Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

[Ahmet Ardıç]

[Not to be rude Ahmet, but you've lost me.
I called them Arabic numerals because that is the English name for the ten decimal digits written in the form 0123456789.
I called them modern European style because the symbol you discussed (2) is graphed in a modern European style.
Arabian, Persian, tamil, Hindu all use the same characters but graph them in a different way.
The symbol for 2 was just starting to replace the old symbol in the middle of the 15th century in Europe. Before then the digits were written differently. This has been amply discussed elsewhere.
So my question remains - would a Turkish writer, who is not using the Latin alphabet, have known the symbol for 2 in this fashion and used it this way? If 2, why not 4,6,7?
This image shows how the digits were written old style in French Manuscripts from c. 700 to c1500]

Mr Jackson,


As I have written many times before, we do not currently know whether the author is Turkish or what nationality she/he is. All we know is that the Turkish language is in the VM content.
Because of this, it doesn't really make sense at this stage to say that the Turks did not use these Arabic numbers in this way before 1453.

However, I also believe that some wrong phrases or namings misinform people and create a wrong perception.

I know that these names (such as "Arap-numerals") are not given by you or anyone else on this page. Moreover, this name "Arabic numerals" is only & widely used around the world. 
In any case, this naming has not been done correctly in the past. The "Arabic" numerals we all are using today creates the perception that an Arab or Arabs created it.

You also think that the Turks used the Arabic alphabet, but then you assume that the Turks (who you assume used the Arabic alphabet), did not use Arabic numerals in the past. Am I wrong?

Is it possible that the Turks, who lived side by side with the Arabs for thousands of years and intertwined throughout the Ottoman Empire, did not use these numbers? Were the numeral called "Arabic numerals" created by the Arabs? 

Just because an idea is considered or accepted by the majority does not make it true.

You know very little about Turkish culture, language, writings, history and civilization. In general, I say that many Europeans do not recognize the culture that has lived next to them for thousands of years.

First of all, we used Arabic and Latin alphabet during the Ottoman period in Anatolia. In the same period, there were also Turkic peoples who used the Hebrew alphabet, the Runic alphabet and the Uyghur alphabet. Later, we say that the author of many manuscripts that you generalize in the West as "Arabic manuscripts" and/or "Persian manuscripts" may not be an Arab or Persian, but may also be a Turk.

And, I do not think I am rude. I was just wondering which sentence you thought was rude. I'm writing about the terminology used, not about individuals. And I write to draw attention to the misconceptions.

I wish you, as some Europeans, to be able to produce denominations free from prejudices.

Here I am writing about my opinions on a specific subject. But sellected preconceived definitions and naming formats have been proliferating in your cultures for hundreds of years, and you are not see there any wrong.

Example;
Brits speak English. Americans, Australians, New Zealanders also speak English. Do your Western historians or linguistics scholars ever use the terminology for those languages as like "American/Americanish" for American English or "Australianish" or "New-Zealandish" etc.? 

Of course no. Because these are not different languages. 

But when it comes to producing terminology related to my culture, your same scientists call the Turkish spoken in Azerbaijan as Azerbaijani. However, Azerbaijan is the name of the geography and the people living in that geography speak Turkish because there is no such language as Azerbaijani. 

The fact that a linguist uses the Azerbaijani nomenclature in his scientific article is pure hypocrisy and a political attitude. There should be no racism, politics, hypocrisy or double standards in science either.

For this reason, you do not have the right to make an immediate correction or due diligence without understanding my criticisms on these issues, as if you were giving us a lesson.

Are you still asking me about "why note 4,6,7?"

I understand that you did not read carefully what I wrote. All numerals 1 through 9 are used in this manuscript, including 1 and 9.

You use the terminology that you have produced and adopted in English. So the people who first called it "Arabic numerals" made a mistake. More precisely, it is a naming that gives false information to people. I am not at all worried about what your experts or historians will say or think here. You come from a culture that can use such terminology as it pleases, just like those who named it EVA (European Voynich Alphabet). But no matter what naming you use, there is no scientific basis for using them like that. These are just acronyms stemming from misinterpreting the available findings.

I think that people who really deal with science only look at the evidence. Please, show me one piece of evidence that the number forms called Arabic numerals were created by Arabs? Doesn't this naming of "Arabic numerals" give people false information if this can not be prove?

While multiple generalizations are made about Arab mathematics, Arab sailors, Persian poetry, etc., have you seen a single Western scientific article that even suggests that some of them might have been made by Turks?

Whatever you think, the author of the ATA (Voynich) Manuscript was using all these letters from 1 to 9 when she/he wrote this book before 1453.

In fact, it is possible that these letters are read in words and sentences in Turkish with their sound values in VM texts. So after a while you're going to have to make some additions to these tables you made about how basic numbers were written in Europe at one time. Because it always is. As humanity progresses and science advances, new evidence is found and old misinformation is thrown away. But even this situation never changes the views of a group of people. For this reason, there are still those who claim that the world is flat like a tray.

How do you know that "Turkish writers was not using the Latin alphabet" was existe before and after 1453 (in Ottoman time period)?

The author of this manuscript also mostly used the characters of the Latin alphabet in his alphabet, in which he created syllabic characters.

In addition, the generalizations you make are incompatible with historical facts. But you are not even aware of it. Because you don't know my culture. Have you read a scientific article about which alphabets the Turks used in the historical process? How many articles have you read about the Türkish calendar, and tamga signs? 

How many articles have you read about if Turks did or did not take/adapted which parts from Arab culture or European culture before and after 1453?

You and some of your friends in this page have repeatedly explained about the drawings of women bathing in various pools that you see in the pages of VM, with seeing/assuming them as "those can be related to European geography and/or culture" (and especially in connection with Italy). Have you ever thought that there may be 1/1 equivalent of these in Turkish culture in Anatolia?

Have you heard of the concept of Turkish bath? Did you have any historical information about the concubines who bathed in the pools in the harem? Did you know that in no other country or geography in Europe there are not as many spas as in Turkey? How many articles have you read that show that historically Italian and Greek culture has quoted/adapted a large number of Turkish cultural identification marks through the Etruscan civilization? How many scientific papers have you read that says why the "PIE root language" assumption is not be real and it didn't exist in the past in reality?

Here we are reading them. We also read articles produced by your European science and can compare contradictory information. Well, before you can make your assumptions such as this and that in Turkish culture, shouldn't you first need to look at what is written on these subjects in the other culture being compared?

Otherwise, it will not be possible for you to perceive that the question you asked has actually been answered, or to correctly evaluate whether the answer corresponds to the historical reality.

We have included this type of evidence in our book.

Here in this VM-ninja page in many times, I have referred to many old evidence in many of my comments.

Science should not be done, and terminology should not be produced, guided by prejudice and personal thoughts.

Sorry for broken English,

Regards,