The Voynich Ninja

Consider the word lkeede near the center of this image (f114r line 30):
[attachment=16283]
What do you see there? (No, this is not related to the BEEP theory.)

By my count, there are only three words that end with de in the whole Starred Parags section (SPS).  One is a qoteode, the fourth word on line 12 of f104r, a parag head line:
[attachment=16285]
Here the de apparently was the last thing that the Scribe wrote before pausing to recharge the quill.

The other de is on the first word of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. line 36, that happens to be a parag head too:
[attachment=16286]

The lkeede instance at the top of this post occurs near the end of a largish parag (f114r.28--31) There is no sign of quill recharging there, but the next three words aiin oeedaiin qoaiin seem to be a bit more crooked than usual.

There is no lkeedaiin or lkeedo in my transcription of the SPS, but there are two lkeedar, one lkeedal, one lkeedol, two lkeedain,one lkeed,  and a lot of lkeedy.

The digraph de occurs quite a few times in the middle of words, but mostly in groups dee or deee. In my alphabet/word model, those cases would be parsed as a {d} "element" followed by an {ee} or {eee} element, which is allowed.  Whereas de before any glyph other than e (11 occurrences in my SPS) would have to be parsed as a single element -- a d with an e modifier -- which is forbidden.

All the best, --stolfi

(02-07-2026, 06:25 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The lkeede instance at the top of this post occurs near the end of a largish parag (f114r.28--31) There is no sign of quill recharging there, but the next three words aiin oeedaiin qoaiin seem to be a bit more crooked than usual.

I'm not sure what you are getting at, but if the idea is to suggest that somethings weird happens when a word ends in de, then in this example, it's oeedaiin qoaiin that appear crooked to me, while aiin that immediately follows de seems perfectly regular. Just compare this first aiin with ...aiin in oeedaiin and qoaiin.

[attachment=16288]

Possibly the writer just intended to finish these words with the common ending  dy but for some reason did not complete the downswing to the  y.

(02-07-2026, 08:39 AM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Possibly the writer just intended to finish these words with the common ending  dy but for some reason did not complete the downswing to the  y.

Like the unusual cluster of 4 words ending with do on lines 14-21, perfectly aligned with 4 lines of text between them on the left and the right...

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

(02-07-2026, 08:39 AM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Possibly the writer just intended to finish these words with the common ending  dy but for some reason did not complete the downswing to the  y.

That would be my guess too, the final c-shape is exactly what is needed to become EVA-y. Maybe this supports the idea that some glyphs are positional variants, in the sense that the downward stroke may have been seen as "extra". It's hard to draw any conclusions from these few examples though.

For me, the correct answer is: there are numerous possible explanations, and several of these are plausible.

And it stops there.

One can of course prefer one or another explanation, for some personal reason, but when several people do that, we go back to the first line of this post.

- The word could be correct - this is the word that was intended.

- It could be a mistake.

The second case can be exploded into many scenarios, depending on whether the MS is original or a fair copy, the original was clear, the scribe understood the text etc. etc.

(02-07-2026, 07:07 AM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm not sure what you are getting at, but if the idea is to suggest that somethings weird happens when a word ends in de, then in this example, it's oeedaiin qoaiin that appear crooked to me, while aiin that immediately follows de seems perfectly regular. Just compare this first aiin with ...aiin in oeedaiin and qoaiin.

By "crooked" I mean the shape, size, and alignment of the letters in aiin oeedaiin qoaiin.  Not the words themselves. These are fine.  The aiin is not so bad, but the letters seem smaller than normal (compare with the dar earlier on that same line.

One curious thing is that the final e of the lkeede is glued at both ends to the tail of the y from the line above.   Just a coincidence?

So I suspect that those three instances of word-final de are errors.  In the case of f114r.30, in particular,  I suspect that something happened while the Scribe was in the middle of writing whatever glyph came after the d.   So he never finished it; and the event also caused the next three words to be crooked.  

Maybe a bee came into his office, or his wife shouted for him to take the garbage out, now! And when he resumed, he wrote three words before he pulled up the chair to a more comfortable position...

All the best, --stolfi

(02-07-2026, 09:42 AM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Like the unusual cluster of 4 words ending with do on lines 14-21, perfectly aligned with 4 lines of text between them on the left and the right... You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

By my count there are only eight tokens that end in do in the SPS.  Four of them are followed by a loose l or a word that begins with l or r -- and dol and dor are common combinations.  Which is the case of three of those in that "constellation". 

Thus I think it is likely that those eight do are errors too -- like the Scribe inserting bogus spaces, or misreading the Author's dys.

(02-07-2026, 10:37 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For me, the correct answer is: there are numerous possible explanations, and several of these are plausible. And it stops there.

That is the right attitude (to a point) when one is transcribing the text for others.  

But when one is analyzing or deciphering the text, one must keep in mind that every glyph may be an error, every gap may be an omission, etc.  It is not viable to "stop there" at every single place.  Except maybe at few points, one must estimate the probabilities and make a choice.  If an archaeologist is analyzing the finds at Pompeii and sees an inscription SENATUS POPULUSQUE RONANUM, he must decide whether it was an error by the sculptor, or is evidence a forgotten empire rival to the Roman one.

These decisions are necessary especially when there is evidence that the error rate may be rather high -- as seems to be the case for the VMS.  Which would be expected if indeed the Scribe was transcribing a language or cipher that he did not understand.

And that specific lkeede on f114r.30 is rather important to me at the moment...

All the best, --stolfi

Spelling variations or the occasional borrowed word could account for some oddity in how they were recorded by the author or scribe. I think it’s a little dangerous to assume something curiously different is an error as much as it is to explain why certain glyph endings must be poorly written other endings. At some point I think we end up accepting too many errors to prop up our attempts. One or two errors per paragraph or page could be explained by context.

(02-07-2026, 03:08 PM)Grove Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.One or two errors per paragraph or page could be explained by context.

For most purposes, one may define "error" as any token that differs from the most common form of the intended word type.  If an author usually writes "horce" when he means a horse, but at some point he writes "horse" with exactly the same meaning -- for any reason -- this is equivalent to an "error" for many purpoes.

One or two errors per page may be a high estimate for a manuscript written produced in a "manuscript factory", by a professional scribe, in a language that he understands and has settled orthography.  One or two errors per paragraph may still be too much if the scribe is working alone (like a scholar copying a book himself) instead of in a "factory".  I guess that most surviving Medieval manuscripts with running text have either of these two origins.

But there is reason to suspect that it is not the case for the VMS. There is evidence (not conclusive, sure ) that the Scribe did not understand the text at all.  There is also the large number of single-use characters (weirdos), the variations in the repetitive sequences of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f66r, the large variation in glyph shapes, and more.

I recently posted a quote from the diary of the Lewis and Clark expedition.  The English text has many spelling errors, even for common words like "breakfast" and "today", and many truncated or abbreviated words.  I did not count, but they may be quite a bit more than two per paragraph.  But the error rate goes through the roof when they try to transcribe Native names.  I recall about half a dozen different spellings of "buffalo" and of the name of the same tribe.

And the VMS text may not be a proper written language, but only a shorthand -- where some vowels and consonants are often omitted or conflated, in an inconsistent manner.

And the orthography may allow variation.  The writer may be free to use certain abbreviations (like "secũd9" for "secundus") or spell the words in full, at his whim. (I believe that m is usually an abbreviation of iin, for example.) 

Or the encoding of certain features like stress or tone may be optional, present only when the writer thinks that it would be necessary for proper reading.

Thus the rate of "errors" in the VMS could be as high as one in 10 words or more.  IF the rate is indeed that high, (1) attempts at analysis and solutions that assume an error-free text will fail, and (2) proving that an eventual solution is correct will require a LOT of work.

All the best, --stolfi