| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 631 online users.
» 1 Member(s) | 625 Guest(s)
Applebot, Baidu, Bing, Google, Yandex, oeesordy
|
|
|
| Arches of the Virgin |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 15-07-2022, 07:38 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (3)
|
 |
Arches of the Virgin:
To be honest, I didn't know that the Virgin had arches. Not till just the other day. The arches are an architectural structure on the north side of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. Other than their early origin, nothing much is said about them. And apparently, they are difficult to photograph fully, being in close quarters. Of course, someone who had been there would know about the Seven Arches of the Virgin.
Or, maybe, they lost one.
|
|
|
| Core conundrums? |
|
Posted by: Hermes777 - 14-07-2022, 02:17 AM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (22)
|
|
Let us suppose an intelligent and inquisitive person who has never seen the Voynich ms. is shown it and allowed to peruse it for five and only five minutes.
What are the peculiar and unusual features to be noticed on such first impressions?
I think there are three:
1. The nymph section.
2. The fold out map.
3. The script.
On first impressions we have a medieval herbal with an astrological section and, it seems, recipes for herbal preparations. Nothing unusual in any of that (until we look closer.)
But turning to the nymph (baneological) section is a WTF moment. It is when we reach page 75r that we realize this is not just an ordinary (if somewhat rustic) herbal.
I think the foldout map is a big surprise as well. First impressions must tell us that it is important to the whole work. It is unusual in itself and obviously a stand-out feature.
It is the script, though, that is most peculiar. On first impressions, given five minutes, we would think, quite reasonably, that it is written in some European language. There seem to be words and paragraphs and running text. But the script is entirely unfamiliar.
After looking at it for five minutes there is only one question to be asked: Why is it not written in Roman script?
There are, indeed, so many peculiar features of the Vms, upon closer inspection, and its peculiarities are so overwhelming, that it is useful, I think, to look at it with fresh eyes now and then, as if for the first time.
For me, these are the matters that are really begging for answers. I can explain an astrological herbal no matter how odd, but the nymphs, the map and the script place this work beyond the pale. That is what I see when I ask: what is wrong with this picture?
The script is the real mystery. Even if, on first impressions, I suspected the work is a cipher, or gibberish, I am left wondering why someone has invented a script for the purpose? Wasn’t scrambling the text concealment enough? Why has someone gone to the trouble of designing and deploying a new script?
I suspect this mystery is connected to the other peculiarities, the nymphs and the map, and that a single explanation will explain all three.
I am wondering what others might cite as the conspicuously peculiar and unusual features of the work, the core conundrums?
|
|
|
|
| Krebs & the crayfish |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 06-07-2022, 07:37 PM - Forum: Astrology & Astronomy
- Replies (3)
|
|
"Krebs! Krebs!!", I say. I think we may have one on a line. This is new to me, so any leads on prior discussions are appreciated.
It seems obvious now. The German word, 'Krebs' for lobster, crab, cancer is the key. It's the same as the family surname. That's a great example of heraldic canting. So, does that same sort of heraldic interpretation carry over to the VMs? Nicholas of Cusa was clearly in the same chronological space as the C-14.
Interesting to note in his bio that he was briefly in Paris in 1416. That was the year that the Duke of Berry died in Paris. The three Limbourg brothers also died that year. With all the violence in Paris in those years, of course he left.
If the interpretive connection to the VMs holds, it adds another example of contemporary heraldry being used in the VMs. A red crayfish in VMs Cancer may be no more significant than the red hats and blue stripes of VMs White Aries, or the mystic ring and cross held by the nymphs, or the Oresme cosmos, or the myth of Melusine. It's an indicator of something the VMs artist knows.
|
|
|
|
| Nicholas of Cusa: Latin analogy |
|
Posted by: Hermes777 - 04-07-2022, 11:39 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (2)
|
|
I've posted this elsewhere but I think it is relevant here. I am of the view, for sundry reasons, that Nicholas of Cusa is the brains behind the VMs and Voynichese. Turning to his writings, there are many suggestive passages that might help us think usefully about the text. Here is a passage from Cusanus that I find enormously intriguing vis-a-vis the Voynich:
One element universally enfolds within itself three elements; but the three elements generally enfold within themselves nine elements; and the nine specifically enfold within themselves twenty-seven elements. Therefore, the cube of three is the specific unfolding of the oneness of each element. But the species enfolds its own specific elements, just as the specific Latin language has its own specific elemental letters. Although these specific letters are few, they are of inexhaustible power. Hence, just as a Latin sentence consists of certain very universal letters, of general letters, of somewhat specific letters, and, lastly, of very specific letters—all contracted to the Latin sentence—so too every sensible-particular is like a complete sentence.
Conjectures, 95.
Here we see Cusanus' development (refinement) of the traditional analogy between cosmos and text, known as the stoicheon analogy, its classical source being Plato's Timaeus. I think we need to appreciate this type of thinking in order to understand what is going on in the VMs. Every sensible-particular is like a complete sentence (and so vice versa.)
Jasper Hopkins, the Cusanus expert, cannot make much sense of this passage - it is not a natural or familiar division of the Latin alphabet - , but Cusanus is dividing the letters of Latin up into four (Platonic) categories graded from general to particular. It gives us an important insight into how Cusanus was thinking about language.
|
|
|
|
| A Cusanus Ladin Hypothesis |
|
Posted by: Hermes777 - 04-07-2022, 12:33 AM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (38)
|
|
Being a retired academic with way too much time on my hands, I have applied myself to the VMS full time for the last six months or so. It’s not the first time; I often included the VMS as a topic when I taught an Honours program in ‘Lost Texts and Apocrypha’ in the years 2000-2010. I’ve studied it over time and now in some depth.
I have a fully developed contextual reading of the work and an hypothesis regarding its authorship, contents and purpose that I’d like to share here. I regard the hypothesis as very solid in itself (or at least sane), and apply it as my paradigm for tackling the real challenge, the reading of the text. On reflection, establishing the context and the author is the easy part; working out exactly what the author has done in the text is admittedly more tricky. In my methodology the task is to get text, context and subtext to all align. Only then will all be clear and a ‘solution’ emerge.
I’II call the hypothesis the Cusanus Ladin Hypothesis. Here are twelve points, each of which I think is defensible and together constitute a plausible case.
Argument: Nicholas of Cusa is the mind behind the Voynich manuscript.
1. The Voynich ms. is from the mid 1400s. (My hypothesis requires a date perhaps a decade later than the carbon dating.)
2. The Voynich ms. is from alpine northern Italy.
3. The Rosette map - the key to the work - depicts the Rosengarten mountain region of the Dolomites (and, crucially, the symbolism of the Alpenglow.)
4. The nymphs depicted are from the mythology of the Ladin people of that region.
5. The illustrations in the manuscript reflect the ancient herb gathering traditions of the Ladin people of alpine northern Italy.
6. In contrast to the illustrations, the text and language in the Voynich ms. are highly artificial constructions that seem generated by complex, systematic methods.
7. The text could not have been made by rustic herb gatherers from the remote valleys of the Rosengarten mountains. It is the creation of a highly educated mind. The script and other factors suggest the author was a humanist scholar.
8. The type of system used to create the Voynich text is highly suggestive of the systems of Ramon Llull. (Ars Magna)
9. In the relevant period, the main advocate of Ramon Llull’s methods and the great humanist scholar of Llullism, collector of Lllull’s works, was Nicholas of Cusa.
10. Nicholas of Cusa was made bishop over the relevant region and people (Bishop of Brixen) in 1450 and served in that role for about eight years. (It was a turbulent but still very creative phase of Cusanus' life.)
11. In the writings of both Llull and Cusanus there is discussion of applying the Ars Magna to herbalism and medicine and the natural sciences generally.
12. Summary: In the illustrations we can identify the herbal traditions of alpine northern Italy. In the text we can identify the systems of Ramon Llull. The person who links these two identifications is Nicholas of Cusa. He was the Llullian scholar, a Christian humanist, who was in a position to have a prolonged encounter with the relevant herbal tradition.
Conclusion: Therefore, the manuscript is likely to be a project of Nicholas of Cusa undertaken during his time as Bishop of Brixen. It brings the Ars Magna of Llull to a preexisting herbal tradition from alpine northern Italy.
It follows: To decipher the text, we need to understand Nicholas of Cusa’s use of the Ars Magna of Ramon Llull and how he might have applied it (or his own developments of Lllullism) in this case.
We have a capable genius, the right type of mind, in the relevant region, in the relevant period, with plausible motive. It is a circumstantial case but, I think, a strong one.
* * *
Important additional context: the work is Christianizing. It is a Christianization (Christian humanism) of the native Ladin herbal tradition (and its mythology) made in the context of the rising tide of witch-hunts in the region. (Which Cusanus resisted.)
Surmise: The work is likely to concern measurements in the natural sciences - the nymphs are shown measuring – and is an application of Cusanus’ rather mystical theories regarding weights and measures as well as cartography and his other non-theological preoccupations well signalled in his lesser writings and dialogues with the “layman”. A key work is his Conjectures.
Languages: The natural language that goes with the traditions depicted in the illustrations is what we today call Ladin but at the time would have been regarded as a primitive Latin, and was entirely unwritten. I propose that Ladin (a vulgar Latin with Rhaetean fusions) is at least in the background of the work. (I don't propose the text is a simple mapping of Ladin.) Otherwise, Nicholas of Cusa has Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, Catalan, German, Italian and a smattering of others within his range. Even such an artificial construction as Voynichese must have a natural language underpinning it.
Note well: I doubt Cusanus himself put nib to vallum, and he is not the illustrator. It was not a private folly. But I do believe it was his project.
I am well aware I am not the first person to throw the name ‘Nicholas of Cusa’ into the ring. I am personally satisfied he is the author and the mind behind the work. (I resisted the identification at first, but I think it is an unavoidable conclusion.) The script and the text is his. The quest for me is to work out precisely what he has done (and perhaps with whom?)
I do not think Voynichese is an encryption even though Cusanus, as a diplomat, certainly would have been familiar with all the standard methods of his day. More generally, I do not think the text was intended to conceal. I don't detect a subtext of concealment. We only think that because we lack the key to read it. It is more likely to be pastoral in intent. I suspect its linguistic mysteries may have more to do with some concern for the illiterate Ladin.
What I add to the identification of the author is the proposal that the work comes out of his pastoral encounter with the Ladin people (herb gatherers) from the remote alpine valleys (probably in the context of their pilgrimages to Saben, ancient centre of the bishopric.)
I spend my days exploring this hypothesis, searching for a way into the text through this context. (I join that long list of researchers who are all very confident they are on the right path.)
RB
|
|
|
|
| Vocabulary size by Illustration Type |
|
Posted by: RobGea - 03-07-2022, 03:30 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (16)
|
 |
Vocabulary size by Illustration Type (Using slightly modified ZL2a transcription, uncertain spaces as spaces)
Any and all Errors are mine, the folllowing description sounds more complicated than it is  .
In the EVA format there is a variable $I for Illustration type.
The Herbal Type was further split into 2 types, Herbal_a and Herbal_b following LisaFaginDavis allocation of folios by Scribe.
Herbal_a is defined as having EVA $I = H and its folio is ascribed to Scribe_1.
Herbal_b is defined as having EVA $I = H and its folio is ascribed to any Scribe except Scribe_1.
Here the words in the folios of the same Illustration type were collected giving a total word count for each of the 9 types.
Within each type, replicated words were removed, creating a set of words where each word is counted once, this is the vocabulary of that Illustration type, the 'type_vocab'.
Then for each word in the 'type_vocab', if that word apppeared in any the other 8 type_vocab's , the word was removed. creating an 'unshared_vocab'
The 'type_vocab' contains the words that appear once or more in folios that have the same Illustration type.
The 'unshared_vocab' contains words that appear once or more ONLY in folios that have the same Illustration type.
Any word that appears in more than one 'type_vocab' is removed completely.
For instance the word 'daiin' appears in several 'type_vocab's and because of that it does not appear in any of the 'unshared_vocab's.
Key: Herbal_a ( Ha ); Herbal_b ( Hb ); Stars ( S ); Balneo ( B ); Pharma ( P ); Astro ( A ); Zodiac ( Z ); Text ( T ); Cosmo ( C ).
Code: Type, total_words, type_vocab, unshared_vocab, unshared_vocab as % of type_vocab, Rank
Ha, 8054, 2516, 1460, % 58.028 R1
Hb, 3522, 1353, 474, % 35.033 R8
S, 10851, 3072, 1662, % 54.101 R2
B, 6376, 1471, 618, % 42.012 R4
P, 2555, 1132, 472, % 41.696 R5
A, 876, 611, 238, % 38.952 R7
Z, 1291, 767, 343, % 44.719 R3
T, 3108, 1279, 448, % 35.027 R9
C, 2213, 1101, 436, % 39.600 R6
Observations:
-HerbalA has the most unshared words, as expected because it is CurrierA.
-Pharma is also CurrierA so its position at R5 is unexpected.
-Stars at R2 is 10% higher than the next rank, an anomaly with no obvious explanation.
Speculations:
One possibility is the Stars section is discussing something that is outside the range of the rest of the text.
|
|
|
|
| The Berry library |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 28-06-2022, 01:32 AM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (4)
|
|
Well, this is what I get for trying to post on a dead thread.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
This old thread is in serious need of an update. As correctly noted at the start, this was a discovery of profound significance at the time. However, the various discussion threads wandered off in futile directions and died, years ago.
There are some problems. The omnipresent 'globus' part of the globus cruciger is a fairly common artistic item, as the say. Some are regular T-O, some inverted, in various religious illustrations. So, there are similarities with the central portion of the VMs cosmos. The significant difference of the VMs is that it is a cosmic representation, not a religious illustration. As such, as a cosmos, however, this was an uncommon structure for a cosmic diagram in the 1400-1450 era. The representation far more typical of the era was the poly-concentric model of seven 'planets', fixed stars, and various heavens. The Earth itself might be a geographical T-O diagram or a concentric representation of the four elements.
The uncommon cosmic structure is shared with the two cited examples: BNF Fr, 565 and Harley 334. More than just the inverted T-O presentation of Earth, these cosmic diagrams share a simple three-part structure: 1) central Earth, 2) surrounding field of stars, and 3) the outer cosmic boundary, or wolkenband. In BNF 565 this boundary is an elaborate scallop-shell pattern. In the VMs, it is a nebuly line, (etymologically connected to clouds), and in the Harley images it is a plain line. (Lines defined by heraldic tradition.)
The two historical sources represent an Earth that is neither geographic nor completely elemental. Instead, they are pictorial - each showing little houses in one quarter section. Both historical sources were produced in Paris between the dates 1400-1450. The field of golden asterisk stars in both sources is almost identical. The VMs, however, is contradictory. While it retains the inverted T-O structure, the historical sources are pictorial, the VMs is literary. Ostensibly, this is a code shift. Where the historical sources use asterisk stars, the stars of the VMs cosmos are polygonal, though plenty of the asterisk variety are found elsewhere.
So, on to the Duke of Berry's library, because BNF 565 was part of that collection.
Here are some of his books:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The second listing includes BNF Fr. 1082 and another text from Gossuin de Metz, BNF Fr 574.
This comes back then to Harley 334, but not to the cosmic images, but to the illustrations of "the mermaid and her friends" that is in common with the VMs. This representation is clearly explained by the mermaid found in two illustrations from Lauber - a mermaid among sea monsters, and a mermaid among fish, just like Harley 334. While the VMs illustration may appear similar, it is not. In the other three examples, the mermaid is a generic creature, just like the others around her. In the VMs, the figure is different. She is not a generic mermaid. She has thighs. Mermaids do not have thighs. In the VMs, she is a changeling. She is mythical Melusine.
It's interesting to see the connections between Melusine and Jean, Duc de Berry. It is also helpful to distinguish between two versions of the Melusine myth. In the Lusignan version, Melusine transforms into a dragon with wings. Jean de Berry conquered Lusignan castle in Hundred Years War. He is pictured with the castle and the flying dragon, Melusine, in "Tres Riches Heures", and he commissioned Jean de Arras to write her legend.
The other version of the Melusine myth is Melusine of Luxembourg. This Melusine is given qualities and characteristics much more like a mermaid. She doesn't have wings. This is the Melusine of the VMs. And it is the Melusine of Luxembourg that connects Jean de Berry and his Valois siblings to the mythology though their mother, Bonne of Luxembourg. The continued significance of the Melusine mythology is verified in the historical record of the Feast of the Pheasant by Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy, a later Valois descendant. The VMs has substituted the Melusine of Luxembourg for the generic mermaid of the other sources, to create a combined image. And this modus operandi of combined images is also found in the VMs cosmic combination of Oresme and the Shirakatsi diagram of "Eight Phases of the Moon".
Another interesting potential connection to the Berry library is found in the illustrations of the "Berry Apocalypse", now at the Morgan Library, MS M. 133. It takes a good deal of searching to find another source that shows a simple nebuly line used as a cosmic boundary, just like nebuly line in the VMs cosmos, a cosmos that was potentially borrowed from BNF 565, which also started out in the Duke of Berry's library.
Now, if only it weren't for those two ragtag illustrations interpreted as being representations of the Golden Fleece - one found with the illustration of Melusine, and the other drawn in combination with a segment of nebuly line.
|
|
|
|
| Statistics and the Voynich text |
|
Posted by: Torsten - 28-06-2022, 12:28 AM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (5)
|
 |
A common idea for the analyses of the Voynich text is that it is enough to look only into some statistics to learn something about the Voynich text. This way the Voynich text is handled as a black box. For instance Sterneck et al. write "statistical approaches offer a novel way of analyzing the Voynich blackbox. Statistical methods offer tools that capture relevant features of the text without understanding its meaning, and more importantly, allow a certain degree of flexibility with the accuracy of the transcription itself" [You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. et al., p. 1].
The problem with this type of black box research is that for learning something about the Voynich text it is required to interpret statistic results with the Voynich text in mind. Furthermore for using a statistic method like Natural Language Processing, Artificial Intelligence, or Topic modeling it is often required to check if all necessary requirements are fulfilled. For instance many statistic methods expect some level of consistency across the text. But without knowing the text itself it gets unnoticed that the Voynich text isn't homogenous and therefore doesn't fulfills this requirement.
For instance the paper of Sterneck et al. warns that "topic modeling relies on word frequencies and expects consistency across texts" [Sterneck et al., p. 4]. The paper assumes that it would be enough to "consider the topic distributions in conjunction with Currier language" [Sterneck et al., p. 4]. However if we look into the text itself it becomes evident that "no obvious rule can be deduced which words form the top-frequency tokens at a specific location, since a token dominating one page might be rare or missing on the next one." [Timm & Schinner, p. 3]. Sterneck et al. are not aware of this problem and interpret their statistical results in the context of a hypothetical homogenous text. They conclude "We find that computationally derived clusters match closely to a conjunction of scribe and subject matter (as per the illustrations)" [Sterneck et al., p. 1].
Claire Bowern then uses this interpretation of their statistic results to argue that it is possible to explain the difference between Currier A and B as "two methods of encoding at least one natural language" [Bowern and Lindemann, p. 289], and other differences within the Voynich text as "This result suggests that different scribes may have used different encipherment strategies or written about different subjects" [Bowern and Lindemann, p. 303].
Is it indeed possible to explain the variation within the Voynich text this way? What does their statical results mean in the context of the Voynich text?
- In Currier A 0.32% (36 out of 11348 = 0.32%) of the word tokens contain the sequence 'ed'.
- In the Cosmologial section already 9.5% (257/2691 = 9.55%) of the word tokens do use the sequence 'ed'.
- In Herbal in Currier B there are 16.3 % (528/3233=16.3%) of the word tokens containing 'ed'.
- In Quire 20 (Stars - Currier B) the number is 19.4% (2073/10673 = 19.4%).
- And for Quire 13 (Biological - Currier B) the number is 27.9% (1925/6911 = 27.9%).
After Claire Bowern it is possible to explain the differences between Currier A and B as the result of "two different encoding methods", the differences between different hands "with scribal differences and with different subjects" and the differences between different illustrations with different subjects. However the differences for EVA-'ed' between Herbal B and Quire 13 are with 16.3% vs. 27.9% as dramatic as the difference between Currier A and Herbal B (0.32% vs. 16.3%). But after Lisa Davis the Herbal B part as well as the whole Quire 13 are written by the same hand (16.3% vs. 27.9%). The difference between Herbal B and Quire 20 is with 16.3% vs. 19.4% even smaller whereas both sections did use different illustrations and after Lisa Davis also different hands. Claire Bowern interpretation of their statistical results obviously doesn't fit with the Voynich text.
Let's look also at the distribution of a single word type. Let's take EVA-'shedy' as an example.
- EVA-'shedy' only occurs once in Herbal A (1/10616 = 0%)
- it is the 12 most frequent word in Herbal B (35/32333=1.1%)
- it is the 10th most frequent word in Quire 20 (113/10673=1.05%)
- it is the second most frequent word in Currier B (395/20817 = 1.9%)
- it is the most frequent word in Quire 13 (247/6911=3.56%)
- it is the most frequent word for folio 103v (15/449 = 3.34%), but it doesn't occur on folio 105v (0/390 = 0%)
The frequency counts for Herbal A and B and for the quires behave as the counts for 'ed' would suggest. However the counts for individual folios also differ. How can we explain the word counts for 'shedy' on folio 103v and 105v? Both folios belong to Quire 20, they both share the same illustration type and after Lisa Davis also the same scribal hand, but the difference between both folios is with 0% vs. 3.34 % as dramatic as between Currier A and Quire 13. Therefore none of the three explanation attempts used by Claire Bowern does fit in this case.
Note: The distribution of 'shedy' is not an exception. Even for EVA-'daiin' it is possible to point to pages without a single instance of 'daiin' (see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
This means that even by applying three different explanation attempts ("different encoding methods", "different scribal hands", and "different topics") it is obviously not possible to explain the properties of the real Voynich text in a satisfactory way. So if you want to apply some statistic methods to the VMS you should also ask yourself: Can I apply this method to the Voynich text and what does my results mean in the context of the Voynich text?
|
|
|
|
|
