The Voynich Ninja

We need fewer speculations, more attestations.

(23-07-2026, 10:45 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.We need fewer speculations, more attestations.

You should have to acknowledge you've read this message as a click through after "Post Reply"

@ Koen

Before we can find any confirmation, we first have to come up with some speculations...  and I think I’ve shown here quite clearly that “gaismilch” is a very unlikely speculation. To many unusual asumptions. 

And then I simply wrote that Age’s idea is very plausible because it’s very easy to read with far fewer assumptions. As far as I know, that’s a typical way of thinking in science.

And you know that I do NOT agree with most of Age’s assumptions

The next task would be to find a "ez /tz” = "es" in a German text from that period that looks similar to a “g.” And that will be difficult because, first, there aren't that many German texts from that period—most are in Latin. Second, this spelling must also appear in a normal and fast handwritten text (!)—i.e., which makes it even harder to find it.

It's not important enough to me to spend weeks looking into it, with an uncertain outcome... I find it plausible, and that's enough for me...

Wow, that went faster than I expected. Thanks to AI: Here’s a quick example showing that an “ez”= "es" can look like a “g.” However, this is handwriting in which the writer’s style is generally a bit “more angular” than in the marginal note With a little more effort, you could certainly find an even better example.
If you write the two letters a little closer together—with the “e” having a slightly shorter “stroke” at the top and the “z” a bit more curved—you get the “g.” 

[attachment=16752]

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

here:
[attachment=16753][attachment=16754]

(24-07-2026, 09:02 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.here:

I don't now anything about this, but just looking at the images this 'g' doesn't look like that 'ez' to me. Looking at the spacing between letters, the glyph is way too narrow to be a ligature. Also, is there any explanation in this scenario for the horizontal line that starts from g and goes through a?

Jojo, you know that a single letter can be made up of several strokes, right?

@ oshfdk If you're talking about cramped letters, then what's this?
[attachment=16756]

That line could be the misplaced “f” stroke? 

@ Koen
Yes, I'm very aware of that, and as you know, this theory wasn't my first choice either.

But it has the advantage of being incredibly simple, with very few assumptions—if you view it as a slightly misspelled “es.” But only if you read the ‘af’ as “von.”

We all know how small the letters really are. And as I said, it’s fast handwriting—not like in the comparison text—and even there you can see how this “ez” is sometimes very distinct and sometimes written very close together. 

But I guess there's no such thing as a perfect theory. Still, the other theories are probably just even worse  And we don't even know if the sentence is supposed to make any sense at all - I know.

that is the "e" von teve / ceve in the first line.
[attachment=16757]

It’s not just the ‘g’, after all.
‘Gas’ becomes ‘Ziege’, and ‘mich’ becomes ‘milch’ – and that’s even written as two separate words. The ‘o’ isn’t taken into account; it’s even dismissed as nonsense.
If it’s now a ‘tz / ez’ – where you can even make out a ‘z’ – the whole sentence makes sense. Without any major changes.
With a simple black-and-white copy, Palofski couldn’t see any of this at all, so he cobbled a sentence together.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

Wenn ich den Satz mit zwei kleinen Korrekturen lese, so heisst es..." falls ich es verbrenne, so nimmt es (der Fluch) mich an/auch.
Hier steht "as" stellertretend für den Fluch.

When I read the sentence with two minor corrections, it says... ‘if I burn it, then it (the curse) will take hold of me as well’.
Here, ‘as’ stands in for the curse.