+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Marginalia (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-45.html)
+--- Thread: f116v is a decryption attempt? (/thread-5910.html)
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - Mauro - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 06:36 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It is certain that the "a" in Voynich does not necessarily have anything to do with the Latin "a."
But... there is no "a" in "Voynich"!
(excuse me please, I could not resist
)
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - monisusa - 02-08-2026
(12-07-2026, 08:38 AM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have long suspected that the marginalia may be an attempt at translation or a translation of a manuscript. There is no way to prove this at the moment, but it is possible to speculate...
What if You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is an attempt to translate a recipe? It's possible that the person thought they could translate the manuscript (or they could, but they weren't very good at it), so they decided to take a random recipe and translate it on the last page. He may not have been able to translate the letter d, as it appears in the words, and he may not have been able to translate aror (oror) sheey, and the only thing that made sense in his "translation" was "so nim gas mich". "marix morix vix" may be a repetition as "qokedy qokedy qokeedy"
I could not find the combination aror sheey or oror sheey in the manuscript. There are recipes where the word before sheey is similar to oror: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...ol rar sheey ylar...); You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...airal sheey...); You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...ar sheey...).
What do you think?
Hi, it is of utmost importance to read the gothic cursive correctly. You should not mix up the character r with v! If you look at the word "poxleber" you see how the author writes r, it has a stem. But it is different to the character v, which is open on top.
Therefore we have to read ma vix and mo vix. Vix/wix/wichs is the dialectal Bavarian word for wax. I explained this in my
study on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. which mentioned here under the thread "marginalia". It is not an attempt to translate a recipe, it is the recipe itself. Kind regards
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - ololololo - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 02:00 PM)monisusa Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hi, it is of utmost importance to read the gothic cursive correctly. You should not mix up the character r with v! If you look at the word "poxleber" you see how the author writes r, it has a stem. But it is different to the character v, which is open on top.I didn't consider the poxleber line because there is no match for it.
(02-08-2026, 02:00 PM)monisusa Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Therefore we have to read ma vix and mo vix. Vix/wix/wichs is the dialectal Bavarian word for wax.In fact, it doesn't really matter in this theory whether it's mavix or marix, movix or morix. What matters is that this string corresponds to the string qekeeey qoparaiin olcheear chedar or (by the way, I noticed that there are actually three ars here, so "marix morix" and "maria" now match this string without any issues).
(02-08-2026, 02:00 PM)monisusa Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It is not an attempt to translate a recipe, it is the recipe itselfFirst, in my interpretation, this is a spell.
Secondly, I've read your research, and although it's a bit of a stretch in terms of interpreting the abbreviations, I think it's quite consistent with my own interpretation. Perhaps if your translation is accurate, the author could be one of the VMS authors, and this recipe has something to do with Starred Parags.
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - monisusa - 03-08-2026
(27-07-2026, 01:32 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(27-07-2026, 01:06 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.13th. No J.
Was K always included in the alphabetical order?
Hello,
It existed in the German alphabet. However, this character k was not always used by scribes who had a latin background! Instead they used "c". c9 = /kus/
For example "Frederic9".
This applies also for the scribe of f116v. This scribe very likely had a non-German background. Probably romance or slavic but he wrote a German note. Thats why we have to remember, that there are "mistakes" because the author was not quite sure how to spell a word particularly since he tried to write in the vernacular.
Furthermore we have to pronounce the word "ceuc" as /koik/ (like in Engl. boy) It means quicklime which was used to prepare a kind of soft soap for the ointment.
The character v here has to be read as vowel u (as in devs = deus). v represents the four sounds v, (like in vino) f, u and German w. Therefore it is necessary to
read it according to the context.
Kind regards Monika
N.B. All this is explained in detail in my study on f 116v, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - JoJo_Jost - 03-08-2026
So very many assumptions.... for one analysis...
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - ololololo - 03-08-2026
(03-08-2026, 08:24 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So very many assumptions....I agree
As for the decryption theory, it's more or less clear. The author somehow received a set of letters and tried to make sense of it. However, it was a challenging task. Nevertheless, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. can be compared to f104r.
And then we can only guess...
For example, if ar = m, then according to the correspondence with Roman numerals, ar = ain = eiin = XIII - 13, although the 13th letter is N (thanks to @nablator for noticing this).
The decrypter may have had a similar logic. This does not mean that it is correct.
But nevertheless, this can give us a little clue. For example, I imagine a scenario like this: the author (meaning the person who came up with the idea of writing this book. Sort of like a head of scribes) decided to check if it was possible to decipher a recipe from the last section after writing the entire book. He ordered one of the scribes to do so. With a trembling hand due to excitement and fear of making a mistake, the scribe attempted to use the cipher alphabet to restore the recipe, but failed. poxleber and gasmich were an attempt to prove to the scribe that he knew what the recipe was about
What am I getting at? Well, the handwriting of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is generally similar to VMS, and if the author was one of the scribes, it could mean that the VMS text is undecipherable or that the text is poorly encrypted, turning it into "anhitonic" spells.
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - ololololo - 03-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 06:01 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Everywhere in the VMS the glyph a is written as two simple pen strokes: an e and an i, both from NW to SE. Just like on the aror of f116v.
Examples from Herbal A, Herbal B, and f116r. The e and i parts are clearly visible almost everywhere, as they were written in two strokes (one for the e and one for the i).
On f116v, they look like they were written in one stroke.
When I say differences, I mean the shape and spelling of the first a on f116v. Based on this difference, it should not be grouped with other a on f116v.
I don't deny that it could have been written by one of the VMS co-authors or another person. I just think there is a difference.
(02-08-2026, 06:36 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It is certain that the "a" in Voynich does not necessarily have anything to do with the Latin "a."The only thing is that it could have been stylized as a to be misleading. Apparently, the author (or the botany scribe) originally intentionally wrote e and i together as a. The balneology scribe did not always follow this, and he sometimes wrote e and i separately from each other.
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - JoJo_Jost - 03-08-2026
@ olololo I was referring to Monika's analysis, not yours (and actually, anyone who has to make too many assumptions to fit their theory into it).
With this number of assumptions in there, I could turn 116v into a Hawaiian magic spell too...
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - ololololo - 03-08-2026
(03-08-2026, 09:06 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@ olololo I was referring to Monika's analysis, not yours (and actually, anyone who has to make too many assumptions to fit their theory into it).Oh, my apologies...
RE: f116v is a decryption attempt? - JoeyB - 03-08-2026
Hey, I came across a source when looking into the grammar of the "so nym" part of f116v:
96. Obe du wilt, daz din win balde luter werde, so er vff den trusen lit.
Item so du wollest, daz din win balde luter werde, so er vff den trusen lit oder
so er suß nit luter ist, so nym geiß milch vnd mache sie lawe vnd guß sie oben in
den wine vnd nym ein maße zu einem fuder, so wirt er luter, ez weret aber nit lange.
(Cod. Donaueschingen 787, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)
(The part I'm pointing at is the wine book inside it, ff. 181v and 209r-211v, which Thomas Gloning transcribed and put online at Giessen:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)
The pages may auto-translate depending on your browser settings so you might have to click a button to Undo the translation.
A couple of things...
First, the document is apparently now in Karlsruhe (Landesbibliothek), formerly the Fürstenberg court library at Donaueschingen. Paper codex, 225 leaves, South Rhenish Franconian. The Giessen page cites Ankenbrand dating it "zwischen 1484 und 1509, ganz allgemein um 1500".
Second, it seems to be a mixed medical and domestic handbook: a calendar, bloodletting rules, Gottfried von Franken's Pelzbuch, and recipes (per the Contents description at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). The wine book is the part I'm quoting from and this is recipe 96 of 121 in that part.
Third, can someone comment on the grammar, as I don't read German and I was working from Koen's blog and other writing about "so nym" plus translating tools. This seems like a purpose clause ("if you want your wine to become clear quickly"), then a state clause ("when it lies on the lees, or when it is otherwise not clear"), then the instruction starting "so nym geiß milch", then a result at the end ("so wirt er luter", but it doesn't last long).
The relevancy then is: If that's right, it's a condition or state sitting in front of "so nym" plus goat's milk, which seems to map onto what people have proposed for the structure of f116v.
Side question, is "suß" here "süß" (sweet) or "sust/sonst" (otherwise)?
Fourth, and maybe cutting the other way: this is about clarifying wine, not treating a person. The section title is "Hie vahet an alle artzenie von dem wine", which translation tools tell me is roughly "here begins all the medicine of wine", so the medical "framing" applied to the wine barrel. Which is where I think the parallel gets weaker bc if you read the material before "so nym" in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as somebody's ailment, this maybe isn't so parallel after all.
Last thing, goat's milk turns up in the next entry too (#97, keeping wine clear with eggs, honey and crushed lime). That one also opens with "so nym", but the object is the eggs, and the goat's milk comes in later as "du:o darin ein maß geißmilche oder rindern", a measure of goat's or cow's milk. So slightly different phrasing, fwiw, and again I don't speak German so I'm using translation.
Am posting because this source was in a list of things I was sharing with DG97EEB and it hadn't made its way into a post in the forum yet.