Just for a fun discussion, I thought I would ask for peoples opinions on when the VMS left the hands of its original creator(s)? I know that some believe that those who created it didn't understand it, either because it is gibberish or because they were simply scribes for an author who was the only one who knew. As far as I know, we have relatively good evidence that by about 1575 the manuscripts was in the hands of those who didn't even understand what it was supposed to be, let alone be able to read it.
I think that there is other physical evidence in the manuscript that prior to this, it was already in the hands of someone who didn't understand it. Namely because of the incorrect binding, incorrect painting, POSSIBLE retracing by someone who didn't get what the original glyphs were and also the marginalia?
Since the incorrect binding happened not too long after the creation of the manuscript, I personally think that within a generation or two the manuscript somehow left those who had originally devised it then began being passed around as a curiosity by others who had no understanding of it.
I'm not sure if this conjecture would really help in solving any part of the script, but if it became 'displaced' so quickly after its creation it might suggest that it was not a wide spread task or it was only intended for usage by a single individual.
(28-11-2025, 05:07 AM)Skoove Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Just for a fun discussion, I thought I would ask for peoples opinions on when the VMS left the hands of its original creator(s)?
Most likely on the Author's death. I would guess that it the most common case for manuscripts created from scratch (as opposed from copies of existing manuscripts made for sale or for hire, like the Alchemists' Herbals or the luxury illuminated books).
Quote:I know that some believe that those who created it didn't understand it, either because it is gibberish or because they were simply scribes for an author who was the only one who knew.
I believe the latter, but I would use "creator" for the Author, not for the Scribe. So for me the "creator" received the VMS from the Scribe as soon as it was written, and could read it.
Quote:As far as I know, we have relatively good evidence that by about 1575 the manuscript was in the hands of those who didn't even understand what it was supposed to be, let alone be able to read it.
You mean Barschius? I didn't check the dates, but seem correct.
Quote:I think that there is other physical evidence in the manuscript that prior to this, it was already in the hands of someone who didn't understand it. Namely because of the incorrect binding, incorrect painting, POSSIBLE retracing by someone who didn't get what the original glyphs were and also the marginalia?
I am still uncertain about this point, but anyway, if I understood the prevailing story correctly:
- The current binding is from the 1800s -- done by the Jesuits after they found the book had been badly damaged by worms, mold, etc.
- The folio numbers were written with handwriting from the 1500s to 1700s, after the vellum sheets had been scrambled and nested in the incorrect order.
- The "font" of the marginal writings seems to be from the 1500s or later.
- There is evidence that the painting was later than the folio numbers.
- I see plenty of evidence that most of the text and a lot of the drawings were retraced in at least two, possibly three separate occasions. The first was a "professional" restoration, the others less careful if not vandalistic. Presumably the first one was motivated by fading of the original writing, hence it must have occurred decades or centuries after the original scribing.
Quote:I personally think that within a generation or two the manuscript somehow left those who had originally devised it then began being passed around as a curiosity by others who had no understanding of it.
That is basically what I think too. That is what apparently happened with Barschius->Marci->Kircher->Jesuits at Collegio Romano. However, before that, it may have been sold, rather than just "passed around". We don't know how it got from Sinapius to Barschius, nor how Sinapius got it.
All the best, --stolfi
Consider what society was like at that time. The 15th century was a time of great change, was the start of the cultural movement that later became the Renaissance. It was a time of new ideas, new philosophies. The classical view of the universe was being challenged. Belief in magic, religion, medicine, astrology and in other secret sciences was strong. Books on these topics formed the new 'information age'. Reading and writing were at the heart of scientific advancement. Manuscripts were prized possessions and were eagerly acquired by those who could afford them. Manuscripts from some unknown land and in an unknown alphabet would have been of particular curiosity and could have commanded a premium on the market.
This scenario seems to me to be the most likely. The writings were not written by someone for their own personal use but were a fabrication to feed the fashion for such works, to be sold for dishonest profit, and changed hands soon after their completion.
Right, so you're going to get all different answers to this question, depending on the origin scenario favored by the one responding.
The most conservative estimate is that
at least two people worked on the text, which is considered original to the MS. So
at least two people knew a lot about the MS. And after that, there are only questions:
- Lisa sees five scribes, so that would be 5 people. How many people did the drawings, were they the same as the ones who did the text? In most manuscripts, the artists are not the scribes. Again, two is a conservative estimate, so maybe there were more.
- Even if we stick with two, this means that there was talking about the MS. What context was this in? A hidden cave? A monastic community? A scriptorium or copy shop? A school/university? A medical facility? How many people were there, how many were aware of the MS? Is it so inconceivable that the makers told other members of their community about this? Nothing in the MS looks particularly heretical or punishable... For all we know, the creation of the MS, or at least the knowledge of what it is, was shared by a whole community. Why not a hundred people? Even if it was Brother Geoffrey's crazy project, why couldn't a hundred others have known about it?
- Did the person who added the month names understand the MS? If you favor one way or the other, try to do the exercise of imagining that you have to defend the opposite view in a debate. It's not hard at all. So in this case, we're creeping towards the 16th century and understanding of the MS is still an option.
- Did the people who bound the MS understand it? So far, the general idea is that they didn't, because they misbound it. But following Lisa's suggestion that the MS was conceived of as unnested folded sheets, misbinding would have been the only option. There was no good order available. So we can't even exclude that the "misbinder" understood the MS.
In my opinion, all we can say is that the people in the Prague area who left us writings about the MS did not fully understand it. But can we say for certain that all understanding of the MS was gone from the world when someone brought the MS to Prague? Even that is impossible.
In other words, there are two extremes:
* The people who made it kept it secret or lied about it right away. The knowledge was lost when they died.
* The MS was kept in the community that produced it, and even throughout the binding efforts, people still understood what it was. When the MS left the community, the new owner still knew what it was. The tie between the manuscript and the understanding of it was only severed when it entered the historically attested Prague circles.
It feels like neither of those extremes are the most likely solution, but I don't think anything in between can be excluded.
(28-11-2025, 12:06 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The most conservative estimate is that at least two people worked on the text, which is considered original to the MS. So at least two people knew a lot about the MS.
If this is the most conservative, I'm far right then
I still think it's just as likely that the whole manuscript was created by a single person, at least the text and drawing part, maybe also the original binding. I'm not sure this was the case, but I don't think I've seen strong enough evidence to the contrary. I do recognize several handwriting styles in the MS, but from my point of view these could be attributed to a combination of: evolution of the script, different writing tools, difference circumstances of the writing (e.g., compare writing in the comfort of your own study with writing in a roadside inn while traveling or even writing while on board a ship under weather), different topics - compare jotting down lecture notes with writing a poem about a loved one, many people would consider that correct handwriting style a part of the message here, etc.
Generally, I think most theories assume that the manuscript was created voluntarily and the process of its creation was fully under control of the author(s)/scribe(s), which is not necessarily the case. I think I'll open a new thread about this one, I've already written about this calling this "the prisoner scenario" a few times, maybe it deserves a separate thread.
One person is technically possible, but would not be the standard professional assessment when confronted with the degree of handwriting variation between A-B. Two hands is two scribes. When someone insists that it might as well have been one person, this is usually theory-driven.
A lot depends on your assumption if Voynich Manuscript is a genuine thing used by someone or is it a fraud.
Personally, as I read more about VM, I am close to believe that it was a fraud made for emperor Rudolf so he would pay a nice sum for it.
In such case the original creators would be forgers, the manuscript would be made to look older than it was and it changed ownership quite quickly.
A fraud theory is totally independent on number of scribes stuff. If it was a fraud there could be one "mastermind" man and several people working for him.
(28-11-2025, 01:59 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.One person is technically possible, but would not be the standard professional assessment when confronted with the degree of handwriting variation between A-B. Two hands is two scribes. When someone insists that it might as well have been one person, this is usually theory-driven.
I don't have any doubt in the professionalism of the assessment, but I do in the applicability of this assessment to unique scripts of completely unknown nature. I don't think we know which variations of the script are semantical, which are decorative (stylistic, related to topic) and which are technical (different tools, different scribes, etc). There are threads arguing if
d j g or
k Z are different letters or not. Many changes in the character statistics and in the character shapes at the same time between A and B may be explained by using a different encoding with two distinct characters sets (typical A
t and B
t as two different codes) instead of saying that these are two different scribes that use two slightly different languages or codes for some reason.
(28-11-2025, 12:06 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The most conservative estimate is that at least two people worked on the text, which is considered original to the MS. So at least two people knew a lot about the MS.
Whoa, not so fast.
There may have been two or more
scribes who put the thing to vellum. But, again, it would be insane for someone to write straight from one's head onto vellum. For several reasons.
Therefore, those scribes almost surely copied from a draft on paper, that had the text and sketches of the figures in some uncertain degree of detail.
But then there is no reason to think that there was more than one person who understood the text and created that draft. All that the scribe(s) needed to know in order to copy the draft to vellum was the alphabet. They did not even need to know what it sounded like.
Maybe one of the scribes was the author of the draft himself. But the apparently misaligned half-lines of You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. is evidence (not conclusive, but not negligible) that the scribe who wrote the text on that page could not read it.
Moreover, not everyone would be able to draw on vellum those tiny letters with a minimum of neatness. Thus it is more likely that the Author (or Authors, if you will) enlisted other people to do the actual scribing on the vellum: if not experienced "professional" scribes, at least someone who was able to do that.
All the best, --stolfi
Quote:Therefore, those scribes almost surely copied from a draft on paper, that had the text and sketches of the figures in some uncertain degree of detail.
Sorry for picking at words but do you believe both that it was made in early 1400s and that they had access to paper?
It seems to me that paper already existed at that time but it was a new thing, not widely known.
If they had paper they would write VM on paper. Or was calf skin considered to be more "prestigious"?