| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 612 online users.
» 7 Member(s) | 598 Guest(s)
Applebot, Baidu, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Facebook, Google, Yandex, Hider, ololololo, R. Sale, rikforto
|
| Latest Threads |
15thc perception on swall...
Forum: Imagery
Last Post: Koen G
1 hour ago
» Replies: 602
» Views: 334,972
|
No text, but a visual cod...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: ololololo
1 hour ago
» Replies: 1,869
» Views: 1,305,663
|
Voynichese is a numeric c...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: ololololo
1 hour ago
» Replies: 196
» Views: 20,659
|
New members: trouble regi...
Forum: News
Last Post: Koen G
2 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 40
|
[split] Measure uncertain...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: Grove
3 hours ago
» Replies: 7
» Views: 231
|
I am not convinced by the...
Forum: Provenance & history
Last Post: rikforto
3 hours ago
» Replies: 19
» Views: 684
|
Voynich is encrypted ENOC...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: Radim Dobeš
4 hours ago
» Replies: 361
» Views: 52,278
|
The 'Chinese' Theory: Fo...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: Linda
4 hours ago
» Replies: 799
» Views: 212,305
|
A Glyph Is Not a Letter, ...
Forum: News
Last Post: rikforto
10 hours ago
» Replies: 22
» Views: 1,216
|
Voynich Reconsidered
Forum: News
Last Post: dfs346
Yesterday, 08:47 PM
» Replies: 151
» Views: 108,709
|
|
|
| New book by Gerry Kennedy |
|
Posted by: ReneZ - 04-02-2016, 02:12 PM - Forum: News
- No Replies
|
 |
A new book is appearing this month:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
from one of the authors of:
The Voynich Manuscript: The Mysterious Code That Has Defied Interpretation for Centuries
The Voynich MS is discussed, but not going beyond a summary of this earlier book. According to the author, there are some new details related to the lives of Wilfrid and Ethel.
(Disclaimer: this is just for info. I have no personal interest in the sale of this book).
|
|
|
| Are there any traditional ways of indicating scale in mauscript drawings? |
|
Posted by: crezac - 01-02-2016, 11:01 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (3)
|
 |
I don't see anything in any of the drawings to indicate scale. Possibly scale isn't important. Possibly the scale is mentioned in the text. Maybe all the drawings were recognizable to the authors contemporaries.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is often identified as a water lily. If it isn't a water lily something like European wild ginger (asarabacca) is a possibility if it's a smaller plant. I don't see anything to indicate scale, but I know only a little about plant drawings in manuscripts. Can someone who knows more say if there are conventions in drawing to indicate how large the plants are? If not are there ways to estimate the plant sizes based on any of the plant structures?
|
|
|
|
| Common points of agreement |
|
Posted by: crezac - 31-01-2016, 11:35 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (7)
|
|
There are thousands of pages of analysis, theory, speculation and pure ranting about VMS out there. Some of it conflicting, some of it taken as fact just because it's been taken as fact for decades, some of it interesting but impossible to prove.
What I want to do here is outline some things about VMS which everyone can agree on, mainly so that I have a starting point for my analysis but maybe long term so that when we are discussing VMS someone can say "that's not a point of common agreement" and have a place to reference the claim. I'm limiting myself to the text itself, if someone wants to do something similar for images, the physical manuscript and so on that's fine but I don't want to put any of that in this post.
I'm going to try to limit myself to the facts we know. I may occasionally say that it's reasonable to assume or speculate something. If I start claiming things are "possibly" something, feel free to shoot me down in a comment; there are so many things that are possibilities listing them isn't helpful. I will edit this post if I need to add, modify or delete items on my list.
VMS is written in a set of distinct characters.
There are 25 characters in the set. (attach jpg illustrating each character)
It is not know what any character represents.
More than one character is written in the same place on some pages.
The character set is used to encodes information in strings of these characters.
Character distribution in these strings is ordered, i.e not random.
There is no string of these characters with a known meaning.
The strings are written left to right.
Individual strings can be organized into arrays separated by spaces.
Arrays are permitted to span lines.
Arrays can be used to label images.
Not all arrays are aligned with the left margin.
A blank line can be used to separate arrays.
None of the characters are used as punctuation.
None of the characters are used only as representations of numbers.
Lets see what discussion those generate, if any. I can add more if anyone actually cares enough to comment 
|
|
|
|
| Question regarding the original author's birthday |
|
Posted by: crezac - 29-01-2016, 04:27 AM - Forum: Provenance & history
- Replies (4)
|
|
VMS has been dated to sometime in the 15th century, or at least the parchment has. It has also been noted that there don't appear to corrected errors, i.e. the author made no mistakes he had to correct. Finally the ink analysis seems to indicated that, while more than one type of ink is used for main text, page numbers and some marginalia, it is all consistent with a 15th century origin.
Page numbers weren't common in early manuscripts. Their earliest uses appear to be when making a copy of a manuscript to ensure the copy and original were ordered the same. This would be especially important if one couldn't read the original. If you wanted to work on understanding what the original meant you would want your own copy. And your copy would include marginalia from the original.
If the artist were likewise copying images of plants he had never seen from an earlier work that might account for the fact that none of the plants are easily recognizable from the drawings.
Obviously the only way to prove this would be to find an earlier copy of VMS. But, purely for purposes of discussion, if VMS is someones workng copy of an earlier manuscript, how much will that impact any attempts at a translation?
|
|
|
|
|