Voynich decoded completely

[Mark Knowles]

If the forum will permit me to paraphrase a post that I have made on another thread: in response to any proposal that the Voynich manuscript is written in (or derived from) a specified language, the forum should expect the proposer to match, however approximately, the glyph frequencies with the letter frequencies in that language.

For example, if it is proposed that Latin is the precursor language, the proposer should be expected to cite the frequencies of Latin letters as written in the fifteenth century.

I think that the broadest representation of Latin letter frequencies is that in the LatinISE corpus. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..  The LatinISE corpus has a medieval subcorpus which should represent Latin texts of the fifteenth century, although I have not been able to find the time period to which it refers. Alternatively, we could refer to the letter frequencies in a specific medieval Latin text, for example Dante Alighieri’s Monarchia, written between 1312 and 1313.

The frequencies of the glyphs in the v101 transliteration, in descending order, and the frequencies of the letters in the LatinISE medieval subcorpus, have a correlation of 95.9 percent; the v101 glyph frequencies with the letter frequencies in Monarchia, a correlation of 93.3 percent.

In the context of a proposal to map Voynich glyphs to Latin letters, these tables permit a test of whether the proposed Latin equivalents have comparable frequencies to those of the respective glyphs.

I must confess that I haven't read all your comments on the matter, but in your one-to-one mappings you seem to ignore the possibility of a verbose cipher or a filler text amongst other possibilities. In such a case the underlying language could well be Latin.