| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Latest Threads |
What if it's a "Lossy Enc...
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: oshfdk
8 minutes ago
» Replies: 11
» Views: 159
|
Deconstructing the VMS : ...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: Dunsel
11 minutes ago
» Replies: 17
» Views: 281
|
Aries Design: Truly Aries...
Forum: Imagery
Last Post: nablator
34 minutes ago
» Replies: 44
» Views: 2,827
|
No text, but a visual cod...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: ololololo
3 hours ago
» Replies: 1,871
» Views: 1,307,308
|
The 'Chinese' Theory: Fo...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: Linda
6 hours ago
» Replies: 803
» Views: 213,336
|
Month names collection / ...
Forum: Marginalia
Last Post: Koen G
7 hours ago
» Replies: 347
» Views: 80,962
|
New members: trouble regi...
Forum: News
Last Post: Strong Test
7 hours ago
» Replies: 1
» Views: 144
|
I am not convinced by the...
Forum: Provenance & history
Last Post: Oscroft
8 hours ago
» Replies: 35
» Views: 996
|
Voynichese is a numeric c...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: ololololo
9 hours ago
» Replies: 199
» Views: 21,129
|
116v
Forum: Marginalia
Last Post: Jorge_Stolfi
10 hours ago
» Replies: 1,361
» Views: 959,592
|
|
|
| Amelia Sarah Levetus |
|
Posted by: EllieV - 06-10-2016, 04:23 PM - Forum: Provenance & history
- Replies (9)
|
 |
Voynich discovered the VMs supposedly around 1911 and presented it publicly in 1915 during the Art Exhibition in Chicago. The 1915 press reports give impression that the VMs was part of Italian collection that was sent to Austria for safekeeping during the Napoleonic Wars.
In 1913 Voynich starts advertising business address in Vienna, Austria (XIX Peter Jordangasse, 27). In 2003 Dana Scott pointed similarities between this address and the Vienna address of Voynich's family friend Amelia Sarah Levetus - art historian and writer.
In her 1906 book "Imperial Vienna" Amelia Levetus describes the movement of the Hapsburg art collection during the Napoleonic wars: " Those work of art, collected by Ferdinand von Tyrol, were placed in Schloss Ambras. Napoleon knew of their whereabouts, and carried them off to Paris, but they were returned after the Congress, when they were brought to Vienna, and placed in the Upper Belvedere for better safety"
The story is from the same historic period as the one in Kansas City Times, November 12, 2015 describing the movement of the VMs collection: "When Napoleon began to send the valuable collections of art works of Northern Italy to Paris, the heads of the other states took fright. Many dukes and princes sent their possessions to Austria in the hope that there they would be safe."
So Amelia Levetus was aware about this particular period. Her book " Imperial Vienna" has a lot of research about the relations of Napoleon and Austria.
Is it possible that Amelia Levetus was the one who found the loose ends in the art collection movements in Austria during the Napoleonic wars while researching her books and articles and alerted the Voyniches? I often wondered how exactly Voynich learned about this abandoned collection.
Voynich advertised his Vienna business address in 1913 and again in 1914. Itally, Austria and Hapsburg collection were mentioned a lot in the 1915 press in relation to the VMs and other manuscripts exhibition. All mentioning of Austria disappeared in 1916 after FBI started investigating Voynich for suspicion of being German spy (possessing cipher manuscript). This must have spooked him - so he stopped mentioning anything German-related to the manuscript.
|
|
|
| Plant pictures as composite images |
|
Posted by: Diane - 05-10-2016, 12:25 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (11)
|
|
I'd like some help from other members to clarify a point for the introduction to a book of essays.
I was unaware until fairly recently that the Friedman group had formed a general opinion that plants in the manuscript's botanical section were formed as composites.
Having discovered the fact independently - and presented an explanation of the way in which the pictures are structured, the system informing the 'pictorial annotations' at the roots and identified about forty folios' worth, I was later informed that the general idea had been stated in d'Imperio's book.
So my question is this.
Between 1912 and the publication of Mary's book in 1978
and
(separately)
between 1978 and when I began publishing my own work (from 2010)
had anyone ever looked into that issue, or defined any of the plants as composites, or explained any folio in that way?
Otherwise it looks as if d'Imperio's general statement was ignored for the first thirty years, and now that an independent investigation has provided explanation and demonstration - now that is being ignored, while the general statement is increasingly repeated...
Is that the case, or is there a precedent body of research that I've overlooked? Please rack your memories..
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
| The predictability of glyphs in labels agrees with that of vords |
|
Posted by: david - 04-10-2016, 09:19 PM - Forum: Approved blocks
- Replies (16)
|
|
Statement - The predictability of glyph placement within label vords is in concordance with that of vords in the main corpus
Explanation
Some vords appear as "labels", single or double vords apparently identifying images within the manuscript. These labels have the same grammar as those vords in the main body of the corpus.
The text of the manuscript is divided up into clearly defined word-like glyph groups (dubbed vords on this forum). These glyph groups have a non-trivial internal structure which is manifest in the severe restrictions imposed upon the positioning of glyphs within the word groups.
In other words, Voynichese has a very strict phototactic structure – morphemes appear in predefined places within vords, and only there.
A morpheme is the smallest grammatical unit in a language.
Morphemes in the corpus are easily identifiable. Voynichese glyph combinations are very positional aware within vords – glyph groups are non-trivial in their internal positioning. We can identify, and have identified, a long list of suffixes and prefixes within Voynichese. We know that certain glyphs only appear as suffixes; we know that certain glyphs only appear as prefixes; and we know that other glyphs are free form. We have also identified (via the CLS theorem) that glyphs appear in a certain pattern.
We assume these are bound morphemes because they obey certain rules of positioning. (We can make no assumptions about words that do not include such bound morphemes as we are unable to identify a meaning for such unbound morphemes, but such vords are relatively few in nature).
And analysis of the labels (see links below) show that the corpus of labels has a notable level of concordance with the morpheme placement of vords in the main corpus.
Further reading- You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. MarcoP on the Voynich.Ninja.
Quote:Summary: Marco found that almost 70% of all labels matched words in the main corpus. The rest were unique.
- VMS language DNA variations. Davidsch
Quote:My research shows visually that the labels, as defined,
follow the same rules for the letters in the remainder of the text that are not labels, with some exceptions:
- 'a' occurs proportionally more in the "label text"
- the 'q' (only posA) occurs much lesser in the "label text"
- the 'h' occurs much lesser in the "label text"
- the 't' on posB is higher in the "label text"
You can check by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. "CAB NST" & "CAB labels only".
- You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Prof. Stolfi
Stolfi notes [You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.] when attempting to create a "grammar" for Voynichese that (italics mine):
Quote:It should be noted that that normal words [in his attempt to create a grammar] account for over 88% of all label tokens, and over 96.5% of all the tokens (word instances) in the text. The exceptions (less than 4 every 100 text words) can be ascribed to several causes, including physical "noise" and transcription errors. (Different people transcribing the same page often disagree on their reading, with roughly that same frequency.). Indeed, most "abnormal" words are still quite similar to normal words, as discussed in a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
[..]
The words that do not fit into our paradigm [..] These words comprise 1295 tokens (3.7%) in the main text, and 127 tokens (12.4%) in the labels. The vast majority are rare words that occur only once in the whole manuscript. - TheYou are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Brian Cham and David Jackson describes how Voynich glyphs can be divided into three categories that interact with one another in a pre-defined manner.
Notes
- Statement changed from "The morpheme construction of labels is in concordance with that of the main corpus"
- Added Davidsch to further reading
|
|
|
|
| Vellum and Parchment - a note for Anton |
|
Posted by: Diane - 04-10-2016, 09:35 AM - Forum: Physical material
- Replies (17)
|
|
Since the Poll thread has closed, I've started the thread to reply to the last comment made by Anton that
Quote:Anton:
After ...seven?.... years, nobody has yet been able to give me a concise professional definition of vellum
I thought I might pass on the British Library's concise definitions - accepting that customs differ in different countries and in different languages. In fact, our habit is to refer more generally to 'membrane' unless specifically comparing that in one manuscript to another to aid provenancing - e.g. the French pocket bibles' vellum with that in the Vms.
Brit. Lib:
Quote:PARCHMENT:
A writing support material that derives its name from Pergamon (Bergama in modern Turkey), an early production centre. The term is often used generically to denote animal skin prepared to receive writing, although it is more correctly applied only to sheep and goat skin..
Quote:VELLUM: the term vellum reserved for calfskin.
and UTERINE VELLUM:
Uterine vellum, the skin of stillborn or very young calves, is characterized by its small size and particularly fine, white appearance; however, it was rarely used.
Here again, customs differ. Our practice is to never write "calfskin" in that way; it is reserved - in our practice - for describing leather - e.g. a bag, a pair of shoes or book-binding is "calfskin" but membrane used for a manuscript''s bifolia is "vellum" or "calf-skin".
I notice that Helmut suggests that in his practice the term for 'vellum' has a much more restricted application than is found elsewhere - the British Library's descriptions being sufficient example.
Hope that is concise enough. 
|
|
|
|
| Interesting result for f3r with an ngram Genetic Algorithm |
|
Posted by: julian - 04-10-2016, 06:55 AM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (29)
|
 |
I've recently repurposed my genetic algorithm code to use EVA rather than Voyn_101. The GA seems to do better with EVA, and I'd like to report an interesting result using Latin as a base language for You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (a folio I picked at random).
The way this works is that the GA reads in the EVA transcription for the given folio(s), line by line and word by word, and as it does so it creates frequency tables of all the ngrams it finds. Right now it uses ngrams up to 3 glyphs long.
It then reads in a very large Latin word list, to use as a validation dictionary.
It then prepares a set of Latin letters, nulls and scribal abbreviations, currently numbering around 60 items in total.
Then it randomly pairs each EVA ngram with one of the Latin letters, nulls or abbreviations, and using that pairing (called a chromosome in the jargon), applies it to all lines and words in the EVA, so as to produce new words in plaintext. Each plaintext word is checked for validity in the Latin dictionary, and scored. If the word is valid, it gets a high score. If the word is long, it gets a higher score. All the word scores are summed. If a consecutive sequence of valid Latin words appear, that causes the overall score of the chromosome to increase according to the length of the sequence. The idea here is to reward chromosomes that produce sequences of valid, long Latin words.
This random process continues over many pairings/chromosome and many generations, using selection between each generation to refine the pairings (I'll spare you the details!).
Here are details for one of the better results (with a score of over 22000):
A) The list of letters, nulls and abbreviations used is as follows:
'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'g', 'h', 'i', 'l', 'm', 'n', 'o', 'p', 'q', 'r', 's', 't', 'u', 'x', 'y', 'z',
' ', ' ', ' ', (nulls)
'qu',
'ra', 're', 'ca', 'ci', 'co', 'us', 'os', 'is', 'ur', 'um', 'er', 'in', 'im', 'nt', 'nd'
'quo', 'cum', 'con', 'cun', 'cus', 'cre', 'car', 'cer', 'cri', 'cis',
'ent', 'est', 'rum', 'tis', 'tum', 'tur', 'ter', 'mum',
'ntum', 'quon', 'eius', 'etam'
B) The best chromosome of VM glyph pairing to the Latin ngrams in A), includes the following
a = r
8 = t
c = re
h = ur
o = er
y = tum
s = u
k = est
9 = um
8a = c
co = m
ii = <null>
4o = in
(The remaining pairs are omitted for brevity.)
I found the 9 = um equivalence that the GA discovered to be striking (Brumbaugh claimed this equivalence in his solution), but I suppose it's sort of obvious.
B) The best pairing translates the following valid Latin words on f3r:
'ratis', 'carus', 'ratum', 'cum', 'inque', 'cercis', 'erratum', 'interim', 'da', 'carum', 'uterum', 'certis', 'ra', 'ius', 'caro', 'pratis', 'inda', 'is', 'pratum', 'us', 'istis', 'sus', 'sum', 'corda', 'iratum', 'irent', 'inest', 'iterum', 'tergum', 'istum', 'peius', 'creo', 'irem'
(All these words appear in the Latin word list I'm using.)
C) The longest sequence of valid words is 16 (spanning folio lines 2,3,4 and 5):
"ratum cum inque cercis erratum interim ratis da carum uterum ratum certis cercis cercis ra ius"
D) The translation, using this ngram pairing, of the first few lines of f3r:
tsheos qopal chol cthol daimm
estseru inquonrtis ratis carus dciscis
ycheor chor dam qotcham cham
umterim ratum cum inque cercis
ochor qocheor chol daiin cthy
erratum interim ratis da carum
schey chor chal cham cham cho
uterum ratum certis cercis cercis ra
qokol chololy s cham cthol
ius ratisusum u cercis carus
ychtaiin chor cthom otal dam
umturestcarum ratum caro prtis cum
otchol qodaiin chom shom damo
pratis inda racis iscis cumer
ysheor chor chol oky damo
umsim ratum ratis coum cumer
I expect the Latin above makes no sense at all, but the "look and feel" of the word lengths and the vocabulary size I find encouraging.
I'd welcome suggestions of Latin abbreviations, prefixes and suffixes that I could include in (or remove from) the list in A) above (which I gleaned mostly from d'Imperio's summary of Cappelli).
Julian
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: enochianvoynich.jpg?w=840]](https://voynichnumerology.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/enochianvoynich.jpg?w=840)
