+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: Corrections in the VMS (/thread-136.html)
Corrections in the VMS - Anton - 18-01-2016
There is a widely circulating assertion that there are no corrections in the VMS. Are there no really? It seems to me that this assertion is largely based on the fact that we simply don't see them in the scans.
However, the technique back then was not that the scribe striked the incorrect letter through and wrote the correct one nearby; incorrect letters were just scraped out (for the parchment properties allow so). So if something is scraped out and then another character is inscribed on top of that, we will probably not notice the correction, at least in the scan.
It would be interesting to know the views on this from people who saw the VMS in its original. Are there really no traces of text having been scraped out?
I attach hereto a curious instance (highlighted by myself) of EVA r in f57r. Don't know if it was scraped out or simply faded with time.
RE: Corrections in the VMS - Anton - 18-01-2016
And, further, I wonder (in the same f57r), what's this:RE: Corrections in the VMS - -JKP- - 19-01-2016
There are tons of corrections and anomalies.
As with so many things regarding the Voynich manuscript, one person says it and thousands of people repeat it without analysis.
I thought I could write a blog post about it and discovered there are so many, it would be difficult to document them in a blog.
So far I have amassed 10 pages of notes and descriptions on this very subject. I'll have to release it as a paper rather than a blog post due to its length and complexity.
RE: Corrections in the VMS - david - 19-01-2016
I think it was Pelling who first suggested that glyphs had been modified throughout the book, although whether by the original scribes or others is impossible to say.
Stolfi also did quite a bit of work on this, and also has suggested that many of the illustrations were painted in by a later artist, possibly unconnected with the original scribes.
What we don't see are the standard manuscript practices of crossing out and amendements. Instead, some glyphs appear to be changed.
His theory, IIRC, was that the text was first written onto wax tablets and then copied onto the manuscript.
RE: Corrections in the VMS - -JKP- - 19-01-2016
I didn't know about the wax tablets theory but independently ended up at the same idea.
To create something like the VMS text in such a fluid manner (even with evidence of errors and changes) suggests either a deep familiarity with use of the "code" or that it was produced from a premade copy. Since parchment was precious, I tried to think of ways in which a temporary copy could be made.
My first thought was drawing in sand (and smoothing it and redrawing each line as it was copied). But sand tends to fill in the lines unless they are far enough apart. It's not very practical and requires a lot of space.
My second thought was using parchment with something that erases easily, something waterbased that washes off. The same sheet could be used over and over, but I couldn't think of any waterbased pigments of the time that would be easy to use (and to read) that would wash out readily without leaving stains. They may exist, but I don't have enough knowledge of pigment chemistry of the time to know if this is a practical solution and the VMS does not show evidence of advanced pigment knowledge—the pigments are rudimentary compared to many 15th century illuminated manuscripts.
My third thought was wax. It dries, you write in it with a stylus, you heat it and dry it again and use it again. I had no idea whether such things existed in the middle ages, so I googled wax tablets and discovered that school children did indeed practice with wax tablets around this time period (or at least by the 16th century).
RE: Corrections in the VMS - david - 19-01-2016
Wax tablets were very common in the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance. You would make your marks in the wax, and once finished with the work, gently warm it and erase all the writing, leaving a fresh new copy for you.
Of course, they were slowly replaced in the 17th century onwards by slates and chalk. But trading before then meant chalk and slates were too expensive for such common use in parts of Europe where they weren't native.
(The theory is Pellings, not Stolfi's, my original post wasn't very clear).
But I agree that the text is most probably copied. Whether from an earlier manuscript or a temporary mashup is of course up to speculation.
RE: Corrections in the VMS - Anton - 19-01-2016
Quote:To create something like the VMS text in such a fluid manner (even with evidence of errors and changes) suggests either a deep familiarity with use of the "code" or that it was produced from a premade copy.
That "fluid manner" usually goes hand in hand with the "no corrections" assertion. What is there exceptionally "fluid" about the manner?
RE: Corrections in the VMS - -JKP- - 19-01-2016
(19-01-2016, 11:01 AM)David Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Wax tablets were very common in the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance. You would make your marks in the wax, and once finished with the work, gently warm it and erase all the writing, leaving a fresh new copy for you.
These things are all new to me. I live in an area that wasn't colonized until 1853. There's no European history at all that's any older than a century or so and it's a four-hour round-trip drive to see the occasional traveling museum show in a bigger city. My introduction to history is very recent, courtesy of the Internet.
That might be part of the appeal of the VMS. Reading a history book is boring compared to trying to solve a centuries-old mystery.
RE: Corrections in the VMS - david - 19-01-2016
Quote:I live in an area that wasn't colonized until 1853....tries to think... So that's Africa or Australia, right?
But we digress.
First off, I would suggest that there are several hands in the Voynich, if you look at the handwriting. This is not a novel or new argument.
But all of them share the same characteristics - firm shaping of the letters, flowing cursive script that runs glyphs together. We don't see constant stop starts in the middle of "vords", but instead they are formed by a hand who knows how to form the glyphs and which glyph is coming next.
RE: Corrections in the VMS - -JKP- - 20-01-2016
(19-01-2016, 04:20 PM)David Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Quote:I live in an area that wasn't colonized until 1853....tries to think... So that's Africa or Australia, right?
But we digress.
First off, I would suggest that there are several hands in the Voynich, if you look at the handwriting. This is not a novel or new argument.
But all of them share the same characteristics - firm shaping of the letters, flowing cursive script that runs glyphs together. We don't see constant stop starts in the middle of "vords", but instead they are formed by a hand who knows how to form the glyphs and which glyph is coming next.
Actually, Australia was colonized by Europeans almost a century before this area. It is relevant to research. Europeans and Asians grow up with millennia of history all around them. I grew up with trees. There are no old buildings or old books or people speaking other languages here. Aspects of history that many people learn as children because they are surrounded by it are completely unknown to those of us who grew up 6,000 miles away from the origin of the VMS, unless we make the effort to learn it.
As for other hands, it's a very interesting aspect of the VMS. I'm glad you brought up the topic. There's definitely more than one hand (not counting the marginalia and zodiac labels). There is one example in particular where the person who wrote in the letters didn't appear to comprehend the patterns and shapes of the VMS writing system. Since we're on the topic, I should upload the example to my blog. I'll try to dig up my notes.
To answer your question about the fluidity of the writing. The reason I suspect there was a "precopy" of some sort for at least some of the more complex pages (on the assumption that there is meaning behind the text) is because one can't always predict how much of a particular topic will fit on one page if writing extemporaneously. Yet most of the text-dense pages appear self-contained—they don't squeeze in extra text at the end or on the sides or bleed over to the next section (e.g., pages 75r to 85r) because there wasn't enough room.