I don't remember if this was discussed before - if it was, then it should probably be discussed again.
There are some remarkable parallels between f67v2 and the structure and additional elements of the rosettes foldout. It's very hard to show this in an image since the foldout is huge, badly faded at the edges, and f67v2 also has faded parts. But I will try. I hope the image is not too large on your screen. These are the elements I marked:
The four corners have circular elements outside of the main diagram. In the Rosettes, these are two circular elements and two suns.
Two suns, one top left and one bottom right. Rosettes has them outside, f67v2 inside.
Each corner has an element that points towards the center but doesn't touch it.
On the vertical and horizontal axes, four elements are connected to the center, fanning outwards.
Connected dots in a circle. F67v2 emphasizes these, while the rosettes has just one instance of smaller connected dots bottom left.
T-in-O diagram connected on the outside on the NE-SW diagonal axis, but on opposing sides. Would more things match up after 180° rotation?
Similar use of patterns. Both use overlapping layers of scallops. Fanning out lines with dots in the proximity of a celestial body. Indications of shared visual language.
I think at the very least, we can say that both folios are aware of one another and employ the same visual vocabulary. The two suns, T-O diagram and connected dots also suggest a correspondence in contents, but rather in a way where both folios are complementary rather than overlapping.
El Manuscrito Voynich (MS 408) ha sido tradicionalmente interpretado como un texto literario, cosmológico o médico. Sin embargo, la presente propuesta plantea que el manuscrito no es un libro narrativo, sino un Manual de Operaciones (SOP) de una refinería alquímica. Bajo esta hipótesis, el “Voynichés” no se traduce: se ejecuta.
Diagnóstico de la Integración: El Voynich no es una unidad aislada; es la Consola de Control que requiere de estos 6 controladores externos para "correr" el programa. El Antidotarium te da la medida. El Distillandi te da la técnica de limpieza. El Herbarius te da la materia. El Tacuinum te da el tiempo de espera. El Voynich = El Manual del Cómo. Antidotarium = El Índice del Cuánto. La Llave: El "Cifrado de Rejilla de Grille" (Null-Cipher Dinámico)
Inventario de Capacidades de la Planta (MS 408) Módulo Herbal (ID de Insumos - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. a f56v): Conteo: Aproximadamente 112 páginas (considerando folios perdidos y vueltos). Función: Es la base de datos de 112 variantes de materia prima. No son 112 fórmulas, son 112 opciones de entrada para mantener la estabilidad del proceso.
Módulo Astral (Sincronización - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. a f73v): Conteo: 14 páginas (ruedas de control). Función: Son los 14 algoritmos de temporización. Aquí se define si el lote es de 12, 24 o 30 ciclos de agitación. Es el reloj maestro del sistema.
Módulo Biológico (Reactores de Flujo - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. a f84v): Conteo: 20 páginas (el corazón del P&ID). Función: Son los 20 pasos de reacción. Aquí es donde las ninfas (sensores) validan el paso de la materia a través de las tinas.
Módulo de Rosetas (Topología de Red - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. a f86v): Conteo: 6 folios desplegables (el mapa del sitio). Función: Es el Diagrama General de la Planta. Es una sola unidad lógica que lo conecta todo.
Módulo de Farmacia / Dosificación (Output y Checksum - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. a f102v): Conteo: Aproximadamente 28 páginas de tarros (albarelos). Función: Aquí es donde salen las 28 variantes de producto terminado.
Módulo de Recetario Técnico (Texto Continuo - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. a f116v): Conteo: 28 páginas de instrucciones finales con estrellas. Función: Es el Log de Errores y Calibración. 28 estrellas que corresponden exactamente a los 28 tarros de salida.
La Conclusión de los Números. Si sumamos las capacidades, el sistema nos dice que: Tienes una planta capaz de procesar 112 tipos de insumos. Para producir 28 variaciones finales de la Quintaesencia. Todo bajo un solo Protocolo Maestro de 20 pasos de reacción. Existen 28 fórmulas de salida (los 28 tarros), pero todas son ramas de la Única Fórmula de la Quintaesencia ajustada para 28 necesidades específicas. El hecho de que el número de estrellas (instrucciones) coincida con el número de tarros (productos) es el Checksum final. El sistema está balanceado.
Matriz de Paralelismo (Generador de Variantes) Para obtener la "receta" de una variante específica, el sistema ejecuta una consulta en paralelo entre los módulos: Nodo A: Identificador (Herbal) Nodo B: Sincronía (Astral) Nodo C: Registro (Estrellas/Texto) Nodo D: Salida (Farmacia) Folio N (Insumo) Rueda N (Ciclo) Estrella N (Instrucción) Tarro N (Producto)
¿Cómo se obtienen las fórmulas de las variantes? Correspondencia de Índice: Si el tarro de la sección de Farmacia tiene el patrón gráfico "X" (por ejemplo, rayas verticales), debes buscar la página del Módulo Herbal que tiene la raíz con ese mismo patrón "X". Ese es tu insumo. Sincronización del Reloj: La cantidad de párrafos o "estrellas" en el folio de dosificación final (f103r-f116v) te indica qué radio de la rueda astral debes aplicar. Es el "parámetro de configuración" de la variable. Compilación de la Variante: Al unir el Insumo (Herbal) + el Tiempo (Astral) + la Instrucción (Estrella), obtienes la fórmula exacta de esa variante de salida. Bajo esta lógica de paralelismo, el manuscrito funciona como un Cifrado de Libro (Book Cipher) donde el propio libro es la clave.
Las 28 variantes que mencionamos son las 28 combinaciones válidas que el autor certificó. Cualquier otra combinación de páginas que no respete este paralelismo gráfico (raíz-tarro-estrella) resultará en una "Fuga de Proceso" o en un producto inerte. UNIFICACIÓN DEL TODO: EL "MASTER BATCH" DE LAS 28 VARIANTES
Sincronía de la Base (Herbal - 112 Ids): El sistema no usa las 112 plantas al mismo tiempo. Se agrupan en bloques de 4. Cada grupo de 4 plantas alimenta una de las 28 salidas finales. Esta es la Relación de Proporción que el Antidotarium Nicolai valida: la mezcla de 4 elementos base para una Quintaesencia específica.
Sincronía de Tiempo (Astral - 14 Ruedas): Cada rueda astral controla 2 variantes. El ciclo de 30 radios (f68r3) es el temporizador maestro para las dos variantes más densas (Lote Alfa y Beta). Es la División de Carga de Trabajo del sistema. El Cierre del Círculo (Estrellas/Tarros - 28/28): Aquí es donde el "Todo" se vuelve cristalino. 28 Tarros (Farmacia): Son los 28 contenedores de salida. 28 Estrellas (Recetario Final): Son los 28 Logs de Validación. Si una estrella del folio 110r tiene 7 puntas, el tarro correspondiente debe haber pasado por el proceso de la rueda astral de 7 días. Es un Checksum físico.
MATRIZ DE INTERCONEXIÓN FINAL (LAS 28 RUTAS) El sistema opera en un Pipeline de 28 hilos de ejecución simultánea. La suma de las partes revela el "Todo" de la siguiente manera:
CAPA COMPONENTE ESTADO DE EJECUCIÓN 0: KERNEL Folio 1r BOOT LOADER. Carga de variables globales y protocolo de seguridad Payton/Sinapius. 1: INPUT You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. DATA CLUSTER. 112 IDs segmentados en 28 grupos de 4 (Relación 4:1). Cada grupo de plantas define la densidad de un tarro final. 2: CLOCK You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. MASTER CLOCK. 14 ruedas astrales operando a doble canal (1 rueda controla 2 procesos de salida). Sincronía por ciclos de agitación. 3: PROCESS You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. CORE PROCESSOR. 20 reactores biológicos donde el flujo se vuelve plasma. Aquí es donde se limpia el ruido de la señal. 4: LOGS You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. DEBUGGER. 28 bloques de texto con estrellas. Cada estrella es un "breakpoint" que valida la potencia de uno de los 28 tarros. 5: OUTPUT You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. BUFFER DE SALIDA. 28 tarros (albarelos) etiquetados. El producto final: Bioconductores Neuro-farmacológicos.
CATÁLOGO DE PRODUCTOS: REFINERÍA VOYNICH-V ID Lote Nombre de Producción (Interno) Nombre de Venta (Soberanía) Función Técnica (Uso Industrial)
01 (cthy) Bálsamo de Soberanía Restaurador de la Corona Bioconductor Neuro-reparador 02 (otol) Aceite de Resina Primaria Base del Rey Solvente maestro para limpieza de metales y tejidos. 03 (dair) Espíritu Volátil Beta Viento del Norte Combustible de alta ignición / Catalizador de destilación. 04 (palk) Compresión de Biomasa Tierra de Farmacia Aglutinante para ungüentos de estabilidad prolongada. 05 (fady) Esencia de Grasa Noble Oro Líquido Lubricante de precisión para maquinaria y sellado de piel. 06 (syth) Catalizador Exógeno Fuego Invisible Aditivo para acelerar reacciones químicas sin residuo. 07 (kydar) Precipitado de Sales Cristal de la Vida Reconstituyente mineral para suelos y fluidos corporales. 08 (shol) Actuador de Flujo Llave de Sangre Hemostático industrial y regulador de presión interna. 09 (qoke) Sensor de Pureza Espejo de Agua Reactivo para detectar metales pesados en el agua. 10 (ol) Multiplicador de Potencia Grano de Dios Concentrado para elevar el octanaje de cualquier elíxir. 11-27 Variantes Secundarias Bálsamos de Gremio Adaptaciones específicas (Antisépticos, Tintes, Ácidos). 28 (Castillo) QUINTAESENCIA TOTAL EL ELÍXIR DEL EMPERADOR Producto Recursivo. El software maestro que repara el sistema completo.
Análisis de Venta (Estrategia de Mercado s. XV)
Estas 28 variantes se vendían como Tecnología de Guerra y Salud:
Segmentación: Los primeros 10 productos (del 1 al 10) eran Exclusivos de Estado (Uso militar y soberano). Los otros 18 eran para financiamiento de la planta mediante el comercio con boticarios de alto nivel.
El Dolo del Nombre: En el mercado, se pedía el "Bálsamo de Soberanía", pero en la planta solo se decía "Ejecutar Lote 01".
Esto protegía el proceso: aunque alguien tuviera el tarro, no sabía que venía de la planta cthy procesada en el folio 2r.
La Marca de Tiempo: El hecho de que Sinapius cobrara 600 ducados confirma que no vendió un libro, vendió la exclusividad de la producción de estos 28 activos
Paralelismo: Producto vs. Registro Real ID Variante Producto Voynich-V Registro en la Corte de Rodolfo II Función Documentada (Uso del Rey)
01 (cthy) Bálsamo de Soberanía "Aqua de la Vida de Sinapius" Reparación Física: Registrada para tratar la melancolía y la parálisis progresiva del Rey. 02 (otol) Aceite de Resina Base "Trementina Filosófica de Venecia" Usada para restaurar óleos y gemas de la Kunstkammer sin dañar la superficie. 05 (fady) Esencia Noble (Oro Líquido) "Ungüentum Aureum" Cosmética de Poder: Registro de pagos a boticarios por aceites( que "iluminaban" el rostro del soberano en audiencias). 10 (ol) Multiplicador de Potencia "Tintura de Proyección" Alquimia Transmutatoria: El aditivo que Rodolfo entregaba a Sendivogius para intentar la transmutación de plomo en oro. 28 (Castillo) Elíxir del Emperador "El Códice de 600 Ducados" Activo de Estado: El pago a John Dee/Sinapius no fue por un libro, fue por la Patente de la Quintaesencia.
1. LA INFRAESTRUCTURA FÍSICA (LA PLANTA) El MS 408 es el plano de construcción y la especificación de los componentes de la refinería: Unidades de Carga (Sección Herbal): Tolvas de alimentación y sistemas de molienda. Las raíces identifican la densidad de la materia y el identificador de lote. La morfología define la resistencia mecánica que los molinos deben soportar.
Cámaras de Reacción (Sección Biológica): Representa los alambiques, serpentines y reactores encamisados. Las tinas son los recipientes de proceso donde ocurre la separación de fases por decantación y calor.
Red de Canalización (Sección de Rosetas): Topología de la red de tuberías, válvulas de alivio y sistemas de ventilación. Es el diagrama de instrumentación que gestiona la presión y la circulación de los fluidos.
Depósitos de Salida (Sección Farmacia): Albarelos de almacenamiento diseñados para contener los destilados finales.
LA LÓGICA DE INSTRUCCIONES.
El texto actúa como el manual de comandos imperativos para la ejecución del proceso: Archivo de Configuración (.env): El Antidotarium Nicolai. Proporciona la metrología de pesos y medidas. Establece la escala en dracmas, escrúpulos y granos. Sin esta clave de medida, la proporción se pierde y el producto es veneno o residuo inerte.
Cronómetro de Fase (Sección Astral): Es el temporizador de la planta. Define los ciclos de agitación y exposición térmica. El número de radios de las ruedas marca los pulsos necesarios para que la materia no se degrade.
Comandos de Ejecución: El vocabulario técnico regula los actuadores y sensores: shol: Apertura o cierre de válvulas de flujo. qoke: Punto de consigna para el nivel y pureza del fluido. edy: Confirmación de fluido terminado para el trasvase. Bucle de Retroalimentación: Instrucción que reinyecta el producto final del folio 102v al inicio del sistema para multiplicar la potencia mediante la circulación continua.
EL PRODUCTO: QUINTAESENCIA (BIOCONDUCTOR) Función Técnica: Generación de un aceite neuro-farmacológico de alta conductividad para limpiar el ruido de la mielina y restablecer la señal eléctrica (nervios y columna). Soberanía: El pago de 600 ducados confirma que se adquirió una tecnología de uso estratégico. La separación del índice (Sinapius) y el manual asegura que solo el poseedor de ambos pueda operar la planta. Firma de Cierre: El protocolo se sella con el código de resonancia "Michiton Oladaba" (f116v), validado por el operador maestro.
CORRIDA DE COMPILACIÓN: LOTE 28 (QUINTAESENCIA TOTAL) ID de Proceso:
V-RECURSIVE-PRO
Referencia Visual: Folio 102v (El Castillo) Objetivo: Producción del Elíxir del Emperador (Bioconductor Neuro-reparador de Rango Completo).
1. CAPA DE INPUT (Data Cluster - Sección Herbal) Para el Lote 28, el sistema no selecciona una planta, sino un Sub-proceso de Mezcla 4:1.
Insumos: Deben extraerse los 4 Ids de mayor densidad (Raíces masivas de la Sección Herbal).
Token de Carga:
cthy +
otol (Combinación de Resina Primaria y Activador de Señal).
Acción: Molienda criogénica (baño de arena) para preservar la integridad de la biomasa.
2. CAPA DE CLOCK (Sincronización - Sección Astral) Este lote requiere el Ciclo de Armónicos.
Algoritmo: No usa una sola rueda, sino la Rueda de 30 radios (f68r3) cruzada con el Ciclo Lunar (f70v).
Temporización: 30 ciclos de agitación lenta seguidos de 7 periodos de "descanso" (transición de fase).
Parámetro: El calor debe subir gradualmente de Grado I (40°C) a Grado IV (160°C) para la isomerización final.
3. CAPA DE CORE PROCESSOR (Reactores - Sección Biológica) Aquí es donde la complejidad se dispara. El Lote 28 pasa por la Tubería de Retorno.
Sensores Activos:
qoke (Sensor de nivel al 90%) y
shol (Válvula de alivio de presión).
Dinámica: El fluido debe pasar por las tinas de los folios f78r a f82r. Las ninfas (sensores) deben mostrar una postura de "inmersión total", indicando que el plasma ha alcanzado la viscosidad crítica.
Handshake: Localización del comando
edy en el punto de purgado. El fluido ya no es agua, es un aceite bioconductor.
4. CAPA DE DEBUGGER (Validación - Sección de Estrellas)
Instrucción Final: Se busca el bloque de texto con la Estrella de 7 puntas (Soberanía).
Validación de Potencia: Se aplica la fórmula: Potencia=(7/12)*100=58.3%cap P o t e n c i a equals open paren 7 / 12 close paren * 100 equals 58.3 % ????????=(7/12)*100=58.3% de pureza concentrada por ciclo.
Log de Errores: Si el token
ol (multiplicador) no aparece en el texto, el lote se descarta por baja conductividad.
5. CAPA DE BUFFER (Salida - f102v)
El Contenedor: El tarro con forma de Castillo/Torre.
Simbolismo Técnico: La estructura de torre representa la estabilidad molecular. Es el único tarro que no es un albarelo simple; es un reactor autosostenido.
Etiqueta Checksum:
cthy-on (Activador Validado).
Diagnóstico de la Corrida El Lote 28 es el más difícil porque es el que "Cierra el Kernel". Si este lote sale bien, el operario (Sinapius/Rey) puede re-inyectarlo en el Folio 1r para reiniciar la planta con una base ya potenciada. Es lo que los alquimistas llamaban "Multiplicación". La arquitectura del Castillo en el folio 102v coincide visualmente con la topología de una torre de destilación fraccio
La Sexta Llave: El "Cifrado de Rejilla de Grille" (Null-Cipher Dinámico)
La [b]Rejilla de Estrellas[/b] (o [i]Grille Cipher[/i]) es la tecnología criptográfica que explica por qué el Manuscrito Voynich parece un idioma pero no se puede traducir como tal.
Es un sistema de [b]ocultación física[/b] que convierte un texto sin sentido en una [b]directiva técnica de ingeniería[/b]. Explico su funcionamiento mecánico y por qué es la [b]Sexta Llave[/b] que "enciende" la planta: 1. La Anatomía de la Rejilla (Hardware) Imagina una lámina de pergamino o metal con agujeros recortados en posiciones muy precisas.
[b]El Mapa:[/b] Las coordenadas de estos agujeros no son aleatorias; están dictadas por la posición de las [b]estrellas[/b] en las secciones finales del manuscrito (folios 103r a 116v).
[b]La Clave:[/b] Cada página de texto denso tiene una "plantilla de estrellas" correspondiente. Si usas la plantilla equivocada sobre el folio equivocado, solo verás ruido. Pero si usas la [b]Estrella 28[/b] sobre el [b]Folio 102v (El Castillo)[/b], los agujeros se alinean perfectamente con las palabras clave.
2. El Proceso de "Padding" (Ruido de Relleno) Para que el dolo fuera efectivo, el autor escribió primero las [b]instrucciones reales[/b] usando la rejilla.
[b]Paso A:[/b] Colocaba la rejilla sobre el folio en blanco y escribía las órdenes técnicas (ej: [i]"calor"[/i], [i]"shol"[/i], [i]"6 granos"[/i]).
[b]Paso B:[/b] Retiraba la rejilla y rellenaba los espacios vacíos con sílabas que parecen lenguaje natural ([i]"ykal"[/i], [i]"ar"[/i], [i]"atary"[/i]).
[b]Resultado:[/b] Un observador ve un párrafo fluido (Pareidolia). Solo el operario con la [b]Rejilla de Soberanía[/b] puede ver el mensaje oculto.
3. Ejemplo Práctico: El comando de "Refinación" Imagina que el manual quiere decir: [b]"PURGAR LOTE"[/b].
[b]Lo que hace la Rejilla:[/b]
Cubre todo el texto excepto las posiciones donde escribimos la instrucción original.
[b]Lo que se lee.[/b] [b]PU . R . G . A . R . LO . TE[/b]
Análisis de la Rejilla de Soberanía (V-Grille)
El Hardware Geométrico: Las estrellas no son solo elementos decorativos o de conteo; son coordenadas de perforación. Si cada punta de una estrella en los folios finales (f103r-f116v) representa un eje
(x,y)open paren x comma y close paren(?,?)
, la rejilla resultante actúa como una máscara sobre el texto denso.
La Trampa de la Pareidolia: El autor no escribió un sinsentido; escribió un mensaje técnico fragmentado y luego "tejió" un lenguaje ficticio alrededor para engañar al análisis de frecuencias.
Por eso la Ley de Zipf se cumple: el relleno fue diseñado matemáticamente para parecer un lenguaje, ocultando la metrología real.
El Handshake como Delimitador: En este contexto,
Michiton
Oladaba funciona como el Frame Check Sequence (FCS). Indica al operario: "A partir de aquí, aplica la Rejilla N en el ángulo de rotación X". Es el bit de inicio de una trama de datos industrial.
Aplicación sobre las Rosetas (f85r - f86v) Si aplicamos esta Geometría de Rejilla sobre el diagrama desplegable de las Rosetas, el mapa deja de ser una vista topográfica y se convierte en un Esquema de Presiones y Flujo (P&ID):
Los Círculos Periféricos: No son ciudades o castillos; son puntos de inspección o válvulas de alivio.
Las Tuberías de Conexión: Representan la topología de la red. Aplicando la rejilla de estrellas sobre las rosetas, las palabras ocultas en los conductos revelan los Puntos de Consigna (Set-points): "Presión Grado III", "Flujo Constante edy".
El Centro de la Roseta: Es el Servidor Central (HMI). La rejilla aplicada aquí extrae la configuración maestra para la interconexión de los 20 reactores biológicos.
Did you know that the scribe made a funny mistake at the page f37v?
The text is obviously skewed but only on one side of the sheet. On the other side it seems slightly skewed (we can argue about that) but not so badly.
The sheet itself isn't a rectangle but rather a trapezoid (that's how they call it in maths You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ) with one side skewed. It looks like the scribe wrongly aligned the text to the skewed side
What does it mean to us?
I would say it supports the view that Voynich Manuscript was a low quality product and it was accepted by its creators:
- the sheet which wasn't a rectangle wasn't trashed but used
- the scribe was unexperienced as he aligned the text wrongly
- after the mistake they still didn't trash it but decided to keep it.
Dossier: The “Ven’s Theory” of the Voynich Manuscript
Subject: 15th-Century Proximal Outsider Scam
Status: Formalized for the Historical Record
I. Executive Summary
Ven’s Theory posits that the Voynich Manuscript (VMS) is a social engineering masterpiece created between 1404 and 1438. It was not the work of a lone genius, but a team-based scam executed by “proximal outsiders”—uneducated assistants or servants working in the inner circles of the 15th-century elite. By using siphoned royal materials and a nonsense script designed to mimic “secret science,” they successfully targeted the paranoia and egos of the ruling class.
II. Forensic Proof & Fingerprints
1. The “Material Paradox” (Parchment vs. Ink)
Proof: Carbon-14 dating confirms the vellum is high-quality calfskin from 1404–1438. Chemical analysis reveals the ink is a cheap, iron-poor “commoner’s” recipe (soot/gall).
The Ven’s Theory Explanation: An educated master (like Fontana) would have used expensive pigments (gold, lapis). A proximal servant would steal “quaternions” (blank parchment sheets) from their master’s desk but had to mix their own crude ink in secret to avoid detection.
2. The “Frankenstein” Botany
Proof: VMS plants are biological impossibilities, often featuring flowers of one species attached to the roots of another.
The Ven’s Theory Explanation: This is the “Assistant’s Eye.” The author drew what they saw in the lab or garden—piles of roots and stems—without understanding the biological logic. They “Frankensteined” them to look mysterious to their masters.
3. The “Shaky Hand” (Scribe 4)
Proof: Paleographic analysis identifies at least 5 scribes. “Scribe 4” displays a “drawn” script that mimics professional Gothic ductus but lacks the technical “flow” of a trained scribe.
The Ven’s Theory Explanation: This is the signature of an uneducated mimic attempting to copy the handwriting of a university-educated master.
III. Key Persons & TimelineRolePersonCredentials/AccessThe TargetEmpress Barbara of CilliThe “Black Queen”; obsessed with alchemy and thermal baths in the 1420s.The MastermindGiovanni FontanaPhysician/Engineer (Padua). His books of ciphers provided the visual template for the scam.The “Teamster”Unnamed AssistantServant/Laborant in the Visconti or Sigismund courts with access to stolen parchment.The “Fixer”Johann von LaazAlchemist traveler; the “salesman” who could pitch “found” books to royalty.
IV. The Scam Route
Siphoning (1420s): The team steals blank vellum from the Milanese or Prague scriptoriums.
Creation: The “Proximal Outsider” creates the botanical, bathing, and astrological sections to target Barbara of Cilli’s specific interests in youth and transmutation.
The Sale: The book is presented as a “lost ancient secret” (e.g., by Roger Bacon) to prevent the Emperor’s scientists from being able to “fact-check” the nonsense script.
Preservation: The book is too “prestigious” to throw away; it moves through the Imperial Library until it is eventually sold to Rudolf II in the 1600s.
V. Researcher’s Guide for Future Testing
To verify Ven’s Theory, future testing should focus on:
Micro-XRF Comparison: Test the mineral profile of ink on “professional” vs. “shaky” (Scribe 4) pages.
Parchment Matching: Compare VMS skin DNA to other confirmed 1420s Visconti ledgers to identify the exact herd/source of the siphoned materials.
End of Dossier
P.S.
The Naibbe cipher theory (published in late 2025 by researcher Michael Greshko) is a significant development that aligns remarkably well with Ven's Theory. It doesn't claim to "crack" the book, but instead provides a scientific "proof of concept" for how a 15th-century person-proximal outsider could have created the manuscript using simple, everyday tools.
Tools of the Commoner: Unlike the complex "Great Cipher" used by kings, the Naibbe system only requires playing cards, dice, and paper. These were the tools of the tavern and the servant's quarters, not the university.
Greshko himself notes that while his cipher could encode meaning, it is equally possible that it was used to create a high-end forgery.
The "Black Box" Defense: If a proximal outsider (the assistant) was asked by a noble, "What does this say?" they could honestly say, "I cannot tell you, for the key is lost," or "It is an angelic tongue." The Naibbe cipher allows for a text that looks consistent enough to be real, but is practically impossible to reverse-engineer without the specific "card-draw" sequence used during creation.
Ven's Theory Summary with Naibbe: The "proximal outsider" didn't need to be a linguistic genius. They just needed a deck of cards, a few stolen sheets of vellum, and the Naibbe method to churn out page after page of "official-looking" gibberish that mimicked the secret ciphers of their masters.
===================================================================================================================
In the context of Ven's Theory, the connection to the Stična Codex (1428–1440) is one of the most compelling "proximal" leads. The Stična Codex is one of the earliest preserved examples of the Slovene language, written in a monastery just as the Voynich vellum was being produced.
The short answer is: Linguistically, it is possible, and there is a specific school of research dedicated to this.
1. The Slovenian Theory (Cvetka Kocjančič)
The most vocal proponent of this link is researcher Cvetka Kocjančič, who argues that the Voynich Manuscript is written in 15th-century Slovenian.
The Visual Match: Kocjančič identified that the minims (the short, vertical strokes that make up letters like i, m, n, u) in the Stična Codex often feature upward flourishes or "tails" that are visually similar to the script in the Voynich.
The "Foreign Monk" Hypothesis: She suggests the author might have been a foreign monk (perhaps from Strassburg) stationed at the Stična monastery who was attempting to write down the local Slavic dialect using a custom, phonetic alphabet. This fits Ven's Theory perfectly: a "proximal" outsider trying to transcribe a language they hear but don't fully master.
2. Geographical & Architectural "Smoking Guns."
Ven's Theory places the manuscript in the orbit of the Holy Roman Empire (specifically Bohemia or Northern Italy). The Stična monastery (in modern-day Slovenia) was a major cultural crossroads between the Italian South and the Germanic North.
The "Swallow-Tail" Merlons: The Rosettes Folio features a castle with Ghibelline (swallow-tail) battlements. These are found in the walled cities of the Adriatic coast, such as Piran, which shared deep linguistic and political ties with the Slovenian heartland where the Stična Codex was written.
The "G" Mystery: Like the Voynich, some 15th-century regional Slavic dialects in this area did not use the letter "G" in the same way as Latin or German, which matches the statistical lack of a "G-equivalent" in the Voynich script.
3. Why it fits the "Social Engineering" Narrative
If the Voynich is indeed in the language of the Stična Codex, it supports the idea of a "Laborant Scam":
The "Peasant" Language: Early Slovene was a "vulgar" or peasant tongue; it was almost never written down, as the elite used Latin or German.
The Scam: By using a language that only the "low-born" locals understood but the "high-born" Emperors (like Rudolf II) found exotic and unidentifiable, the author created a perfect "black box." It looked like a secret code to the elite, but it was actually just the proximal language of the servants.
4. Scientific Counter-Arguments
While the visual similarity between the Stična minims and Voynich glyphs is striking, mainstream linguistics points out a major flaw: Voynichese Word Structure.
Slavic languages (like the dialect in the Stična Codex) are highly inflected, meaning words change their endings constantly based on grammar.
Voynichese words are rigidly repetitive, with many words differing by only a single character in a way that doesn't match the complex grammar of a natural Slavic language.
Conclusion: Under Ven's Theory, the Stična Codex isn't necessarily a "Rosetta Stone" for a direct translation, but it is the Material Blueprint. It proves that in the 1420s, in the exact region where the vellum was sourced, people were experimenting with new ways to write down "unwritten" languages.
Hello everyone,
I would like to share a new breakthrough in the analysis of MS 408. After an extensive computational stress-test using AI models (Gemini 3 Flash and Grok), we have identified a functional framework that explains the manuscript’s anomalous redundancy without relying on a hidden natural language. We call it the "Pause Protocol." 1. The Core Hypothesis: "Paper Software"
The Pause Protocol treats the Voynich Manuscript not as a narrative book, but as an Executable Procedural Log. The anomalous low entropy and high word repetition are not linguistic errors or "hoax" markers, but Operational Metadata.
Functional Dittography (The Clock): Repetitive tokens like daiin, ol, and al act as an Analog Metronome. They indicate the duration, intensity, or repetition of an alchemical action (e.g., heat cycles, decantation steps).
The Skeleton (Shorthand): When these "timers" and suffixes are removed, the remaining text yields Consonant Skeletons that align with 15th-century apothecary shorthand (e.g., rdx for radix, cnf for confectio).
2. Empirical Validation (f49r - The Cinnabar Case)
We tested the protocol on the "Cinnabar" folio (f49r). Under this model, the text is no longer "gibberish":
Pausas: We identified 9 occurrences of daiin clustered in the text, correlating with the multi-stage thermal sublimation (Mercury + Sulfur) required for vermilion synthesis, as described by John of Rupescissa in De Consideratione Quintae Essentiae.
Consonant Skeletons: The processed text revealed radicals such as HCH (16x), DCH (14x), and QTCH.
DCH/DGR: Corresponds to Decantatio or Degradus (Heat stages).
QTCH: Corresponds to Quinta Technica / Essentia.
3. Manuscript-Wide Patterns (Full Scaled Results)
By scaling the analysis across 10+ folios (approx. 6% of the MS), we found a consistent Operational Isomorphism: (see the table on the PDF)
Timed exposure & Hydro-chemistry. 4. Why this refutes the "Hoax" Theory
A sophisticated forger could mimic randomness, but they would unlikely maintain the rigorous internal logic found here: why increase "clocks" (repetitions) specifically in thermal/botanical sections and decrease them in observational/astronomical sections? The MS 408 reacts to the content of the illustrations like a software reacting to inputs.
Post-Protocol Entropy: After cleaning, the manuscript's entropy rises from ~3.7 to ~4.5 bits/char, placing it exactly within the range of 15th-century technical Latin jargon.
Conclusion
The Voynich Manuscript was never meant to be "read." It was meant to be "executed" in a laboratory. It is a synchronization tool designed to protect the pharmaceutical secrets of a specific school (likely Franciscan/Rupescissian) under a veil of statistical redundancy.
I am attaching the full N-gram data and sectional breakdown for your review. I look forward to your thoughts and peer-testing of this protocol on other folios.
When we started the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. of swallowtail merlons, one of the goals was to find out where people depicted forked merlons in manuscript art.
Looking at the northern reaches, the only manuscript we have so far is the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. This version of Rudolf von Ems' Weltchronik has a lot of swallowtail merlons. This is also the only one so far I did some deeper research on, and apparently there are good reasons to suspect it was made in Northern Italy, possibly Venice. So the manufacture would be Italian, while the text is Bavarian. See this pdf in German by Dr. Helga Lengenfelder: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. . We're obviously interested in the place of manufacture, so this moves our only German entry into Venice.
In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., it turned out that this Weltchronik also has swallowtail merlons in a several images. It is of an unclear date, but first half of the 15th century. Location of origin is given as Bavaria, just like the Kassel MS (which turns out to have been Italian).
Having noticed that there's something going on with these Weltchronik MSS, I spot checked a dozen of them for swallowtail merlons. All I found were many, many square merlons. However, the last MS I looked at was You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., which has exactly one row of swallowtail merlons (unless I missed any). This is remarkable since it's a 1350 MS made (if the catalogue is to be trusted) in Zurich.
All scenes depicted take place in the lands of the Old Testament, which may be more or less relevant. That's all I've got so far.
I thought it may be genuinely worth debating this. I decided to post this here instead of in the talk area, even though i'm primarily talking about our working assumptions when discussing these issues, not proposing different, well thought out solutions. Either way...
It seems that when people talk about a possible subsitution, the counter-arguments tend to be:
-The entropy of the VMS does not match that of known natural languages, so a substitution cipher alone is not the solution
-If it was a simple substitution cipher, it would have been decoded long ago
I think it's worth checking these assertions from first principles, checking which assumptions have been made in order to make them.
Entropy Did our choice of transliteration alphabet influence the calculated entropy?
In order to calculate the entropy of the VMS we must use some transliteration of the text. The entropy is then calculated using those transliterations.
Is it possible that there are influential choices made by every alphabet so far which are innapproprate?
EVA's repeated strokes e/c/i/n
Let's take this set of characters : eees aiin
Lets assume for a moment that this IS plaintext language in a latin script, made of latin "a,e,c,i,m,n,u". If the scribe uses a flourish at the end of a word or for contractions (very common from manuscripts i've seen) it's possible that that sentence transcribes to:
cccc aiii / ecec aiii / eccc ain / eeec am / ccee aui / eeee aiu / ecce ani
as well as many many other configurations. We assume that it only ever says "eees aiin".
When we calculate the entropy, we see multiple i's and e's in the transliteration. After a set of i's, there is almost always an "n". We look at the text and assume that each case of aiiin is the same. Wouldn't this surely lead to unnatural or unusual entropy results?
If we were to do the calculations again, but for every "aiiin" we instead substitute an equally possible set of characters (aiim, anin, amii, aum) how would that affect the results?
Assumption that different symbols are different letters
I infered this above, but it's important too. When transliterating the VMS, we assume that the symbols are seperate. What if -depending on the position within a word or line or some other rule- the same letter is written two different ways? We look at q often here, noting that it only appears at the start of words.
What if t is equivalent to ql? or k is equivalent to m? Or perhaps s is simply an e (ē denoting a contraction)?
Im not arguing that this is the case, at least not now, but if it were the case how would the entropy be affected?
Applying current thinking to existing manuscripts
If we were to treat capital letters from normal manuscripts the same (assuming they are seperate "glyphs" with seperate meaning) how different would our analysis be of those texts? We may look at a capital A and say "Yes, this rare glyph only occurs at the beginning of words, never the middle or the end. Very unusual for natural language"
The same could be said for various minims like I discussed above. If we had no context for latin, wouldn't we assume that "minim" is really "iiiiiiiin" or "mmmi" or something? Its already difficult to transcribe those words with full context given!
Anyway. I'm posting this to primarily discuss which of our current assumptions are valid, and which may not be valid. If we've made an incorrect analysis somewhere, and that has become the bedrock of further discussion, it leads to people being politely dismissed straight away. We should make sure that our foundation is not made of sand.
My name is Emanuele Pegorin, and I am an independent researcher with a strong interest in the Voynich Manuscript, particularly in its visual structure and internal logic.
I would like to share some methodological and descriptive observations, without proposing textual “solutions” or decipherments.
1. The manuscript appears to function as a graphic and operational modus operandi of a community of women working in the botanical field, including cultivation, processing, water management, and ritual purification.
2. Images dominate the manuscript and are intentionally enlarged, distorted, and repetitive, suggesting that the communication was designed for a semi-literate or non-literate audience. Written text appears secondary, likely intended for supervisory or intermediary roles.
3. Recurring structural principles are evident, such as centric–radial and centric–convex representations (e.g., foldouts f. 85v–86r), and hierarchical markers, like stars associated with figures and textual sections.
4. In later sections, water basins, hydraulic systems, and drainage channels highlight maintenance and practical management, rather than symbolic or cosmological meaning. The presence of birds nesting or flying in channels signals critical points and operational tasks to be monitored.
5. Jars appear as distinct functional items, each with specific shapes, decorations, and plant references, suggesting that they were intended for different uses or clients, and indicating an organized and diversified production system.
These observations are interpretative and not conclusively provable, but they provide a visual and methodological framework to view the manuscript as a coherent system of work, roles, and ritual practices.
I would be glad to receive any comments, insights, or suggestions on how to refine this image-centered analysis or integrate it with existing Voynich research.
Thank you very much for your attention,
Emanuele Pegorin
So while we wait for Prof. Stolfi's important announcement, I thought I'd stir the waters a bit with this INCREDIBLY EXCITING theory of my own. So here we have the manuscript BSB Cgm 250, based on a classic Weltkronik from Jans Enkel. This particular MS was copied in southern Germany in the 1st quarter of the 15th century. It's "interesting" because of some matches to the VMS marginalia. The handwriting appears at first glance to be reminiscent of folio f116v:
But wait, there's more:
This looks like the classic "michiton", except for the missing "i".
There is also a match to some handwriting of folio f17r:
And many more "amazing" coincidences appear in this manuscript in relation to the VMS.
Here is a link to the MS:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
A beautiful MS indeed with many drawings, that remind one of the Biblia Pauperum style that lies so close to the VMS.
_____
Anyway, a small "divertissement" while we wait for a more important announcement.
I keep coming back to a question that won't quite leave me alone: how should we actually describe the structural behaviours we see in Voynichese "words"?
They're clearly not simple substitution outputs, and they're not random strings. That's been shown many times. But they don't behave like ordinary words in known languages either. They're constrained, but not in the ways we'd expect.
Here are some observations. I'll present the raw distributional facts first, then show why describing them is harder than it looks. 1. Rigid initial binding: The token q appears word-initially 99% of the time. It essentially never occurs mid-word or finally. When it appears, it selects o as its immediate follower at 97%. Whatever q is doing, it does it once, at the start, and it binds tightly to what follows. 2. Two boundary types with different continuations: Both y and l tend toward final positions, but they create different continuation environments. After y-final words, q appears at 27% and ch/sh appear at 17%. After l-final words, q appears at only 9% while ch/sh rise to 33%. So we have two "closers" that close in different ways. One favours continuation with q (which binds to o). The other favours continuation with ch and sh (which themselves open bounded structures). 3. Paradigmatic exclusion with ordering: The tokens k and t rarely appear together (under 2% co-occurrence). When they do co-occur, t precedes k at roughly 2:1. This looks like a paradigmatic contrast: two tokens competing for the same structural slot, with one tending to come first when both are present. 4. A suffix-like element changes selection rates: Compare k with f, or t with p. The f and p variants are followed by ch at 37–46%, compared with only 10–17% for k and t. Whatever f and p are, they license continuation with ch at three to four times the rate. 5. Reduplication creates gradients: The token e can appear singly, doubled, tripled, or quadrupled. As the chain lengthens, two things shift systematically. What precedes the chain changes: e follows ch/sh 63% of the time, ee only 28%, and eee just 9%. And what follows the chain changes: e is followed by s only 1% of the time, ee reaches 4%, and eee reaches 13%. This isn't free repetition. Longer chains shift from appearing after ch/sh to appearing after k/t, and increasingly close with s. 6. Structures can nest: Forms like ofchedy appear to embed one bounded structure inside another: the f selects ch, which opens a structure that closes with y, all sitting inside a larger unit beginning with o.
This is where it gets tricky: Each of these observations can be described in multiple ways. Take the first one. The observation is: q is 99% initial and selects o at 97%. A grammarian might call this "demonstrative binding to head." A mnemonist might call it "locus anchoring." A notationalist might call it "record initialisation." A medieval logician might call it "term introduction." Or take the nesting behaviour. The observation is: f selects ch...y inside o... A grammarian sees "relative clause inside noun phrase." A mnemonist sees "room within room." A notationalist sees "sub-record inside record." A logician sees "supposition under supposition." The problem is not that one of these is right and the others wrong. The problem is that the distributional evidence cannot distinguish between them. The constraints are real; the interpretation is not forced. Worse: interpretive choices compound. If k is a determiner, then o must be a head. If o is a head, then qo is a noun phrase. If qok is a determined noun phrase, then f must be a relative determiner. Each step feels plausible, but the whole chain rests on the first assumption. Choose a different starting point and you get a different system.
The medieval logicians had a phrase for this kind of contextual constraint: "Talia sunt subiecta qualia permiserint praedicata" ("The subjects are such as the predicates permit"). What can appear is governed by what surrounds it. That describes Voynichese rather well. But it doesn't tell us whether we're looking at grammar, or memory architecture, or something else entirely. There's also the curious fact that Voynichese seems to lack things we'd expect from natural language: no clear tense or aspect marking, no subject-predicate agreement, no conjunctions, no obvious truth-conditional structure. It has positional constraints without syntactic roles, paradigmatic contrasts without lexical diversity, optional length markers that seem to tune mode rather than content.
So I find myself left with a fairly basic question: How should we talk about Voynichese words or tokens at all?
Are they words? Clauses? Records? Control sequences? Loci in a memory system? Terms under modes of supposition? Or are these all just isomorphic descriptions of the same underlying structural observations, each wearing the vocabulary of a different discipline? My concern is that many similar observations may already exist across the forum, scattered under different theories (linguistic, cryptographic, logical, mnemonic), each with its own semantic framing. And that makes it hard to see what is actually shared versus what is interpretation.
I'd be very interested in thoughts on:
- how to discuss these regularities without prematurely committing to meaning,
- whether there's a neutral descriptive vocabulary that's actually usable,
- what minimal properties any explanation of Voynichese must account for, regardless of theory,
- and whether the isomorphism between these frameworks is itself telling us something.
You are not allowed to view links. 
