+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Theories & Solutions (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-58.html)
+--- Thread: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality (/thread-6124.html)
Pages:
1
2
Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - npcompl33t - 27-09-2026
I think many people, myself included, have been frustrated by the amount of repetition in the VM. There is historical precedence for repetitive phrases like 'Holy Holy Holy', etc, but I haven't personally seen examples of historical works that utilize repetition to the extent of Voynich.
Even under the self citation theory, you have to ask: why would they choose to copy the same word consecutively multiple times?
It's obvious that the scribes behind the Voynich manuscript valued aesthetics of the text, regardless of the broader questions around its semantic meaning. As I have been analyzing the VM, I am increasingly starting to suspect that scribes are intentionally choosing to render words in repetitive forms, even when other options may exist.
What if the answer is simply that the scribes viewed the repetition as a positive aesthetic quality?
I'm reminded of the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. of the medieval minims phrase that appears to be multiple lines of I characters, but actually spells out a complex phrase.
With Voynich, the repetition doesn't necessarily even need to come from ambiguity of characters possibly taking multiple forms (although that could be the case). Maybe others have already suggested this, but it would explain how both extreme atypical repetition and semantic meaning could coexist.
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - ololololo - 27-09-2026
(27-09-2026, 04:40 PM)npcompl33t wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Even under the self citation theory, you have to ask: why would they choose to copy the same word consecutively multiple times?I can generally explain this simply as a lack of creativity. The scribe might have gotten tired and written the same word once: Let’s say a scribe sat down to work. He diligently comes up with words for 5 pages, but his creative energy is running out. He decides to cheat a little and write a few lines below, and fills the remaining space with similar words or simply duplicates them.
Also, the same phenomenon is also present in the Codex Seraphinianus; read You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
Scribe B particularly “abused” repetitions, perhaps You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and wanted to write a large amount of text as quickly as possible.
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - Stefan Wirtz_2 - 27-09-2026
Repetition is in a group of european languages a fully normal element to emphasize the meaning of that word.
It‘s different for 3x or even 4x setting: three times repetition is only possible for elements of direct speech.
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - npcompl33t - 27-09-2026
(27-09-2026, 05:01 PM)ololololo wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(27-09-2026, 04:40 PM)npcompl33t wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Even under the self citation theory, you have to ask: why would they choose to copy the same word consecutively multiple times?I can generally explain this simply as a lack of creativity. The scribe might have gotten tired and written the same word once: Let’s say a scribe sat down to work. He diligently comes up with words for 5 pages, but his creative energy is running out. He decides to cheat a little and write a few lines below, and fills the remaining space with similar words or simply duplicates them.
Also, the same phenomenon is also present in the Codex Seraphinianus; read You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
Scribe B particularly “abused” repetitions, perhaps You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and wanted to write a large amount of text as quickly as possible.
Perhaps, but i can think of a few issues with this theory:
- In most cases, wouldn't scribes using vellum be copying from a prepared source, not actually writing the content? Composing generally did not happen directly on vellum.
- If they weren't fully engaged, or were getting 'tired', wouldn't you expect these types of repetitions to generally increase monotonically over the course of their work? Wouldn't visible mistakes also increase at the same rate?
- Copying requires no creative energy, the amount of 'creative energy' to change words halfway through a copy vs copying the entire same word is marginal to nonexistent.
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - ololololo - 27-09-2026
(27-09-2026, 06:25 PM)npcompl33t wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If they weren't fully engaged, or were getting 'tired', wouldn't you expect these types of repetitions to generally increase monotonically over the course of their work?Not necessarily. He could have simply gone to rest, and then, inspired and with new words, returned to work.
(27-09-2026, 06:25 PM)npcompl33t wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In most cases, wouldn't scribes using vellum be copying from a prepared source, not actually writing the content?Then it could have been the author’s mistakes.
(27-09-2026, 06:25 PM)npcompl33t wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Copying requires no creative energy, the amount of 'creative energy' to change words halfway through a copy vs copying the entire same word is marginal to nonexistent.I meant that the scribe might have gotten tired of writing by the end and simply started cutting corners.
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - npcompl33t - 27-09-2026
The problem i have accepting this theory, is that all of your proposed explanations conflict with each other. If he is getting tired, an can rest, then a lack of creative energy doesn't seem like a good explanation.
If it is the author's mistakes, and not the scribes, then all of your points about Scribe B losing energy doesn't make sense.
Each explanation invalidates the other two, and none accounts for all 3 points collectively.
The larger issue though, is that copying requires no creative energy at all, and it is trivial to copy in a way that does not produce direct repetitions. The overhead of looking at a different word while writing is virtually nothing compared to the actual writing itself. The repetitions don't meaningfully alter the amount of work or effort involved.
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - Mauro - 27-09-2026
(27-09-2026, 06:25 PM)npcompl33t wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- Copying requires no creative energy, the amount of 'creative energy' to change words halfway through a copy vs copying the entire same word is marginal to nonexistent.
In don't agree with this. Copying requires little effort for sure, but copy-and-modify gibberish, keeping it structured and repetitive at the level of characters but avoiding repetitiveness at the level of words along the whole text (*), as in the VMS, I guess requires a lot, I'd bet more than writing text in mother language. Just an opinion.
Then, I agree that the VMS maker(s) wanted to make something which pleased his(their) aesthetic qualities, and I guess he liked the script he(they) created and the flowing of the text, and I guess the illustrations too. Which, indeed, are strangely pleasant.
(*) except some rare cases which are even too repetitive, with the same word 4/5 times in a row
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - ololololo - 27-09-2026
(27-09-2026, 06:57 PM)npcompl33t wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If it is the author's mistakes, and not the scribes, then all of your points about Scribe B losing energy doesn't make sense.This is if we accept that scribes = copyists. I, however, believe that in any case, scribes were authors. Well, at least they wrote the Voynichese text specifically. If they copied from sources, how can we explain the statistical features within their texts?
And the reason might not be just “fatigue.” Maybe he just felt like it? Maybe he was lost in thought and accidentally wrote a repetition? Maybe he didn’t have enough words to fill the line, and he duplicated one of them? Maybe he used some method, and this method gave him a doubled or tripled word?
(27-09-2026, 06:57 PM)npcompl33t wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Each explanation invalidates the other two, and none accounts for all 3 points collectively.Why is that?
The scribe didn’t need to make this text deliberately beautiful. He just needed to fill the space with various gibberish.
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - npcompl33t - 27-09-2026
Personally I think the statistical properties vary quite considerably for the same hand in differnt parts of the manuscript, while two different hands in the same section write extremely similarly, but this isn’t really relevant to the discussion here ultimately.
I think across the manuscript on every page you can see scribes adding visual flourishes to text, making the text visually beautiful is one of the few things we can conclusively prove, regardless if the text carries meaning or is gibberish. This isn’t surprising, as many scribes from this time took pride in the visual aesthetics of their writing.
The theories you have posited for the repetition are: it reduces the effort, a mistake, and because they felt like it, which I will interpret to mean they didn’t care one way or another about repetitive text.
I’ve already stated why I don’t find the effort argument compelling, with respect to direct repetition.
As far as errors, repetition appears much more common than errors, and I think would have been caught in the preparation stage before being put onto vellum.
The last, that they were unconcerned with repetition, is perfectly valid, but also unfalsifiable.
All 3 of the theories you have suggested are based on the assumption that the text is meaningless. That’s fine, honestly I have not entirely ruled out that possibility myself, although I feel it is almost as confusing because it doesn’t really address motive.
The theory that they actually preferred aesthetics of repetition, could be valid whether the text has meaning or not. Is your concern that it leaves open the possibility the text is not meaningless? Or do you genuinely think aesthetics were not important to the scribes, or the theory is otherwise flawed?
RE: Repetition as a positive aesthetic quality - npcompl33t - 27-09-2026
(27-09-2026, 07:34 PM)Mauro wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In don't agree with this. Copying requires little effort for sure, but copy-and-modify gibberish, keeping it structured and repetitive at the level of characters but avoiding repetitiveness at the level of words along the whole text (*), as in the VMS, I guess requires a lot, I'd bet more than writing text in mother language. Just an opinion.
Then, I agree that the VMS maker(s) wanted to make something which pleased his(their) aesthetic qualities, and I guess he liked the script he(they) created and the flowing of the text, and I guess the illustrations too. Which, indeed, are strangely pleasant.
(*) except some rare cases which are even too repetitive, with the same word 4/5 times in a row
Why would copying require any of this? Why wouldn’t it just be pick a random word and copy it? The vast majority of scribe work is exactly this, word for word copying. Why would copying require all of the additional overhead of managing structure, individual characters, etc? If avoiding repetitiveness is the goal, there is an extremely simple way to avoid this that doesn’t require all the additional overhead. Requiring them to be managing all this additional structure implies there is some reason why simply picking a random word and writing it is insufficient?