<![CDATA[The Voynich Ninja - News]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/ Mon, 18 May 2026 21:12:58 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[New Article by Layfield and Davis]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5751.html Sat, 16 May 2026 15:45:01 +0000 LisaFaginDavis]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5751.html
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]>
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]> <![CDATA[Stars in the recipe section]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5733.html Wed, 13 May 2026 14:52:40 +0000 Labyrinthinesecurity]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5733.html
I then trained a simple statistical model to predict whether a paragraph maps to a “tail” star using only internal text features (no external information, no hand labeling tricks).

The model correctly identifies tail paragraphs about 86% of the time (balanced accuracy), which is far above chance (50%).

(I also ran permutation tests where we randomly reshuffled the data within each folio, preserving structure but destroying signal. In those tests, performance dropped to about 52%, which is basically chance. This suggests the model is not just exploiting simple artifacts like folio grouping or class imbalance.)

Is anyone aware of similar studies? I'd be interested to know if star morphometrics correlate to textual contents.

Thanks!]]>
I then trained a simple statistical model to predict whether a paragraph maps to a “tail” star using only internal text features (no external information, no hand labeling tricks).

The model correctly identifies tail paragraphs about 86% of the time (balanced accuracy), which is far above chance (50%).

(I also ran permutation tests where we randomly reshuffled the data within each folio, preserving structure but destroying signal. In those tests, performance dropped to about 52%, which is basically chance. This suggests the model is not just exploiting simple artifacts like folio grouping or class imbalance.)

Is anyone aware of similar studies? I'd be interested to know if star morphometrics correlate to textual contents.

Thanks!]]> <![CDATA[update to Zattera's slot machine]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5715.html Thu, 07 May 2026 09:36:17 +0000 Labyrinthinesecurity]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5715.html

Metric      Before  After    Change
Generated  3,110    5,524    +2,414
TP types    1,226    1,680    +454
TP tokens  20,454  24,662  +4,208
Precision  0.3942  0.3041  -0.0901
Recall      0.1468  0.2011  +0.0543
F1          0.2139  0.2421  +0.0282
TokCov      0.5491  0.6620  +0.1129

Note that we worked on the IVTFF corpus, not Zattera's homebrew Slot Alphabet. 

The improved grammar (F1=0.242) outperforms Zattera's grammar (F1=0.214) when both are scored on our corpus. However, Zattera reports F1=0.270 on his own filtered corpus (~5,105 types), and our grammar was F1-trained on the test corpus while his was not.]]>

Metric      Before  After    Change
Generated  3,110    5,524    +2,414
TP types    1,226    1,680    +454
TP tokens  20,454  24,662  +4,208
Precision  0.3942  0.3041  -0.0901
Recall      0.1468  0.2011  +0.0543
F1          0.2139  0.2421  +0.0282
TokCov      0.5491  0.6620  +0.1129

Note that we worked on the IVTFF corpus, not Zattera's homebrew Slot Alphabet. 

The improved grammar (F1=0.242) outperforms Zattera's grammar (F1=0.214) when both are scored on our corpus. However, Zattera reports F1=0.270 on his own filtered corpus (~5,105 types), and our grammar was F1-trained on the test corpus while his was not.]]> <![CDATA[Currier A/B split is not what we thought it was!]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5710.html Mon, 04 May 2026 14:09:38 +0000 Labyrinthinesecurity]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5710.html
Some of you may have seen my earlier work confirming the Currier A/B distinction quantitatively. That paper showed the distinction is real, recoverable without labels, and predictive. But it also left a puzzle on the table that I could not explain at the time. I now have an explanation, and it leads somewhere unexpected.

Of the eleven character pairs I tested, one behaved paradoxically. The e/ch pair had essentially zero global correlation with the A/B split, yet it produced the strongest signal of all pairs at folio boundaries. And when included in clustering, it actively destroyed the A/B partition: removing it doubled the clustering accuracy.

How can a pair be simultaneously invisible globally, maximally informative locally, and destructive to classification? That combination is not possible under a simple two-language model. Something more structured is going on.

The answer turns out to be surprisingly clean. If you look at the vowel that follows the digraphs CH and SH across the manuscript, you find that folios split into two sharply separated groups. The gap between these two states is enormous, and a two-state binomial mixture model fits with a 2,549-point AIC improvement over a single state. Of 197 folios, 195 are assigned unambiguously.

This is not the same thing as the Currier A/B split, although it correlates with it. It is sharper, it operates at the individual folio level rather than at section boundaries, and it persists within the Herbal section alone (where the A/B boundary is supposed to be clean).

I call it a boolean switch: a single binary parameter, set once per folio.

Here is where it gets interesting. If the switch were just replacing graphemes uniformly, every word containing those graphemes would respond the same way. They do not.

When you group words into templates, you find three classes:

  1. Fixed O templates: these are locked to O in both switch states. 
  2. Fixed E templates: these are locked to E in both switches states. 
  3. Switchable templates: these respond strongly to the switch.

Template identity accounts for 93.5% of the variance. The folio switch accounts for only 7.9%.

So the system has two components: a template structure that determines which contexts are switchable, and a boolean parameter that modulates the switchable ones. The Currier A/B distinction is a blurred projection of this system, not the system itself.

The e/ch pair is paradoxical because it responds to the boolean switch, but only in switchable template contexts. In clustering, the e/ch ratio injects variance along a dimension that does not align with the primary A/B axis. Mystery solved.

Now for the part that surprised me the most

Everything above is derived purely from text statistics. I had no reason to expect it would connect to anything visual. But then I found Koen's morphometric study of the Herbal plant illustrations (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), which classifies plants as A-type or B-type based on twelve visual features: stem-root lines, flower morphology, daisy-type flowers, grass elements, root platforms, leaf venation, and so on. This classification was done entirely from the drawings, with no reference to text statistics.

I cross-validated my boolean switch against the morphometric classification on 101 Herbal folios (excluding quire 8). The results:

Boolean switch vs. morphometrics: 96.0% agreement, Cohen's kappa = 0.870, Fisher's exact p = 3.5 x 10^-15.
Currier vs. morphometrics: 78.2% agreement, Cohen's kappa = 0.106.

Read that kappa for Currier again: 0.106. Once you correct for base rates, Currier's section-level labels have almost no predictive power for plant morphology. The boolean switch, derived from a single text ratio, predicts the visual classification of the plant drawings with near-perfect accuracy.

Every Currier discordance is resolved by the switch

Of the 27 folios where my switch disagrees with Currier's label, 18 have morphometric data. In all 18 cases, the plant illustration sides with my switch, not with Currier. The probability of that under the null is 3.8 x 10-6.

These are not marginal cases. Folios like f31r, f34v, f39r, f43r, f46r, and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are all traditionally classified as Currier A because they fall in the f1-f57 range. But their text is E-dominant, and their plant illustrations show B-type features (daisies, grass, root platforms, unidirectional leaves). Conversely, f87r, f90r, f93v, and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are traditionally Currier B, but their text is O-dominant and their plants show A-type features (stem-root lines, A-type flowers and calyxes).

The switch is not just a better statistical classifier. It is detecting the same organizational principle that the illustrator(s) was(were) following.]]>
Some of you may have seen my earlier work confirming the Currier A/B distinction quantitatively. That paper showed the distinction is real, recoverable without labels, and predictive. But it also left a puzzle on the table that I could not explain at the time. I now have an explanation, and it leads somewhere unexpected.

Of the eleven character pairs I tested, one behaved paradoxically. The e/ch pair had essentially zero global correlation with the A/B split, yet it produced the strongest signal of all pairs at folio boundaries. And when included in clustering, it actively destroyed the A/B partition: removing it doubled the clustering accuracy.

How can a pair be simultaneously invisible globally, maximally informative locally, and destructive to classification? That combination is not possible under a simple two-language model. Something more structured is going on.

The answer turns out to be surprisingly clean. If you look at the vowel that follows the digraphs CH and SH across the manuscript, you find that folios split into two sharply separated groups. The gap between these two states is enormous, and a two-state binomial mixture model fits with a 2,549-point AIC improvement over a single state. Of 197 folios, 195 are assigned unambiguously.

This is not the same thing as the Currier A/B split, although it correlates with it. It is sharper, it operates at the individual folio level rather than at section boundaries, and it persists within the Herbal section alone (where the A/B boundary is supposed to be clean).

I call it a boolean switch: a single binary parameter, set once per folio.

Here is where it gets interesting. If the switch were just replacing graphemes uniformly, every word containing those graphemes would respond the same way. They do not.

When you group words into templates, you find three classes:

  1. Fixed O templates: these are locked to O in both switch states. 
  2. Fixed E templates: these are locked to E in both switches states. 
  3. Switchable templates: these respond strongly to the switch.

Template identity accounts for 93.5% of the variance. The folio switch accounts for only 7.9%.

So the system has two components: a template structure that determines which contexts are switchable, and a boolean parameter that modulates the switchable ones. The Currier A/B distinction is a blurred projection of this system, not the system itself.

The e/ch pair is paradoxical because it responds to the boolean switch, but only in switchable template contexts. In clustering, the e/ch ratio injects variance along a dimension that does not align with the primary A/B axis. Mystery solved.

Now for the part that surprised me the most

Everything above is derived purely from text statistics. I had no reason to expect it would connect to anything visual. But then I found Koen's morphometric study of the Herbal plant illustrations (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), which classifies plants as A-type or B-type based on twelve visual features: stem-root lines, flower morphology, daisy-type flowers, grass elements, root platforms, leaf venation, and so on. This classification was done entirely from the drawings, with no reference to text statistics.

I cross-validated my boolean switch against the morphometric classification on 101 Herbal folios (excluding quire 8). The results:

Boolean switch vs. morphometrics: 96.0% agreement, Cohen's kappa = 0.870, Fisher's exact p = 3.5 x 10^-15.
Currier vs. morphometrics: 78.2% agreement, Cohen's kappa = 0.106.

Read that kappa for Currier again: 0.106. Once you correct for base rates, Currier's section-level labels have almost no predictive power for plant morphology. The boolean switch, derived from a single text ratio, predicts the visual classification of the plant drawings with near-perfect accuracy.

Every Currier discordance is resolved by the switch

Of the 27 folios where my switch disagrees with Currier's label, 18 have morphometric data. In all 18 cases, the plant illustration sides with my switch, not with Currier. The probability of that under the null is 3.8 x 10-6.

These are not marginal cases. Folios like f31r, f34v, f39r, f43r, f46r, and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are all traditionally classified as Currier A because they fall in the f1-f57 range. But their text is E-dominant, and their plant illustrations show B-type features (daisies, grass, root platforms, unidirectional leaves). Conversely, f87r, f90r, f93v, and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are traditionally Currier B, but their text is O-dominant and their plants show A-type features (stem-root lines, A-type flowers and calyxes).

The switch is not just a better statistical classifier. It is detecting the same organizational principle that the illustrator(s) was(were) following.]]> <![CDATA[Upcoming lecture and article]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5709.html Mon, 04 May 2026 13:19:22 +0000 LisaFaginDavis]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5709.html Register or Login to view. at Western Michigan University (Kalamazoo, MI), I'll be presenting some of the work Colin and I have done applying Latent Semantic Analytics to the VMS in a virtual session on Thursday at 1:30 PM Eastern: "Resequencing the Voynich Manuscript: Linguistic, Paleographic, and Material Evidence" (Session 96). Abstract: "Combining material evidence with novel linguistic analytics undertaken in collaboration with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and others, this paper will present a radical and potentially game-changing hypothesis about the original structure of the Voynich Manuscript." The session will be recorded for ICMS registrants.

In other news, the first of two articles on this topic by Colin and myself will be published online by Digital Humanities Quarterly later this week. I'll post the link once it's available.]]> Register or Login to view. at Western Michigan University (Kalamazoo, MI), I'll be presenting some of the work Colin and I have done applying Latent Semantic Analytics to the VMS in a virtual session on Thursday at 1:30 PM Eastern: "Resequencing the Voynich Manuscript: Linguistic, Paleographic, and Material Evidence" (Session 96). Abstract: "Combining material evidence with novel linguistic analytics undertaken in collaboration with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and others, this paper will present a radical and potentially game-changing hypothesis about the original structure of the Voynich Manuscript." The session will be recorded for ICMS registrants.

In other news, the first of two articles on this topic by Colin and myself will be published online by Digital Humanities Quarterly later this week. I'll post the link once it's available.]]> <![CDATA[Generative and Predictive Modeling Confirms Currier's A/B Distinction]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5698.html Thu, 30 Apr 2026 07:41:01 +0000 Labyrinthinesecurity]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5698.html
In this new paper (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), companion to the testable signatures paper we recently shared on this forum, we test whether Currier's idea of two distinct "languages" (A and B) in the Voynich manuscript holds up under modern statistical scrutiny. We do this in two complementary ways, using character-pair ratios (like how often 'd' appears versus 'l' on a given page):
  • First, a generative (unsupervised) model looks at the raw character counts with no knowledge of Currier's labels and asks: how many distinct groups does the data itself support? It independently selects two groups and assigns pages in a way that substantially overlaps with Currier's A/B split.
  • Second, and perhaps more importantly, a predictive model tests whether knowing a page's A/B label actually lets you forecast its character statistics on unseen pages. The result: it predicts held-out page labels at 89.2% accuracy in character-pair ratios on text the model has never seen.

The A/B distinction is not just a pattern Currier saw: a model rediscovers it blind, and it survives predictive cross-validation.

The A/B label is the dominant axis of variation, but it only explains about 29% of inter-page variance. There's a lot of structure left to account for!

The dataset and methodology are going to be disclosed in two steps: first to a closed group of specialists, then made generally available later on this year.

I hope you'll enjoy the reading]]>
In this new paper (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), companion to the testable signatures paper we recently shared on this forum, we test whether Currier's idea of two distinct "languages" (A and B) in the Voynich manuscript holds up under modern statistical scrutiny. We do this in two complementary ways, using character-pair ratios (like how often 'd' appears versus 'l' on a given page):
  • First, a generative (unsupervised) model looks at the raw character counts with no knowledge of Currier's labels and asks: how many distinct groups does the data itself support? It independently selects two groups and assigns pages in a way that substantially overlaps with Currier's A/B split.
  • Second, and perhaps more importantly, a predictive model tests whether knowing a page's A/B label actually lets you forecast its character statistics on unseen pages. The result: it predicts held-out page labels at 89.2% accuracy in character-pair ratios on text the model has never seen.

The A/B distinction is not just a pattern Currier saw: a model rediscovers it blind, and it survives predictive cross-validation.

The A/B label is the dominant axis of variation, but it only explains about 29% of inter-page variance. There's a lot of structure left to account for!

The dataset and methodology are going to be disclosed in two steps: first to a closed group of specialists, then made generally available later on this year.

I hope you'll enjoy the reading]]> <![CDATA[Testable signatures on VMS structure]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5665.html Thu, 23 Apr 2026 07:38:25 +0000 Labyrinthinesecurity]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5665.html
This new paper explores and proposes 4 such criteria: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Best regards]]>
This new paper explores and proposes 4 such criteria: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Best regards]]> <![CDATA[Unknown alphabet - exhibition and book]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5621.html Fri, 17 Apr 2026 10:35:39 +0000 sivbugge]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5621.html From today April 17, to June 21, 2026 the Norwegian Drawing Center in Oslo, Norway, is showing my studies of the Voynich manuscript as hand-drawn copies. Most of them fragments at the scale 1:1.

The main work is a version of the large foldout diagram, folio 85v-86r, at the scale 4:1, 180x180 cm. I have measured every detail, and copied the forms as close as possible, but straightening up the lines, the geometry and colouring for a clearer reading. Also done with the equipment I find most useful for studies: Pencil, pen and colour pencils on paper. 

Part of the exhibition is the independent publication Unknown Alphabet. The digital version can be viewed or downloaded for free here: 

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

This publication summarizes my work and suggests a decoding. In Parts 2 and 3 of the publication, there are interpretations of the images and the text in the large foldout diagram. 

This probably touches on previous observations in this forum. I have tried to refer to them as thoroughly as possible, but unfortunately I have not been able to read all the threads in the forum’s history.

Hopefully there are some new contributions or ideas, such as:
  1. An analysis of the graphic and abstract aspects of the large foldout diagram.
  2. A decoding with the logic of a set of single letters that can be combined into ligatures. (An adjustment of my 2022 decoding.) 


My interpretations align with some of the ideas discussed in this forum:

ReneZ and Antonio García Jiménez: The large foldout is about medicine. Healing medicine is connected to the six containers in the middle (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). I see this theme of medicine by comparing the forms in the diagram with Brunschwig’s illustrations, and readings of Rupescissa and Testamentum, in addition to symbols from Medisinisch-chymisch-und alchemistisches Oraculum.
 
Koen G: There are vault-like shapes in three of the intermediary circles, as a metaphor for a celestial influence. I suggest a solution for why some of them are shaped exactly as they are. 

Jorge Stolfi: I see what you call “extensive retouching” in the letters, but I have a different understanding of why there are several layers of strokes in many letters. To me, this is not “retouching” but a construction of ligatures, or combinations of letters—for example, where v and i are combined.




.jpg   SBV_Unknown_Alphabet.jpg (Size: 1.02 MB / Downloads: 431) ]]> From today April 17, to June 21, 2026 the Norwegian Drawing Center in Oslo, Norway, is showing my studies of the Voynich manuscript as hand-drawn copies. Most of them fragments at the scale 1:1.

The main work is a version of the large foldout diagram, folio 85v-86r, at the scale 4:1, 180x180 cm. I have measured every detail, and copied the forms as close as possible, but straightening up the lines, the geometry and colouring for a clearer reading. Also done with the equipment I find most useful for studies: Pencil, pen and colour pencils on paper. 

Part of the exhibition is the independent publication Unknown Alphabet. The digital version can be viewed or downloaded for free here: 

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

This publication summarizes my work and suggests a decoding. In Parts 2 and 3 of the publication, there are interpretations of the images and the text in the large foldout diagram. 

This probably touches on previous observations in this forum. I have tried to refer to them as thoroughly as possible, but unfortunately I have not been able to read all the threads in the forum’s history.

Hopefully there are some new contributions or ideas, such as:
  1. An analysis of the graphic and abstract aspects of the large foldout diagram.
  2. A decoding with the logic of a set of single letters that can be combined into ligatures. (An adjustment of my 2022 decoding.) 


My interpretations align with some of the ideas discussed in this forum:

ReneZ and Antonio García Jiménez: The large foldout is about medicine. Healing medicine is connected to the six containers in the middle (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). I see this theme of medicine by comparing the forms in the diagram with Brunschwig’s illustrations, and readings of Rupescissa and Testamentum, in addition to symbols from Medisinisch-chymisch-und alchemistisches Oraculum.
 
Koen G: There are vault-like shapes in three of the intermediary circles, as a metaphor for a celestial influence. I suggest a solution for why some of them are shaped exactly as they are. 

Jorge Stolfi: I see what you call “extensive retouching” in the letters, but I have a different understanding of why there are several layers of strokes in many letters. To me, this is not “retouching” but a construction of ligatures, or combinations of letters—for example, where v and i are combined.




.jpg   SBV_Unknown_Alphabet.jpg (Size: 1.02 MB / Downloads: 431) ]]> <![CDATA[A new Voynich manuscript conference announcement]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5478.html Wed, 25 Mar 2026 10:46:01 +0000 msomturk@hotmail.com]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5478.html
There’s going to be a presentation on the Voynich Manuscript at Gazi University on March 26th, from 11:00 to 12:30, in the F Block conference hall of the Turkish Language and Literature Department in Ankara. It’s mainly for linguistics professors and students, but anyone who’s around and curious can join. I figured people in this group who might be in Ankara that day would want to know.

Also, a small observation: even though no Old Turkish expert from this group has reviewed the claims yet, the idea that the Voynich Manuscript contains Ottoman‑era Turkish seems to be getting a warm reception in academic linguistic circles in Türkiye. Interesting to see how the conversation is evolving.

Time:
March 26th, 11:00–12:30

Address:
Gazi Egitim Fakultesi,
F Blok Konferans Salonu,
Yeni Mah., Ankara, Türkiye]]>
There’s going to be a presentation on the Voynich Manuscript at Gazi University on March 26th, from 11:00 to 12:30, in the F Block conference hall of the Turkish Language and Literature Department in Ankara. It’s mainly for linguistics professors and students, but anyone who’s around and curious can join. I figured people in this group who might be in Ankara that day would want to know.

Also, a small observation: even though no Old Turkish expert from this group has reviewed the claims yet, the idea that the Voynich Manuscript contains Ottoman‑era Turkish seems to be getting a warm reception in academic linguistic circles in Türkiye. Interesting to see how the conversation is evolving.

Time:
March 26th, 11:00–12:30

Address:
Gazi Egitim Fakultesi,
F Blok Konferans Salonu,
Yeni Mah., Ankara, Türkiye]]> <![CDATA[MARCUS POMETTA Sacerdotis Jesus]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5467.html Sat, 21 Mar 2026 08:03:08 +0000 Fabrizio Salani]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5467.html
Forgive me if this information has already been published.

.jpg   pagg.jpg (Size: 1.79 MB / Downloads: 267) ]]>
Forgive me if this information has already been published.

.jpg   pagg.jpg (Size: 1.79 MB / Downloads: 267) ]]> <![CDATA[Thomas Ernst Handwriting and Paleographic Design in the VM.]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5430.html Sat, 07 Mar 2026 19:37:27 +0000 Torsten]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5430.html Thomas Ernst published his views about the Voynich manuscript:

 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]> Thomas Ernst published his views about the Voynich manuscript:

 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]> <![CDATA[One Hand, Five Labels]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5413.html Mon, 02 Mar 2026 04:08:11 +0000 Torsten]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5413.html One Hand, Five Labels:
A Critical Examination of the Five-Scribe Hypothesis for the Voynich Manuscript

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Torsten Timm

Quote:This paper presents a critical examination of the five-scribe hypothesis proposed for the Voynich Manuscript. The analysis suggests that the supposed distinctions between scribes may instead reflect a continuous development of a single evolving hand. It offers detailed observations on glyph forms, patterns of handwriting variation, and their broader implications for interpreting the manuscript’s text.
]]> One Hand, Five Labels:
A Critical Examination of the Five-Scribe Hypothesis for the Voynich Manuscript

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Torsten Timm

Quote:This paper presents a critical examination of the five-scribe hypothesis proposed for the Voynich Manuscript. The analysis suggests that the supposed distinctions between scribes may instead reflect a continuous development of a single evolving hand. It offers detailed observations on glyph forms, patterns of handwriting variation, and their broader implications for interpreting the manuscript’s text.
]]> <![CDATA[Some conclusions drawn from twelve years of studying the Voynich manuscript.]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5411.html Sat, 28 Feb 2026 20:15:28 +0000 Wladimir D]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5411.html Register or Login to view.
In Russian. Use a translator.]]> Register or Login to view.
In Russian. Use a translator.]]> <![CDATA[The Challenge of Analyzing a Dynamic Text]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5403.html Wed, 25 Feb 2026 04:06:39 +0000 Torsten]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5403.html The Challenge of Analyzing a Dynamic Text: Why the Voynich Manuscript Resists Conventional Interpretation

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has a new paper by Torsten Timm

Here is the abstract:
Quote:The Voynich Manuscript (MS 408, Beinecke Library, Yale University) has resisted all attempts of conventional interpretation for over a century. This paper argues that the persistent failure of cryptographic, linguistic, and statistical approaches stems from a shared foundational assumption: that the manuscript’s text was produced by a static system—whether a fixed cipher, a natural language grammar, or a stable encoding scheme. Analysis of the manuscript’s word network and vocabulary evolution reveals that this assumption is untenable. 
The text exhibits continuous development throughout the manuscript, with vocabulary, character usage, and word frequency distributions shifting gradually from beginning to end. This dynamic character is evidenced by a single, highly connected network of similar words spanning the entire manuscript, a strong correlation between word frequency and number of similar word forms and asymmetric vocabulary distribution indicating directional evolution. These properties are naturally explained by the self-citation hypothesis, which proposes that the text was generated through iterative copying and modification of previously written words—a process confirmed as the intuitive human strategy for producing meaningless text beyond approximately 100 words (Bowern & Lindemann, 2021; Gaskell & Bowern, 2022). The dynamic perspective reconciles apparently contradictory observations and provides a framework for understanding why the manuscript has resisted every analytical approach premised on static rule systems.
]]> The Challenge of Analyzing a Dynamic Text: Why the Voynich Manuscript Resists Conventional Interpretation

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has a new paper by Torsten Timm

Here is the abstract:
Quote:The Voynich Manuscript (MS 408, Beinecke Library, Yale University) has resisted all attempts of conventional interpretation for over a century. This paper argues that the persistent failure of cryptographic, linguistic, and statistical approaches stems from a shared foundational assumption: that the manuscript’s text was produced by a static system—whether a fixed cipher, a natural language grammar, or a stable encoding scheme. Analysis of the manuscript’s word network and vocabulary evolution reveals that this assumption is untenable. 
The text exhibits continuous development throughout the manuscript, with vocabulary, character usage, and word frequency distributions shifting gradually from beginning to end. This dynamic character is evidenced by a single, highly connected network of similar words spanning the entire manuscript, a strong correlation between word frequency and number of similar word forms and asymmetric vocabulary distribution indicating directional evolution. These properties are naturally explained by the self-citation hypothesis, which proposes that the text was generated through iterative copying and modification of previously written words—a process confirmed as the intuitive human strategy for producing meaningless text beyond approximately 100 words (Bowern & Lindemann, 2021; Gaskell & Bowern, 2022). The dynamic perspective reconciles apparently contradictory observations and provides a framework for understanding why the manuscript has resisted every analytical approach premised on static rule systems.
]]> <![CDATA[News from Turkish Cultural Research Institute]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5401.html Tue, 24 Feb 2026 05:16:27 +0000 msomturk@hotmail.com]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5401.html
You may already be aware of it. An academic scientific board affiliated with the Turkish Cultural Research Institute, specializing in Old Turkish and Ottoman Turkish, has concluded that the Voynich Manuscript is written in Turkish. Their third article on the topic was published after being peer‑reviewed by two referees. Since the scientific evidence was presented in peer‑reviewed publications, no Old Turkic specialists have raised any objections to the findings. And since the first peer‑reviewed paper in 2023, no counter‑study has been produced to challenge or refute the results. The chair of this publication, Ahmet Bican Ercilasun, is the former president of the Turkish Language Association (TDK) and a professor at both Hacettepe University and Gazi University. Please see the published paper at the link. 

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Anyone can access or communicate with the institute through  (turkkulturu.org.tr)

Cheers!]]>
You may already be aware of it. An academic scientific board affiliated with the Turkish Cultural Research Institute, specializing in Old Turkish and Ottoman Turkish, has concluded that the Voynich Manuscript is written in Turkish. Their third article on the topic was published after being peer‑reviewed by two referees. Since the scientific evidence was presented in peer‑reviewed publications, no Old Turkic specialists have raised any objections to the findings. And since the first peer‑reviewed paper in 2023, no counter‑study has been produced to challenge or refute the results. The chair of this publication, Ahmet Bican Ercilasun, is the former president of the Turkish Language Association (TDK) and a professor at both Hacettepe University and Gazi University. Please see the published paper at the link. 

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Anyone can access or communicate with the institute through  (turkkulturu.org.tr)

Cheers!]]>