The Voynich Ninja

This is a fascinating thread.

Wladimir D, I notice that in your first post you noted the hands/languages for each example, but not the subsequent ones.


I would like to ask: is the presence of certain artifacts in any way correlated to the Currier hands? If there are two scribes involved, I wonder if one of them may have been more inclined to sloppy glyphs /creativity than the other. 

Also are they in any way correlated to Currier languages A/B? If one "language" contains certain artifacts and the other doesn't, that would possibly be significant.

(23-11-2016, 02:58 PM)VViews Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Also are they in any way correlated to Currier languages A/B? If one "language" contains certain artifacts and the other doesn't, that would possibly be significant.

You are right in pointing out the importance of this. I saw one very significant example in this thread (in my opinion),
but I'll leave the answer to Wladimir as he may have more examples.

(23-11-2016, 02:58 PM)VViews Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is a fascinating thread.

Wladimir D, I notice that in your first post you noted the hands/languages for each example, but not the subsequent ones.


I would like to ask: is the presence of certain artifacts in any way correlated to the Currier hands? If there are two scribes involved, I wonder if one of them may have been more inclined to sloppy glyphs /creativity than the other. 

Also are they in any way correlated to Currier languages A/B? If one "language" contains certain artifacts and the other doesn't, that would possibly be significant.

The one I call "Hand 2" (which doesn't necessarily match Currier designations) was more precise about the placement of the "cap" that sits over the bench char than Hand 1.

Rene/
A more interesting in  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. page. Here, the second ink passage added to the left foot "benches" and have received 6 points  and 3  "e".


  Why to do it? Only to distinguish a point of and "e", because if  in these 9 cases was just poorly written left leg, the 6 "bench" with apostrophe default  would read "sh" and there would be no necessary to add ink. Because there is no h with an apostrophe on the shelf.

Also, why not corrected  the middle   leg of long  "bench" of Example 1 to the symbol "e"

(23-11-2016, 03:56 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(23-11-2016, 02:58 PM)VViews Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Also are they in any way correlated to Currier languages A/B? If one "language" contains certain artifacts and the other doesn't, that would possibly be significant.

The one I call "Hand 2" (which doesn't necessarily match Currier designations) was more precise about the placement of the "cap" that sits over the bench char than Hand 1.

What I found most telling is the feature identified in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , which has a stand-alone 'c' character under the 'bench'.
This occurs in all possible types of hands and Currier languages.

Code 162 v101 ר (Figures 1,2,8) - mirrored "e" takes part in the ligatures in Figures 3, 4, 5 and 7. In Figure 6, a double symbol of ר.

Exist symbol "¢" -  mirrored  large  apostrophe, which takes part in ligatures figures 9-13. Figures 12 and 13 are identical ligatures.

(23-11-2016, 04:58 PM)it ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(23-11-2016, 03:56 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(23-11-2016, 02:58 PM)VViews Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Also are they in any way correlated to Currier languages A/B? If one "language" contains certain artifacts and the other doesn't, that would possibly be significant.

The one I call "Hand 2" (which doesn't necessarily match Currier designations) was more precise about the placement of the "cap" that sits over the bench char than Hand 1.

What I found most telling is the feature identified in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , which has a stand-alone 'c' character under the 'bench'.
This occurs in all possible types of hands and Currier languages.

I think this is a very good observation—it suggests cooperation between the different scribes rather than someone picking up incomplete pieces at a later date.

I finally had a chance to look at the Vatican fully encrypted document a couple of days ago, René and thank you for posting the link. Very easy to read (one-to-one substitution code)—you just have to scan about 10 pages and the words start popping out, but what I noticed when I paged through the whole thing was that there were at least three hands, all using the exact same code in the same way and, in the sense of being a group project, it struck me as similar to the VMS).

Another incident spelling medium legs of bench  with a gap, , in contrast to of other examples the left leg is "I".


In the second example, it seems that the bracket ")" written under the bench. In this , there are two justification of. 1 - it is strange that the equal interval between the legs of benches (red) 2 - for the text is not typical by a sequence of characters "yh". In the second case - there is clearly a gap (two "words") You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

In the third example of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. marginalia deleted characters (Latin?)

(01-12-2016, 07:46 PM)Wladimir D Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[deleted for brevity][url=http://www.voynichese.com/#/f113r/exa:yh-/1102][/url]

In the third example of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. marginalia deleted characters (Latin?)

The marginalia you indicated on the top of 114r is very difficult to see, but it looks like it may have a four-petaled flower-shape on the far left, around the spot where the erased text starts. If that's what it is, it's unusual. Glosses and marginalia sometimes include manicules, but it's rare for them to include a flower-shape unless it's along the side.

It's also hard to tell how much text there is (how long the line is). Toward the right-hand side there are pressure marks, but since that is the edge of the vellum, it could be pressure marks from tools used to stretch, scrape or hold the vellum while it was being prepared. It's difficult to distinguish pressure marks from erased text and pressure marks from tools, especially at the edges of the material.

I also can't tell if it's written in the same orientation as the rest of the text or if you have to turn the page upside-down to see it in the normal orientation. The shape on the far right almost looks like an embellished capital E (rounded) but it's facing left rather than right.

Interesting find. I hadn't seen this particular piece of marginalia before.

Even so, it looks like there may have been between five and seven words, but one really needs to see the original manuscript with a microscope to discern something like this.

voynichese.com program does not distinguish between the letters "b" and "n" (EVA).
 I found 15 cases of letters "b". There are statistical differences between these two glyphs.
Before the letter "b"  is always written "e" . Before the letter "n" written "i", "a", "o" and the letter "e", if the glyph (character) "u" (EVA) is composed of "e" + "n" (Figures 22-25).
The letter "b" is always the last in the word . On the letter "n", this rule not covered. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.   
In addition, bench with an apostrophe (when the bottom of the left leg - is the beginning of apostrophe Figure 16, 17) you can transcribe as "bh". In this case, the left leg with the addition of an apostrophe on the second pass may also be qualified as "b" (Figure 5 yellow square).

I have always considered the single glyphs (Examples 18, 19, 20) as the capital "n ". However, in Example 21 the glyph is in the middle of the word (It can not be capital letter).
These glyphs are like bigram consisting of "ר" (as I described in # 76 post - mirror "e") + ¬ (apostrophe). It is used in language A.
Can be traced  principle  similar to modifiers t1, t2, t3, when the modifier (¬ apostrophe) is added to the base character. "b" = "e" + ¬, "n" = "i" + ¬, "ר" + ¬ = new independent glyph.