| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 2054 online users.
» 3 Member(s) | 2048 Guest(s)
Baidu, Bing, Google, dashstofsk, obelus
|
|
|
| [split] Relying on external imagery |
|
Posted by: Mark Knowles - 06-09-2019, 01:31 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (25)
|
 |
I have noticed a behaviour that is easy to succumb to and quite common and that is the practice of scouring manuscripts for images that look very loosely similar to the image in the Voynich that one is interested in and then postulating a relationship. It is perfectly reasonable to look for a correspondence to images in the Voynich amongst other sources and sometimes this can be very productive, but it should not be pursued to the extent of the man spotting Jesus's face in a pizza. I think, as with Nick Pelling's block-paradigm idea, we should not doubt the extent to which the output of the author's work was original and that a given drawing in the Voynich may not have a parallel in another manuscript.
|
|
|
| f18v |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 04-09-2019, 09:35 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (9)
|
 |
I just took a decent look at the root of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. for the first time, and I can't make heads nor tails of it. Well, I can make a tail, which is (I hope) rather clearly suggested in the bottom-right appendage. Tuft at the end and all, like the standard "feline" root tail. There are also tufts of fur indicated along the "body' and the top knot.
What I noticed for the first time today is the pattern that's in the negative on the bottom, as if it's half submerged in waves? I highlighted the area below:
Naamloos-2 kopiëren.jpg (Size: 145.61 KB / Downloads: 197)
Apart from that, I don't know what to make of the other wiggly looking appendages and the strange angular shapes, nor the thing on top of the root that looks like a hairy square with rounded corners. The leftmost part of the rood is vaguely claw-like, but not terribly convincingly so.
The leaves look relatively realistic. In another thread, JKP suggested Malva, so the image may be based on this plant or a similar one.
The flower though, does not look realistic at all, its size, shape, proportions and components are all off to some degree. The lower pattern is that used for mountains, and above it what I think is "an event in the sky". The "sky" part even appears somewhat elevated above the "land" part. I have no idea about the red structure or a possible meaning of it all.
Naamloos-3 kopiëren.jpg (Size: 108.45 KB / Downloads: 194)
|
|
|
|
| Q13a - Architectural frames |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 29-08-2019, 09:09 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (9)
|
|
(Note: both VViews and JKP have written a lot about this subject, and there are also the Sozomeno drawings Rene posted, so see this as an addition rather than something completely new).
While browsing the Très Riches Heures illustrations (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) I noticed that the main drawings on certain pages had been framed with architectural elements. Pillars with statues on pedestals, sometimes wooden bows flanked by two figures spanning the top.
Examples:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
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 role of these figures appears to be that of "thematically appropriate onlooker", for example with Job there are living Dead, with David armored knights. There often is a certain hierarchy in the figures' vertical position, with heavenly beings at the top (cfr. VM cloud band figures).
These rich frames are typical for books of hours of the first half of the 15th century. A turning point came in the 1450's with Jean Fouquet, who considered borders a waste of space and treated each manuscript page as a painter would his canvas. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Naamloos-1 kopiëren.jpg (Size: 304.72 KB / Downloads: 189)
----
The nymphs in Q13A (using Claston's term) have some similarities with these architectural frames. They each stand like a statue on a base - free-floating nymphs are very exceptional). Some pages use the motif of the wooden beam on top. Some pages use pillars to connect them vertically, though the water makes them more like tubes. My personal impression is that the VM illustrator(s) took the main illustrations and tucked them away in what looks like an architectural frame. While they clearly allude to a style less rich than that of the Très Riches Heures, it is possible that they were imitating this manner of framing.
For me though (and this is where disagreement might arise), they really appear as illustrations in their own right, creating some tension between layout and contents.
|
|
|
|
Villa Mondragone, Villa Vecchia, and Villa Torlonia |
|
Posted by: ReneZ - 25-08-2019, 10:56 AM - Forum: Provenance & history
- Replies (5)
|
 |
The 2012 celebration of the 100th anniversary of the 'discovery' of the Voynich MS by Wilfrid Voynich took place in Villa Mondragone, on 11 May.
At the time of the event, I already had some doubt about both the year and the location of this discovery.
By now, it is clear that he did not discover the set of manuscripts including the Voynich MS, but he certainly bought it sometime somewhere.
For the year, it really seems that 1912 is right, even though the deal may have been started in 1911. It even seems that the deal may have been concluded in May, but we may never find out for certain. There is a 'Terminus Ante Quem' for 26 June, when two of the manuscripts from this sale were seen in Budapest.
For the place of the sale, I have no more news (yet).
One of the hotels that was recommended to visitors of the Villa Mondragone event was Villa Vecchia, at the foot of the hill on which Mondragone lies (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). I don't remember who among the attendants stayed there. I was in the centre of Frascati. We didn't know then, but this Villa also has a very minor role in the history of the MS.
The main set of documents that the Jesuits wanted to salvage from confiscation in 1873, and which were marked as 'from the private library of P. Beckx' were taken from Rome to a Villa in Castel Gandolfo called the Villa Torlonia, which was also hosting the Jesuit novitiate (moved there from Rome). This set of documents included the well-known volumes of the Kircher correspondence.
It stayed there until 1919, when the the prince of Torlonia decided to cancel the rent of the place to the Jesuits. The collection of manuscripts was taken back to Rome, while the novitiate moved to the above-mentioned Villa Vecchia in the town of Monteporzio Catone. This villa was turned into a hotel much later.
|
|
|
|
| Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? |
|
Posted by: radapox - 24-08-2019, 07:00 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (50)
|
 |
Hi there, Voynichers. First, let me introduce myself: I'm a guy from the Netherlands with a background in linguistics, a general interest in anything to do with language(s) and writing systems, and a tendency to construct the latter myself. I've been a lurker here for some time, a follower of Nick Pelling's and René Zandbergen's sites for quite a bit longer, and generally intrigued by the VM for much of my conscious existence, although I've never done anything serious with it and I don't know what the heck a "Neal key" is even after having read You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. ;)
Regarding the VM text, I suppose I'm largely on the side of most members here: I don't think any of the "solutions" to the text offered thus far have been of much use whatsoever (this is the polite version of my true feelings as a linguist), but I wouldn't dare claiming I have a better clue myself. Safe to say that my cryptology skills don't go nearly as far as my fascination with it.
That said, I've recently been thinking about an idea, and was wondering if you would happen to know if this has ever been considered before (cue Yes it has, you utter noob, leave this to the big kids) or even sounds remotely plausible. I came up with it because some of my conscripts/langs/thingies work on the same basic principle, which you could call a "relative code": i.e., the meaning of a linguistic unit (character, word, whatever) is not determined by its "absolute" value, but by its difference in value with adjacent units.
A simple example to illustrate the principle. Say you want to encipher the word BOOK. To do this, you note the numeric positions of each letter in the alphabet (2-15-15-11), which you then use as steps to be taken forward through the alphabet for each subsequent letter (starting back at the beginning when you get past 26) to get your ciphertext. You need to choose a starting point beforehand; say the letter A. Then, to encipher the first letter of your plaintext (B), you add the value of that letter (2) to the value of your chosen starting letter (A = 1), which in our example gives you 3, which corresponds to C. The C is then taken as the starting point for the next letter, and so on for each step:
A + B = 1 + 2 = 3 = C
C + O = 3 + 15 = 18 = R
R + O = 18 + 15 = 33(mod26) = 7 = G
G + K = 7 + 11 = 18 = R
The plaintext BOOK is thus enciphered as CRGR. Note how the same plaintext character can end up as different ciphertext characters (the first O has become an R; the second one a G), and vice versa (the first O and the K are both enciphered as R).
Should we want to decipher the message CRGR, we must calculate the differences (in terms of numeric value) between each subsequent pair of letters; hence the term "relative code." Counting backwards from the end of the ciphertext, the "difference" between R and G is K, the difference between G and R is O; the difference between R and C is O again; and the difference between C and the letter you chose as your starting point (A) is B. There we are, back at BOOK.
Now this is of course a very simple example, and I'm not expecting the VM text to do anything as straightforward as this or we'd have found out long ago--at least on a letter-by-letter basis. However, could it be the case that something akin to this principle is going on between certain subsequent words (or even larger units)? The fact that so many passages consist of similar-but-not-quite-similar words (pdsheody shdol shey otchdy dshedy soeeedy dchefoey sair shedy sodair) makes me wonder if it would make sense to look at the differences between adjacent words rather than at their surface forms. I.e., not look at otchdy dshedy per se, but at the operations necessary to get from otchdy to dshedy--whatever those operations may be.
Whew. This took more writing than I expected; sorry for that and thanks for bearing with me (assuming you did). Does this make any sense whatsoever, or have I fallen into the most ridiculous trap imaginable? Has this principle been considered before? I'm genuinely curious what you gals 'n' guys think of my idea, and I promise I won't get offended if you burn it to the ground where it belongs. ;)
Thanks a bunch for your consideration, and keep up the great work on the narrow road of sanity!
|
|
|
|
| Course in Cologne focusing on VMS |
|
Posted by: LisaFaginDavis - 19-08-2019, 03:14 PM - Forum: News
- Replies (42)
|
 |
Hi, everyone,
My thanks to everyone who has reached out to me in the wake of my piece in the Washington Post. The response has been very positive.
I don't know if you all have seen this, the website for a recent course at the University of Cologne focusing on the VMS:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I particularly like the interactive timeline here:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- Lisa
|
|
|
|
| f35r |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 18-08-2019, 09:34 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (8)
|
|
I haven't found much about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. on the forum, even though it is a remarkable plant. More so than others, it appears manipulated to match some desired shape, in this case a gold chalice. I've seen it being likened to a chalice before, but I think it's possible to analyze its various parts in a relatively coherent manner.
Naamloos-4 kopiëren.jpg (Size: 67.69 KB / Downloads: 140)
At the top we can see the green of the leaves, but the outside has been painted an even golden brown. There are also somewhat regular circular marks under the paint, but I can't quite make them out.
Naamloos-6 kopiëren.jpg (Size: 84.09 KB / Downloads: 147)
The stem and roots are streaked with red, which in my opinion links it to the golden chalice that caught the blood of Christ after the crucifixion. Comparison image from Wroclaw, 1443.
wroclaw.jpg (Size: 106.96 KB / Downloads: 128)
This leaves the problem of the strangely curved blue petioles (?) around the flower (?). One might just say "it's round so it's a host, which was also present at the last supper" but I think it's something else. I realized this after seeing this image bi3mw posted earlier: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Naamloos-5 kopiëren.jpg (Size: 45.85 KB / Downloads: 173)
The petioles form a "cloud" around the streaks and drops of red. The meaning seems clear: Holy Blood.
If the meaning of "blue=sky" is regularly employed, it might explain why such a disproportionate percentage of VM flowers (high on plant) are blue.
|
|
|
|
|