• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

The Voynich Ninja

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Portal

Welcome, Guest You have to register before you can post on our site. Username/Email:    Password    Remember me Search Forums (Advanced Search) Online Users There are currently 544 online users. » 8 Member(s) | 533 Guest(s) Applebot, Bing, Google, Cile cile, Gregor, obelus, Pirou, quimqu Latest Threads Distinct patterns at the ... Forum: Analysis of the text Last Post: quimqu 44 minutes ago » Replies: 2 » Views: 55 Combination of pch glyphs Forum: Analysis of the text Last Post: Ruby Novacna 10 hours ago » Replies: 21 » Views: 12,326 [split] VMS mailing list ... Forum: Voynich Talk Last Post: Koen G 10 hours ago » Replies: 11 » Views: 206 Eleven Moon Phases in Fol... Forum: Astrology & Astronomy Last Post: Jorge_Stolfi Today, 05:17 AM » Replies: 121 » Views: 21,200 Speculative fraud hypothe... Forum: Theories & Solutions Last Post: Jorge_Stolfi Today, 03:50 AM » Replies: 87 » Views: 5,830 The journey into an unkno... Forum: Theories & Solutions Last Post: Petrasti Yesterday, 04:02 PM » Replies: 26 » Views: 2,427 How to prove that the B-l... Forum: Theories & Solutions Last Post: Ruby Novacna Yesterday, 08:00 AM » Replies: 76 » Views: 33,831 My Theory: RITE — Ritual ... Forum: Theories & Solutions Last Post: oaken 13-09-2025, 08:47 PM » Replies: 18 » Views: 1,333 Positional Mimic Cipher (... Forum: Analysis of the text Last Post: quimqu 13-09-2025, 06:58 PM » Replies: 39 » Views: 1,652 No text, but a visual cod... Forum: Theories & Solutions Last Post: Antonio García Jiménez 13-09-2025, 04:24 PM » Replies: 1,560 » Views: 754,514

[split] Overlap between both "plants" sections Posted by: -JKP- - 13-01-2017, 07:20 PM - Forum: Imagery - Replies (7) [Edit KG: this thread was originally in reply to this one: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ] It's a good example, Linda. I guess I was reluctant to ID You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as okra because okra leaves are typically more palmate (and more evenly serrated), but there is another reason I was shying away from okra (perhaps I shouldn't have)... it's because there is a plant in the small-plants section that I think might be okra and it is drawn very differently from Plant 8r. Okra is distinctive for its pods and they grow on either side of the stalk in pairs, as depicted in this VMS drawing on folio 101v: Note how the illustrator chose to depict the most distinctive part of the plant. I suspect this is true for many of the other plants, based on studying them in depth for several years. So... I shied away from okra for 8r because the leaves of okra are more variable than distinctive (I could be wrong, 8r might be okra)... but consider that the leaves of Petasites are the most distinctive aspect of the plant. I'm fairly certain 101v : 4 is okra. I'm willing to acknowledge that 8r could also be okra but I'm leaning away from it. I know it could be argued that maybe the big-plants section emphasizes a different part of the plant than the small-plants section (e.g., maybe one is for identification and one is for identifying the useful part of the plant), but once again, I looked into this in-depth, as well and, as far as I can see, when plants are duplicated in the small-plants section, they are drawn pretty much same as their counterpart in the big-plants section.   f8r Posted by: Anton - 12-01-2017, 08:50 PM - Forum: Imagery - Replies (15) The identifications of this plant have been: Th. Petersen: Paraenanthes, Atriplex hastata E. Sherwood: Pisum sativum Steve D: Tussilago farfara The Finnish biologist does not consider this plant. Of these three, methinks that Tussilago farfara is the best match. I'm not sure what does the small "pierced through" leaf stand for, though. Turning to the mnemonic side, I can't imagine what would these leaves and roots remind me. If the roots in this case do not bear any mnemonics altogether, then they look to me as simply resembling real roots of tussilago. As for leaves, folk names of tussilago in various languages have been pointing to a hoof. The large leaf can be thought of as resembling a hoof (when looking from the ground upwards), but, if a hoof, the depiction is surely not the best possible. So I am not sure. Are there any other proposed identifications from those who befriend botany? Sorry, corrected the thread name - should read f8r.   J. Janick interpretations of the VMS... Posted by: -JKP- - 12-01-2017, 06:54 PM - Forum: Imagery - Replies (33) DavidJackson kindly posted links to a collection of essays by J. Janick which interpret and support the Tucker New World theory. Since it's in the library section, it's not possible to comment on the individual articles. I read (with difficulty), the chapter on the zodiac section.  It was so full of errors, I had trouble getting through it and found myself unable to read the others (I didn't feel it was worth the time). However, mine is only one opinion, there may be others who feel differently or who want to address specific statements in the essays, so I thought I would start a thread in case others want to comment on his arguments and his conclusions.   VMS f56v: Cycad? Posted by: Sam G - 12-01-2017, 02:34 PM - Forum: Imagery - Replies (9) Edith Sherwood identifies the plant on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as a sago palm: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Turning to Wikipedia, I find that a sago palm is not actually a true palm at all, but a type of plant called a cycad: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. It seems that most if not all species of cycads have these characteristic cones that resemble the structure seen in f56v.  The Wikipedia article provides this image of a dying cycad cone, which is even closer in shape to the one in the VMS than the example provided by Edith Sherwood: Well, I do think You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. looks like it may be a cycad.  Is it?  What other contenders are there for the identity of this plant and its conspicuous cone-like structure? Also, here's a map from the Wikipedia article showing the approximate world distribution of living cycad species:   stop energy waste on herbal research Posted by: Davidsch - 12-01-2017, 12:00 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk - Replies (24) In my opinion so much time & energy is wasted on the 129 pages of herbals and the 20 pages with roots that someone has to try to stop the waste of human energy resources. Me too, yes, I am guilty too of spending much time of trying to solve the Voynich puzzle by identification efforts of the herbal pages. All that, has been proven is a total waste of time. The basis assumption that we see plants is wrong. Why we think we see plants, with a stem, root , leaves and flower is based on the details we see. But if you look really well, you will see that in every drawing there are things that do not match with the real world ! I could show an example here, but then the discussion will continue as usual: energy will go in the discussion of the details of the given example and a never ending discussion will start. Because we recognize existing parts and details it does not mean it is a plant. It is like the first time people saw an aircraft: "it's diabolical", "people are not meant to fly by God, otherwise he would have given them wings". It is in the nature of humans, that they will always try to identify things. Was it not Aristotle who wrote:  "if you want to analyse something, invent a name for it; because without a proper name, you can not identify it". It is my belief that the author of the Voynich is into medieval Aristotelian wisdom,  and wants to create a mood within he can tells us something.  This has only sideways to do with the herbals you see.   Searching for the exact names or identical brothers or sisters in the kingdom of plants, will therefore always remain fruitless.  The herbals are only illustrative and are not drawn to be identified as real existing plants. Save the world and please stop wasting your energy !    Analysis of the beast on f25v Posted by: davidjackson - 11-01-2017, 04:37 PM - Forum: Imagery - Replies (11) I think a little bit of analysis of the beast in question on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. may be called for, so we can narrow down what we are looking for in identifying it. This is my first draft of my ideas and I though I'd put them out there for some feedback. Questions: How many limbs are displayed? Why is the back limb stuck up like that? What are the ripples on its back? In what order were the plant, beast, paint drawn / applied? As always, nothing is easy, mainly because the perspective is screwed on the beast. Its body is drawn at an angle but the head is side on. Let's just look at the body: By cutting off the head it's a bit easier to see what I mean here. The chest is exposed on the animal and an attempt at perspective is made by drawing the nearside top limb in its entirety (event to the point of joining the shoulder onto the chest, albeit in a funny position) and showing only the paw of the back top limb. Also note that both paws have different number of toes (or claws) - the nearside has three, the farside four. The end limb clearly appears to end in a paw and we must thus assume this is a limb, not a tail. It has three toes, same as the top nearside paw. In fact, if that end limb went at a straight line instead of at a sudden angle up, the perspective works. Imagine the green smudge (the ground) wasn't there and the limb goes out. We're seeing the animal side-on, as we would expect to. But the body is then twisted round. JKP has posted an image of a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., but I don't think anyone has found one with three legs. More-ever, there is something scribbled in the distance between the body and the end limb. This could be an attempt to depict the fourth leg - it's impossible to say.  If that scribble there is not an attempt to depict a fourth limb, then what is it? There are also some scribbles around where the bottom limb connects to the body. It's so small that I can't get a proper resolution on it, even with the big TIFFs from the Beineicke. It looks like three vertical marks where the limb joins the body. It could just because the artist wanted to shade in the shoulderblade. In summary: I think this is a four legged animal and the artist drew it too close to the ground. He then didn't leave room for the tail, and tried to draw it in the gap between the third leg and rear of the beast. Let us look at the second question: why is the back limb sticking up at that angle? It is clearly anti-natural (not that this matters too much in a 15th century depiction). My suggestion is that it's because the body was too close to the ground to be drawn in its proper place. I think the leg was going to be drawn in the correct fashion, but it was so close to the ground that someone had to draw it sticking upwards at an un-natural angle. Let us look at the third question: what's that stuff on its back? We see the body of the animal quite clearly. The artist has drawn the animal. He's then thought that more detail is needed and drawn these loops and whirls over the body and above the neck. The whirls also continue over the back of the beast. It's a covering of some kind. It could be scales, but then why draw them ontop of the body? It could be wool. It could be a crest and scales, but then why extend the crest around the neck? It could be an attempt to depict skin markings. Finally, the question of how the illustration was drawn. Plant, beast, paint. Well, I think the paint and ground came first. The beast was then drawn, and finally the leaf it is nibbling on. Look at the way the beast is eating the leaf. The leaf is drawn to vanish into the beast's mouth - ie, the mouth was there and then the leaf was drawn around it.   Identification of Phytomorphs in the Voynich Codex Posted by: Oocephalus - 11-01-2017, 03:02 PM - Forum: News - Replies (2) This article by A.O. Tucker and J. Janick has just come out in the Horticultural Reviews. It builds on the earlier paper by Tucker & Talbot in Herbalgram, attempting to identify the plants in the VMS as New World species, based on the hypothesis of a Mexican origin of the MS. There are 59 proposed plant identifications, including some that were not included in the earlier paper. A Google Books preview is online You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. I haven't yet looked at this in detail, so I can't say how convincing the identifications are. Just thought it may be interesting to some here.   Voynich mnemonics Posted by: Anton - 11-01-2017, 01:38 PM - Forum: Imagery - Replies (14) I decided to open a thread about Voynich mnemonics in general. There is a number of threads discussing various manifestations thereof and individual interpretations as well. But seemingly there was no thread about the general paradigm underneath which frames it into a system (yet to be revealed). First and foremost, mnemonics apparently reveal themselves in the botanical section of the VMS, which gives to some plants rather weird appearance. Three major questions present themselves from scratch: 1) What is the purpose of mnemonics? Namely: if there is text there (no matter if plain text or ciphertext), everything can be expressed by means of text. So why bother with the additional layer of complexity and introduce graphical mnemonics? 2) What is the information conveyed by mnemonics? Is it plant names, plant usage or otherwise? 3) Is there any system in mnemonics, or it is all ad-hoc? Namely, is there any repetitively applied "logic" that produces graphical shapes from the information as per item 2) above? Regarding items 2) and 3), I recently proposed a hypothesis in the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. thread, which I will repost here: Quote:I got a novel idea that can be named "heads and tails" paradigm. With this paradigm: a) the look of the Voynich plants is explained by that the primary purpose is mnemonics; b) the roots of the Voynich plants are used as mnemonics for one language/usage (say, Latin/"scientific") and the tops of the plants are used as mnemonics for another language/usage (say, German/"folklore") For You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. this would be the (provisional) Lysimachia and Schirmkraut, respectively. With this concept, there may be no plant names mentioned in the botanical folios at all (so my PPN idea would need to be discarded), because they would actually be not needed there anymore. So, according to this paradigm, questions 2 and 3 receive the following answers: - The information conveyed is plant names. The end result is that one is able recall the plant's name by looking at the image. - There is the system as follows. There are two levels of mnemonics generally (although for some plants only one of them may be in place): one in tops of the plants, the other in the roots. The former deals with common "folk" names of plants, the latter deals with "scientific" Latin names, being linked to descriptions in previous textual sources (such as the Natural History by Pliny the Elder). This is highly provisional yet, and, as of now, is more or less confirmed by one plant only (f5r).  After that, an idea came to me of a most simple yet elegant answer to question 1. It implies that the text is a cipher. It is often noted that drawings in the botanical section were made prior to putting down the text. But what if all botanical section drawings were made before putting down all the text? In that case, with 100+ plants out there, the author would have liked some means of identification, in order to avoid confusion. Normally, one could just put down captions when creating figures. But with the intention to encrypt the text, the author could not proceed with plain text labels, because that would reveal information. So he turned to mnemonics - for his own use - to be able to identify plants later when returning to the work with the text. Why not place encrypted labels at once? Well, it's basically the same question as why not encrypt the whole last line of f116v. Indeed, why not? But it's not wholly encrypted still.   f54r Posted by: Anton - 11-01-2017, 08:50 AM - Forum: Imagery - Replies (20) To put the exciting You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. paradigm under further test, I suggest to discuss the plant of f54r. The reason for the choice is that it is the second of the two plants out of my "focal set" with high consensus in identification between various researchers (the other being f5r, where the consensus nevertheless might have been misleading, as we discussed in the respective thread). Th. Petersen, E. Sherwood and Steve D all consider You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as thistle (cirsium oleraceum), while the Finnish biologist just does not provide identification of that plant. So is it thistle or there are better matches?   Cloud bands and the scallops in the sky Posted by: R. Sale - 10-01-2017, 11:46 PM - Forum: Imagery - Replies (7) Clearly there is an interesting example of a cloud band in the VMs central rosette. It was brought to my attention by Don of Tallahassee a while back. His investigations were significant (IMO), but not always focused on the definition provided by the VMs example. And the definition is: Scallop. Having seen examples that other investigators have posted, it is clear that the VMs example in the central rosette follows the general representation of a scallop much better than some of the other interesting contributions. If you take a nebuly line, one that is clearly bulbous, and across the top of these shoulders, you run an engrailed line, like a short series of 'mmmm's, then there you have it - a scallop. An alternating sequence of cloud scallops makes a cloud band. But I have to say, scallops in the sky sounds pretty nebuly to me. A unfortunate choice of etymology, one might say. Are there better matches to the scallop-patterned cloud band found in the VMs central rosette than those we see in the illustrations of Oresme and de Pizan? First Previous Next Last