28-01-2018, 05:11 AM
(27-01-2018, 11:02 PM)VViews wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Morten St George,
nobody is arguing for any specific origin in this thread.
We are simply pointing out that your observations about various elements of the manuscript are erroneous.
Koen Gh's last image shows beyond doubt that the hole in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is not shaped like a tapir. Seriously, just look at it.
As for the star count, even if you discount the smaller star, that still leaves 162 red stars, not 161. And keep in mind that there are two folios missing, so I reiterate that there were probably even more red stars originally, since there are between 5-10 red stars on every other page of Q20.
What we are carrying out in this thread is the closest thing you will get to a proper peer review of your writings on the Voynich.
Nobody has discussed your conclusions about origins here, because before we even get to those, we are providing you with a fact-check of the observations which your theory is founded upon.
As it turns out, several of these are simply incorrect.
On the tapir, I have modified my web page as follows:
DEPICTION
"This bizarre cutout at the end of the section on herbal medicine (folio 102v) is in the form of a South American tapir (also known as the Brazilian tapir), a large mammal never seen in Europe during medieval times.
PHOTO
"The skin of this animal is too thick for fine leather but is used to make items like saddles for horses and durable sandals for humans. It would also have been the ideal material to make vials for mixing and mashing the diverse herbs into medicinal concoctions as well as for storing them. The optical illusion of a tapir in the manuscript might not be accidental."
Do you know by whom the quire numbers were put into the manuscript? I can't remember.
On the stars, I am not counting the red star on the top of folio 105r. Unlike all the other red stars, it is not placed to the left of any script. Instead, it is placed on top of a single word that is crossed-out. Neither the crossed-up word nor the first word below it begins with a glyph that resembles the glyph with which all red star passages on that page begin. Conclusion: that red star is only a "continuation" indicator and does not mark the beginning of a new recipe.
Based on the Prophetiae Merlini, a commentary on the recipes written around 1135, I would estimate there could be as many as a hundred pages of recipes missing from the manuscript. I'm guessing that they decided to retain only the recipes that were translated and published.