26-12-2016, 01:11 PM
(This post was last modified: 26-12-2016, 01:14 PM by Diane.
Edit Reason: add
)
Thank you Sam.
Asking the questions that should have been asked is one reason that it has taken so long for me to publish some of the background, history and comparative matter which led me to the conclusions I reached after 18 months' study of the manuscript (2008-2010).
Most of the questions come down to "Who first said that? Where did he/she say it? What evidence did they adduce? Was the evidence sufficient to justify the assertion". The bizarre attitude among some few Voynich writers - that they can take research conclusions from anywhere, but then cite their sources accurately or not depending on whether they happen to like the original researcher... can be an added nuisance, too.
About ciphers though - there are possibilities other than the "spy-cipher" type with its scratch pad. I looked at a couple of possibilities once I reached the same view as you hold about impracticality.
One simple solution could be that the 'cipher' links to a system already committed to memory.
I believe that I was the first to mention, in that context, the role of the Guidonian Hand, and to show variations of it in Hebrew, and in the context of a navigational text. (As ever, you may find later echoes on various sites now - Stephen Bax' site seems to see the re-discovery of many such).
There is also the interesting possibility that it could be a cursive script rendered into a simplified form ('block letters' style) to suit foreign readers: presumably Latin readers.
Another appealing idea is that the text is not a 'plain text' of ordinary prose or poetry at all. I looked at the way technical instructions are written for making fabrics, and for other technical lists including those produced by merchants in medieval Cairo.
But - thanks be - the written text isn't my problem.
Asking the questions that should have been asked is one reason that it has taken so long for me to publish some of the background, history and comparative matter which led me to the conclusions I reached after 18 months' study of the manuscript (2008-2010).
Most of the questions come down to "Who first said that? Where did he/she say it? What evidence did they adduce? Was the evidence sufficient to justify the assertion". The bizarre attitude among some few Voynich writers - that they can take research conclusions from anywhere, but then cite their sources accurately or not depending on whether they happen to like the original researcher... can be an added nuisance, too.
About ciphers though - there are possibilities other than the "spy-cipher" type with its scratch pad. I looked at a couple of possibilities once I reached the same view as you hold about impracticality.
One simple solution could be that the 'cipher' links to a system already committed to memory.
I believe that I was the first to mention, in that context, the role of the Guidonian Hand, and to show variations of it in Hebrew, and in the context of a navigational text. (As ever, you may find later echoes on various sites now - Stephen Bax' site seems to see the re-discovery of many such).
There is also the interesting possibility that it could be a cursive script rendered into a simplified form ('block letters' style) to suit foreign readers: presumably Latin readers.
Another appealing idea is that the text is not a 'plain text' of ordinary prose or poetry at all. I looked at the way technical instructions are written for making fabrics, and for other technical lists including those produced by merchants in medieval Cairo.
But - thanks be - the written text isn't my problem.