+- 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: Was the VM a failure? (/thread-4767.html)
Was the VM a failure? - Bernd - 26-06-2025
Many theories about the Voynich Manuscript portray it to be an ingeniously clever cipher or a novel method to encode a foreign or constructed language, often claimed to be invented by a famous person. Indeed all (serious) attempts to make sense of the text have utterly failed so far.
But is this hypothesis really feasible? Despite the countless things we do not know about the VM, we can make two statements with great confidence:
1)The mechanism by which the VM text was created did not gain traction and become widely used around the time the VM was made in the 15th century.
2)No even remotely similar encoding mechanism evolved in the next ~600 years until today.
3) Despite countless attempts since Wilfried Voynich's time a century ago, the 'code' remains uncracked.
This should raise some serious doubts.
While examples for brilliant inventions that were lost in time exist (Antikythera mechanism), I do not think this is a parsimonious hypothesis. Given the overall rather amateurish and provincial look of the VM, I think it is far more likely that:
.)If the VM contains enciphered information, the encipherment process is probably too cumbersome and ineffective for most scenarios.
.)The VM served a very narrow and probably personal purpose that did not require the decipherment process to be practical for a wider audience, maybe relying on a-priori knowledge of the contents like a mnemonic aid.
Or - the VM text was never meant to contain any information and was created for whatever different purpose altogether. Again we fail to find comparable examples.
I am not fond of deliberate hoax hypotheses, simply for the almost fractal complexity and level of details we can see in the VM text and imagery, unnecessary for a hoax. But it certainly cannot be ruled out. Yet, no even remotely complex hoax document was ever uncovered.
Regardless of the intention behind the VM, what we can say for sure is that it's creation process wasn't a success story that was frequently repeated. It may have served a purpose for the author or a very small circle, and I do believe it was important for its creator(s) because of the sheer work involved, but it appears unlikely the project was of any broader significance beyond that.
Had it been a ground-breaking and practical invention, it would either have spread fairly quickly or re-evolved in the next hundred years. I think we should keep that in mind.
RE: Was the VM a failure? - bi3mw - 26-06-2025
I wouldn't say that the VMS was a failure. The crucial question seems to be whether or not it was ever intended for distribution. Encryption without any reference to the method in the manuscript itself (as in other encrypted manuscripts) suggests that it was not intended for distribution in the first place. There is still the possibility that there were clues on the missing pages of the manuscript, but I think this is rather unlikely. In my opinion, it can therefore be assumed that the encryption was generally intended to make it impossible for others to read the manuscript. The use of the VMS was therefore reserved for a few insiders. The question arises as to what was so explosive in terms of content that it was thought necessary to conceal it. In any case, the illustrations do not suggest such an explosive nature. On the contrary, if the content is related to the illustrations, which is to be assumed, then we are dealing with rather trivial topics. One could assume that the encryption was more of an end in itself, a kind of intellectual “finger exercise”. So it does not seem surprising that the (experimental) method did not spread further, as it would have had to be disclosed.
RE: Was the VM a failure? - oshfdk - 26-06-2025
(26-06-2025, 03:32 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The question arises as to what was so explosive in terms of content that it was thought necessary to conceal it. In any case, the illustrations do not suggest such an explosive nature. On the contrary, if the content is related to the illustrations, which is to be assumed, then we are dealing with rather trivial topics.
I wouldn't say that we know the contents of the illustrations. There are "plants". There are "cosmological charts". There are "bathing ladies and human organs".
The plants, what are they for? They don't look like realistic depictions of real plants, as far as I understand the consensus. They have weird combinations of details.
The cosmological charts are not a clear copy of any known cosmology, as far as I know.
The balneology, does it really look like medicinal or public health illustrations?
I think that if the manuscript is indeed encoded then the illustrations are more likely a ruse than not. Or at least they are certainly not to be taken literally.
RE: Was the VM a failure? - Bernd - 26-06-2025
To be clear, we cannot tell if the VM served its intended purpose, but the method of creation itself neither spread nor was it ever re-invented and then spread to a point that knowledge about it was preserved until today. Fundamental break-throughs often pop up independently within a small time-frame when the necessary prerequisites are met. This makes it dubious whether the creation method has a broader practical use like encipherment.
Furthermore we neither know of similarly complex intellectual finger exercises nor hoaxes, which again narrows the circumstances under which the VM was created. It was likely a highly unusual freak-event but most probably no technological break-through.
RE: Was the VM a failure? - Pepper - 26-06-2025
Some random thoughts:
The Rongorongo script was used in a small community and apparently served its purpose well enough until external factors made it obsolete. Now we can't read it (yet).
I'd be very interested to see an estimate of what percentage of 15th century manuscripts have survived until today. And how many survive that were written in scripts or languages that were only in use in small communities.
The VMS seems to have been designed to be used. It's a portable size and shows signs of use, though we can't be sure if the stains and damage were done by somebody using it or when it was in storage or on bookshelves in subsequent centuries. It's a realistic possibility that its original owner/s, at least, had a real use for it.
RE: Was the VM a failure? - Mark Knowles - 26-06-2025
One possibility I would like to mention is that the method of encipherment used may be appropriate for a long document, but not appropriate for a short document. A method of encipherment only suitable for large manuscripts has very limited use as most practical requirements for encipherment are for much shorter letters or documents.
RE: Was the VM a failure? - bi3mw - 26-06-2025
(26-06-2025, 03:46 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think that if the manuscript is indeed encoded then the illustrations are more likely a ruse than not. Or at least they are certainly not to be taken literally.
I would assume abstraction rather than deception here. It was probably intended that the plants in the plant section, for example, cannot be assigned to real plants with certainty. Nevertheless, the first section is a plant section as can be seen in many other manuscripts. This is true even if the plants in the VMS cannot be clearly assigned to any known tradition. It seems as if the author wanted to prevent plant names from being deduced from the coded text ( usually first "word" ? ) at any point.
(26-06-2025, 03:47 PM)Bernd Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It was likely a highly unusual freak-event but most probably no technological break-through.
I see it the same way. Sometimes I think that the “code”, if the VMS is ever cracked, will turn out to be extremely unusual but basically simple in design. Many people will then think: “My goodness, why didn't I think of that before?”
RE: Was the VM a failure? - oshfdk - 26-06-2025
(26-06-2025, 04:30 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I would assume abstraction rather than deception here. It was probably intended that the plants in the plant section, for example, cannot be assigned to real plants with certainty. Nevertheless, the first section is a plant section as can be seen in many other manuscripts. This is true even if the plants in the VMS cannot be clearly assigned to any known tradition. It seems as if the author wanted to prevent plant names from being deduced from the coded text ( usually first "word" ? ) at any point.
What is the use of a plant illustration if it won't let the reader identify the plant?
RE: Was the VM a failure? - Jorge_Stolfi - 26-06-2025
(26-06-2025, 02:31 PM)Bernd Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Many theories about the Voynich Manuscript portray it to be an ingeniously clever cipher or a novel method to encode a foreign or constructed language, often claimed to be invented by a famous person. Indeed all (serious) attempts to make sense of the text have utterly failed so far. [...] Regardless of the intention behind the VM, what we can say for sure is that it's creation process wasn't a success story that was frequently repeated.
First, I highly recommend two works by SF author Stanisław Lem which are highly relevant to our subject: the book His Master's Voice, and a short tale in the book A Perfect Vacuum (IIRC), about the guy who chose as his life's quest to find a Genius of the First Class.
Quote:The mechanism by which the VM text was created did not gain traction and become widely used around the time the VM was made in the 15th century.
If the VMS is indeed encrypted. That would not be strange, since there must have been thousands of "ingenous" encrypted schemes that ended just like that.
It is easy to create a devilishly complicated encryption scheme that is impossible to crack. Even Raphael Mnishowski, the originator of the "VMS is Bacon" theory, claimed to have created one. What is not easy is to create one that is practical -- fast to encode and decode, concise, with graceful response to errors, etc.
There are examples of encrypted works, using original methods, that resisted attempts to decode for centuries, and were cracked only recently. IIRC, one was called Agripa's Second Book or something. And then there is the Book of Soyga that drove John Dee nuts...
All the best, --jorge
RE: Was the VM a failure? - Pepper - 26-06-2025
(26-06-2025, 04:30 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I see it the same way. Sometimes I think that the “code”, if the VMS is ever cracked, will turn out to be extremely unusual but basically simple in design. Many people will then think: “My goodness, why didn't I think of that before?”
Me too. Anything super sophisticated would be unprecedented for the 15th century. It's more likely to be a code that requires a specific piece of information to crack, like knowing that page 152 of a certain edition of the King James Bible was used to generate the first word of each line. That's not an ingenious breakthrough but it can be almost impossible to crack without knowing the reference document.