that someone who copied the text was unsure of what it said and simply wrote several versions of the same text one after the other. And this passage is a good example of that....

These lines also show how difficult it was to decipher the underlying text; here there are even two variants of entire lines.

I have analysed the passage here once again to prove conclusively that there are only three versions of one line:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Hi,
I was wondering, were did you get the image of the upper corner of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. that you posted in this thread? 

thanks

(28-10-2025, 08:12 PM)PrixyPurple Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi,
I was wondering, were did you get the image of the upper corner of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. that you posted in this thread? 

thanks

It is one of the typical pages of the Voynich manuscripts, edited by me. The lines have been traced according to the original.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Yet the Rosetta Stone!

I just noticed something that supports the theory that the wheel on pages 67 really does correspond to the Raymundi wheel. As Jorge Stolfi has written here several times, letters that were barely legible were probably traced. With this information, I noticed something that really makes sense.

The word "inhumationem" appears twice in the Raymundi wheel, which I noticed months ago. But the Voynich on the same place word did not fit. For me, this was an indication that although this wheel had many similarities, it did not have enough.

Now, thanks to Jorge Stolfi, I notice that these two words are very similar. It does fit after all! 

Both are on the two wheels, in Aer once ytchey ytchey(first word) and in Terra the fourth word: ypcheg ypcheg. And in both positions it means inhumationem (burial, interment, or literally).

Let's take a look at the origional two words:

[attachment=11978]

In the upper image, we can see two things: first, the word was repainted, and second, the strokes were very faint, as indicated by the arrow on the right. The same applies to the “e” next to it. In addition, the upper loop of the g may no longer have been visible. Just a small loop was missing, and the G became a Y!

It is also striking that the left stem of the T is very close to the right one, thats unusual. It seems that the restorer came up with this idea because he could no longer see the other areas of the original P. He only had the left side, and since everything else was missing, he had to assume it was a t, but he didn't have any more space to the right, so he painted the right bar close to it.

When you think about it, it's exactly the same words that appear in exactly the same place on both wheels, which would be proof (!!!!) that these two wheels have the same origin. 

And what's even more important, we now have 50 words that we could already translate! 

But i think als verbs in voynichese...

(Yesterday, 04:33 PM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In the upper image, we can see two things: first, the word was repainted, and second, the strokes were very faint, as indicated by the arrow on the right. The same applies to the “e” next to it. In addition, the upper loop of the g may no longer have been visible. Just a small loop was missing, and the G became a Y!

It is also striking that the left stem of the T is very close to the right one, thats unusual. It seems that the restorer came up with this idea because he could no longer see the other areas of the original P. 

What I see are clearly 'ytchey' and 'ypcheg', sorry. Then of course one can morph any word into another one with enough speculations.

(Yesterday, 04:53 PM)Mauro Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What I see are clearly 'ytchey' and 'ypcheg', sorry. Then of course one can morph any word into another one with enough speculations.

This is not speculation; you can see it in the picture. Who can draw such thin, barely visible lines with a quill? And how can a quill stop so abruptly in terms of writing thickness on both sides  too (see the e)? The writer has to start putting the quill to paper somewhere. You can't draw an “e” like that with a quill.

Sorry, but this is not speculation, and it explains a lot. Moreover, it is not my theory, but that of Jorge Stolfi, and I appreciate that, knowing him, he must have examined this very closely before posting something like this

(Yesterday, 05:04 PM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is not speculation; you can see it in the picture.

In the picture I see two clearly different words.

(Yesterday, 05:04 PM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Moreover, it is not my theory, but that of Jorge Stolfi, and I appreciate that, knowing him, he must have examined this very closely before posting something like this

For what I know, Stolfi's theory is that there was a Retracer (more than one, actually). But I can't remember him ever saying 'ytchey' and 'ypcheg' on f67v1 were originally the same word. I may be wrong, in case post a link to that, please.