| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 292 online users.
» 7 Member(s) | 282 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Google, davidma, Mauro, Ruby Novacna
|
| Latest Threads |
It is not Chinese
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: Mauro
14 minutes ago
» Replies: 84
» Views: 3,040
|
Pisces (Folio 70v) and th...
Forum: Astrology
Last Post: Dobri
1 hour ago
» Replies: 34
» Views: 4,485
|
Month names collection / ...
Forum: Marginalia
Last Post: davidma
2 hours ago
» Replies: 41
» Views: 802
|
Which plaintext languages...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: Rafal
4 hours ago
» Replies: 17
» Views: 2,727
|
Favorite Plant Tournament...
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: Koen G
14-06-2025, 08:11 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 108
|
Favorite Plant Tournament...
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: Koen G
14-06-2025, 08:09 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 102
|
Favorite Plant Tournament...
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: Koen G
14-06-2025, 08:07 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 110
|
Upcoming Voynich program ...
Forum: News
Last Post: LisaFaginDavis
14-06-2025, 02:20 PM
» Replies: 8
» Views: 1,213
|
[split] Color annotations...
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: Jorge_Stolfi
13-06-2025, 09:38 PM
» Replies: 89
» Views: 45,427
|
Wherefore art thou, aberi...
Forum: Imagery
Last Post: nablator
13-06-2025, 06:18 PM
» Replies: 45
» Views: 1,872
|
|
|
| Thoughts on [m, g] as [in, ain]? (Stolfi) |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 20-10-2024, 04:23 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (17)
|
 |
It looks like Stolfi leaned towards seeing EVA-m and g as shortened versions of in-clusters. To me this feels right intuitively. But I wonder, has anyone looked into this further? Are there any objections or better solutions?
For reference, here is the section I'm referring to, from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Quote:About m and g
It seems that the letter m is inordinately common at the end of lines, and before interruptions in the text due to intruding figures. The letter m, like the IN groups, is almost always preceded by a or o (862 tokens in 950, 91%). We note also that dam and am are the most common -am words, just as daiin and aiin are the most common -aiin words. Perhaps m is an abbreviation for iin (and/or other IN groups), used where space is tight.
On the other hand, the truth may not be that simple. of the 950 tokens that contain m, 56 (5.8%) are preceded by ai or aii rather than a alone.
The rare letter g, like m, occurs almost exclusively at the end of words (24 tokens out of 27); however, unlike m, it is not preceded by a. We note that g looks like an m, except that the leftmost stroke is rounded like that of an a. Perhaps g is an abbreviation of am?
There are 32 tokens that end in m, but not as am, om, or im. It is possible that these tokens are actually instances of g that were mistakenly transcribed as m --- a fairly common mistake.
|
|
|
| Curve-Line System - Bluetoes edition |
|
Posted by: Bluetoes101 - 17-10-2024, 08:41 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (50)
|
 |
Hi all,
This is not a proposed solution.
I had a slow day at the office and wondered if I could get the Curve-Line System fully working, and I could! .. admittedly it has the "something something too many freedoms" issue and I am working on refining it, but I thought it would be interesting to share something that works anyway.
One possible benefit this system would have (if it can be shown to be accurate) would be defining spaces that are not obvious, as in if the next glyph would break the system it is more likely to be a space than not, the same could be said for non-obvious glyphs either due to them being done a bit scruffy, or damage to the original glyph in one way or another.
How the system works
1. The default state of the vellum is C (not \)
2. \ can't be added without a switch or transition
3. A switch is only activated by a non-switch glyph (aa oo ao oa etc are all treated as a single switch, not 2)
(Glyphs have EVA names)
Switch.
Represented by ">", Function: switches text from C to \ or \ to C
Glyphs - A O
Forward transition.
Represented by "\C", Function: \ followed by C without requiring a switch
Glyphs - FKPT(CH)(SH)DRS
(Gallows + Bench + D R S)
Benched gallows are treated as \\CC
Reverse transition.
Represented by "C\", Function: C followed by \ without requiring a switch
Glyph - Y
All other glyphs are treated as C or \ depending on if they are constructed on top of a C shape or a \ shape.
Word examples
Daiin = \C>\\\
D = \C
a = >
i = \
i = \
n = \
Shol = \C>\
Sh = \C
o = >
l = \
Qokchy = C>\C\CC\
Q = C
o = >
K = \C
ch = \C
y = C\
Otshol = >\C\C>\
O = >
t = \C
sh = \C
o = >
l = \
Line example - I used 26r as I have the MSI image (Line 1).
\C\CC>\CC\ >\C>\\\C C> C\ >\C\C>\C \CC\\C\CCC\ C\\C\CC\CC\ >\\ \C>\C>\C\\CC\CC\
So it works, but as you can see it works because most of the text is made up of transitions (bold) which are more fluid.. freedoms. I will now keep transition status for the gallows glyphs and EVA: D, but set all others to C or \.
CH - CC
SH - CC
R - \
S - C
Y - C
Benched gallows are treated as C\CC
\CCCC>\CC >\C>\\\ C> C >\CCC>\C CCC\CCCCC C\CCCC\CC >\\ CC>\C>CCC\CC\CC
The red text is where the system breaks. It could just be that this is 2 words and not 1, it is a very long word for Voynich text "chofochcphdy" and a unique word (only 1 match using Voynichese website), the break would make this "chofo" "chcphdy". "chofo" has no matches but there is 1 match for "chofol" and the page next to 26r (26v) has "chof" as a unique word, which, well who knows if that means anything but it is there. "chcphdy" has 2 matches, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f85r1, so maybe there is an argument that this is 2 words and not one, which I suppose shows rather nicely what I am working towards.
![[Image: fRGWl8n.png]](https://i.imgur.com/fRGWl8n.png)
There are many more examples of this system not working I spotted while coming up with the framework for something that would work, I have a lot more work to do on this but I am putting it down for tonight and I just wanted to share what I have. I will update the thread as I go.
If you have any thoughts, please let me know 
|
|
|
|
| Transcriptions |
|
Posted by: Bluetoes101 - 16-10-2024, 11:04 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (28)
|
|
I have been wondering lately if we can, as a group, improve upon the transcriptions currently available online for people to use. The main one would obviously be Takahashi.
I've been reading about several theories regarding the text lately and I noticed a theme within, they are all take bad data on face value and the data they extrapolate from it is flawed. An example is the "Curve/Line theory" - many exceptions are not exceptions, just incorrect transcription. A lot of the conforming examples could be exceptions also, but how will we know without accurate data?
For example if we look at Takahashi transcriptions.
"EN"
16 matches
I would argue (and I believe most would agree) only a couple of the 16 matches are "en".
Most of the problem (with this example specifically) is that the transcription does not take into account that not every "n" is "n" (below), I know some will disagree, but honestly I think if you consider these to be the same glyph you must also consider "s" and "r" the same, in the same way I suppose "d" and "m" must be the same.. and there's probably more examples. They all have the same features. r, m and n start with "\", s, d and g start with "c", but there are many more obvious errors.
![[Image: 6fQQi2V.png]](https://i.imgur.com/6fQQi2V.png)
I'm not savvy in web design, but would it not be fairly simple to set up a version of the voynichese website where people can submit amendments, these could them be reviewed and approved or rejected and then changed or retained? I for one would be willing to help in whatever way I can, and I'm guessing many others would also.
Just to disclaimer this a bit, I am very thankful for the work put in thus far to provide us with what we have, but I just don't think we shouldn't try to improve upon it if we can.
|
|
|
|
| Voynich Talk E3: Why your Voynich theory is wrong (pt2) |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 07-10-2024, 11:36 AM - Forum: News
- Replies (27)
|
|
I just uploaded a new video to YouTube. It is the second part in a series where I try (try!) to explain to theorists why their substitution cipher doesn't work. In contrast to the last video though, which focused on the well-known and often discussed entropy problem, this one should also offer some food for thought for those familiar with the statistics. The question I explore is this: if we follow the logic of a substitution cipher, and compare Voynichese to the writing systems of natural languages, then how many letters does its alphabet have? People often claim that Voynichese has a large alphabet, but the opposite is true: it' much too small.
|
|
|
|
| Maximum vord repetition |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 05-10-2024, 10:43 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (18)
|
|
As a segment of text that contains multiple repetitions of multiple vords, I believe the outer text band of VMs White Aries (f71r) contains the maximum concentration of examples. Certainly, this is true in the other VMs Zodiac text segments where it is difficult to find a single example of simple pairing.
If this is a property that might advance further interpretation, I don't believe there's a better segment of text.
|
|
|
|
| New book |
|
Posted by: LisaFaginDavis - 03-10-2024, 02:29 PM - Forum: News
- Replies (57)
|
 |
Does anyone know anything about this author - Robert C. Williams - and his argument that the VMS was created by Voynich? This book was just published: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I've read the free sample on Amazon, and there are a few glaring problems with his argument right off the bat, but I'm curious to know if anyone knows about him and his work.
|
|
|
|
| Ink/pen dynamics and the rhythms of writing |
|
Posted by: pfeaster - 28-09-2024, 03:53 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (33)
|
 |
Some pages in the Voynich Manuscript show a lot of variation in the appearance of the ink from word to word or glyph to glyph. I'm wondering what conclusions, if any, it's safe to draw from these variations. I know there's been some speculation about text written at one time having been "retouched" at a later time, but that's not (primarily) what I'm interested in here. Rather, I'm wondering whether variations in the ink can reliably tell us anything about what went on during the initial writing sessions.
On pages where we can see a lot of variation in ink quality, the color of the ink varies from darker to paler, and at points where an excess of ink has pooled onto the writing surface, the ink tends to be relatively dark. Here are a couple hastily-chosen examples:
So I infer that a darker color probably represents a greater flow or quantity of ink, while a paler color generally represents a lesser flow or quantity of ink (but I'd welcome a correction from anyone who knows better). I suppose the variations in color could be measured quantitatively based on RGB values if anyone wanted to do it.
What seems potentially interesting here is that, unless I'm mistaken, certain glyphs (or parts of glyphs) seem to turn up written "darkly" more often than others. For example:
- The [c] at the beginning of [ch], [Sh], etc.
- [d]
- The loop at the top of the second leg of EVA [k] or similar
- [r] or [l] after [o], [a], or "i", even if the [o], [a], or "i" is relatively light (note: putting "i" in square brackets was causing formatting weirdness, and I'm still getting some unintended asterisks....)
[*]For illustrative examples, see f27r, f35v, f38v, f41r, or f47v. I don't mean that all tokens of these glyphs are written "darkly," but that the glyphs that stand out visually as especially "dark" tend to fall into these categories (and maybe a handful of others). These patterns appear to transcend different "hands" and "languages."
I don't have much personal experience writing with a quill, so I'm not sure what factors might lead ink to flow more or less freely from the pen onto the page (if that's what's responsible for the differences in the first place), but I can think of two possibilities. On one hand, ink flow might be greater right after the pen has been refilled and lesser as it's running out. On the other hand, ink flow might be greater when the quill tip is being pressed more firmly against the page and lesser when it's being pressed less firmly.
Either way, it seems to me that the variations in ink quality could reveal something useful (?) about the original rhythms of writing. For example, [r] or [l] might typically have been written after [o], [a], or "i" after a pause to refill the pen, or [d] might typically have been the first glyph written after the pen was refilled. Or these glyphs might typically have been written more "emphatically," so to speak, with more pressure on the quill tip. I'm not yet sure where this might lead -- just throwing it out as a possibility (well aware that the response might be that it was thoroughly discussed back in 1997!).
I also wonder what factors would have led many other pages to display comparatively consistent ink darkness, and whether greater or lesser consistency in this detail coincides at all with other categorizations. Did it have something to do with the pen, or with the way it was being used, or with the ink composition, or with the vellum?
A few other related observations:
Some pages contain text that was (I suspect) written using a pen with a frayed tip that caused a conspicuous parallel "doubling" of certain strokes -- e.g., You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f44r. In both of those same cases, the accompanying plant images also seem to have been drawn using a pen with a similarly frayed tip -- or at least they contain similar-looking doubled lines, whatever specific defect in the pen was causing them. Compare the following details from f6v:
And the following details from f44r:
To me, this suggests that the text and drawings on each of these pages were likely created during the same session, with the same faulty pen. I haven't tried to study this type of correspondence methodically, but a quick perusal seems to support a hypothesis that the pictures and text on any given page tend to share the same overall pen-and-ink profile (including "mixed" profiles, as on f73v). I wonder if there are any really obvious exceptions.
Another page with noticeable line-doubling in both the Voynichese text and the drawing is f17r. Notably, the marginalia at the top also features line-doubling, most obviously in the top of the [a] in [malhor].
[*]With apologies in advance for any reinvented wheels.
|
|
|
|
| Authorship of f116v squiggle, candidates |
|
Posted by: oshfdk - 24-09-2024, 09:02 AM - Forum: Provenance & history
- Replies (14)
|
|
[Edit: Originally this was a post about Benedictus Aretius, but I managed to find examples of his ex libris rather quickly. I think it doesn't make sense to create many threads trying to look for people who could possibly have left their signature on the last page of MS, so I renamed the thread, and I will post information about other figures of interest here.]
I was trying to identify the possible authorship of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and would like to see if anyone has some more information about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Swiss theologian, natural philosopher and, among other things, a botanist. I wonder if it's possible to find out what his ex libris looked like. [Edit: found it, see posts below]
Some background for my question: If we take the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. squiggle as a signature, to me the first letter looks like an A, so I tried looking for all possible persons with names starting with A and trying to find examples of their signature and ex libris. I started at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and followed various links and search requests and then stumbled upon a name new to me in this article: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
It describes in some detail the collaboration of Leonhard Rauwolf and Caspar Bauhin on various herbaria, and then goes:
Quote:Bauhin also had his own herbarium, which he had presented to Conrad Gessner (see Gessner to Benedictus Aretius, 24 November 1565, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
One possible way of writing "Are" could be similar to the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. squiggle, so I looked up Benedictus Aretius (as far as I understand, he is primarily known as a Protestant reformer, but he was also a practicing botanist, judging by his works) and tried to find examples of his writing. Unfortunately, there is not much. There are images of three letters written by him on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:
The signature has no much resemblance to the f116v squiggle. It's interesting though that Aretius seemed to abbreviate the first name in favor of his (invented) last name. As far as I understand, he was born Matri, but swapped the Latin root for Greek becoming Aretius and used it as his name (kind of a personal brand, in modern terms). So it seems possible that he could use just "Aretius" in his ex libris. Also the signature differs substantially in all three letters, so it's possible that there was a separate version for marks of ownership.
Summing up, there was a person interested in botany and herbaria, contemporary to Leonhard Rauwolf (one of tentative past owners of VMS) and with a potential link to him via Conrad Gessner and Caspar Bauhin, with some known history of exchange of herbaria from Bauhin to Gessner. This is a very weak link, which makes the possibility of VMS somehow traveling from Aterius to Rauwolf not very likely, as far as I see it, but it would be nice to have a look at Aretius' ex libris or more writing, just to be sure.
|
|
|
|
| Historical persons in VMs |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 23-09-2024, 10:30 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (19)
|
|
Historical persons have been found in the VMs illustration You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - White Aries. Two persons can be identified, who were popes in the mid and latter parts of the 13th century. They were Innocent IV and Adrian V. Two popes from Genoa, Sinibaldo Fieschi and his nephew, Ottobuono Fieschi. They are identified by their heraldry.
Heraldry was widely used as a method of communication and the heraldic elements here are clearly seen, but somewhat more difficult to interpret because of historical obscurity and the artist's intentional obfuscation.
The two primary heraldic elements are the pattern of alternating blue stripes on the dexter diagonal (paired), and the hat on the inner ring nymph with the combination of blue stripes and a red galero. While neither heraldic element is highly specific on its own, the combination of the two elements leads to these particular historical facts.
As Pope Innocent IV, Sinibaldo Fieschi did 1) initiate the tradition of the cardinal's red galero, 2) make his nephew, Ottobuono, a cardinal (1251), 3) approve the original foundation of the Poor Clares. The cardinal's red galero served as a designation of rank in the church hierarchy. The armorial blazon, 'Bendy, argent et azure" describes the Fieschi insignia. The combination of these two heraldic elements constitutes a unique historical marker and identifies the individuals involved.
The matter of the artist's intentional obfuscation becomes clear when the existence of dualistic construction becomes evident - specifically regarding the orientation of the blue stripes when viewed from a more dominant, radial perspective or a less evident, isolated perspective, when it is the more hidden perspective that corresponds with historical events and various other aspects of confirmation built into the structure of the White Aries illustration.
Considering that these facts were historical at the time of the VMs C-14 dates, reveals that the artist was aware of some fairly exclusive information in relation to Catholic church history and tradition and that s/he chose to disguise it.
|
|
|
|
|