<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[The Voynich Ninja - Physical material]]></title>
		<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The Voynich Ninja - https://www.voynich.ninja]]></description>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 12:01:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>MyBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[The VMS ink is NOT iron-gall]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5667.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 14:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=2733">Jorge_Stolfi</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5667.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The McCrone report stated on page 3 "In all probability", the inks used for text and drawing were iron gall inks."  <br />
<br />
But that is not correct.  The instruments described in the report cannot <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">positively</span> identify iron-gall ink (IGI).  The X-ray diffraction spectrum can identify particles of <span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">crystalline</span> mineral pigments, like azurite, minium, hematite.  For substances that are not crystalline -- which is the case of IGI -- they can only tell which chemical <span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">elements</span> they contain, but not the substances -- how those elements are combined. <br />
<br />
Those instruments only determined that the ink contains iron.  It was natural to conclude that it was IGI, because 99.99% of the iron-containing dark ink on vellum documents and manuscripts is IGI, and it does not make sense to write on vellum with any other black ink.  People would use vellum when they wanted the document or book to last for centuries, and resist rubbing, humidity, spills; and to make the text relatively tamper-proof. Only IGI would achieve that goal.<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><br />
But, unfortunately, the VMS is not a "99.99% manuscript".  It is a "0.01%" one.  And that has led too many experts astray...</span></span><br />
<br />
In particular the VMS text ink is definitely <span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">not</span> IGI. <br />
<br />
For one thing, unlike IGI, the VMS ink will come off easily and completely with water.  That is clearly visible on the ultraviolet images of f116v, or inside the "ketchup" stain of f103r.  In fact it seems to come off even just by rubbing.  <br />
<br />
But the real evidence is how it looks under infrared.  According to You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view.:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;" class="mycode_align"><blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>According to recent reflectance measurements, iron gall inks absorb IR radiation up to 1200 nm [23] (p. 58) (Additional file 1: Suppl 2),Footnote3 while ochre already become transparent at 850 nm [25] (p. 16). An iron gall ink underdrawing could be thus determined, if the underdrawing lines absorb radiation up to 1200 nm and become invisible in higher wavelengths</blockquote></div>
<br />
And here are clips from the infrared images of You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. under light of various wavelengths:<br />
<br />
650 nm (red):<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">
<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=15280" target="_blank" title="">f17r-MB625RD_006_F-C4.jpg</a> (Size: 296.9 KB / Downloads: 239)
</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">700 nm (infrared):</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">
<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=15279" target="_blank" title="">f17r-MB700IR_008_F-C4.jpg</a> (Size: 266.69 KB / Downloads: 238)
 </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">940 nm (infrared):</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">
<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=15278" target="_blank" title="">f17r-MB940IR_012_F-C4.jpg</a> (Size: 224.18 KB / Downloads: 236)
</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">Thus the text ink on that page becomes transparent and invisible between 700 and 940 nm.  It is not IGI, but probably some iron-containing brown mineral pigment like sienna.  </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">The report itself admits that the quire numbers (Sample 19) did not show significant iron contents.   Which is not strange: quire numbers, unlike the folio numbers, were only temporary instructions to the bookbinder; and thus were probably made with some other ink, like lampblack (india) ink -- with is much easier to make than IGI, lasts indefinitely in a closed bottle, and is better than IGI for writing on paper.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">Another common mis-interpretation of that report is the claim that they determined that all inks and pigments were original from the 1400s. </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">First, as the report admits, they failed to identify many of the pigments, including the text ink and the green paint that is used on the leaves of most of the plants. (They only determined that it contained copper but was not crystalline, and guessed that it could be some unidentified organic salt of copper.)  And they mis-identified others, like a red pigment as "palmierite" (which is an extremely rare colorless mineral, found only around fumaroles in volcanic areas.)</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">And, for those paints that they <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">did</span> identify, they did <span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">not</span> </span></span><span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">not determine any dates.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">All they found is that the pigments that they did identify, like azurite (but not that "palmierite") were available and used in the 1400s.  That is, none of the pigments <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">that they could identify</span> was a synthetic pigment that became available only after 1700 (like the titanium white that debunked the Vinland Map).  </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">But all those pigments that they did identify are still available today, and would have been used by a painter or forger at any time before 1911...</span></span><br />
<br />
All the best, --stolfi]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[The McCrone report stated on page 3 "In all probability", the inks used for text and drawing were iron gall inks."  <br />
<br />
But that is not correct.  The instruments described in the report cannot <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">positively</span> identify iron-gall ink (IGI).  The X-ray diffraction spectrum can identify particles of <span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">crystalline</span> mineral pigments, like azurite, minium, hematite.  For substances that are not crystalline -- which is the case of IGI -- they can only tell which chemical <span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">elements</span> they contain, but not the substances -- how those elements are combined. <br />
<br />
Those instruments only determined that the ink contains iron.  It was natural to conclude that it was IGI, because 99.99% of the iron-containing dark ink on vellum documents and manuscripts is IGI, and it does not make sense to write on vellum with any other black ink.  People would use vellum when they wanted the document or book to last for centuries, and resist rubbing, humidity, spills; and to make the text relatively tamper-proof. Only IGI would achieve that goal.<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><br />
But, unfortunately, the VMS is not a "99.99% manuscript".  It is a "0.01%" one.  And that has led too many experts astray...</span></span><br />
<br />
In particular the VMS text ink is definitely <span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">not</span> IGI. <br />
<br />
For one thing, unlike IGI, the VMS ink will come off easily and completely with water.  That is clearly visible on the ultraviolet images of f116v, or inside the "ketchup" stain of f103r.  In fact it seems to come off even just by rubbing.  <br />
<br />
But the real evidence is how it looks under infrared.  According to You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view.:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;" class="mycode_align"><blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>According to recent reflectance measurements, iron gall inks absorb IR radiation up to 1200 nm [23] (p. 58) (Additional file 1: Suppl 2),Footnote3 while ochre already become transparent at 850 nm [25] (p. 16). An iron gall ink underdrawing could be thus determined, if the underdrawing lines absorb radiation up to 1200 nm and become invisible in higher wavelengths</blockquote></div>
<br />
And here are clips from the infrared images of You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. under light of various wavelengths:<br />
<br />
650 nm (red):<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">
<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=15280" target="_blank" title="">f17r-MB625RD_006_F-C4.jpg</a> (Size: 296.9 KB / Downloads: 239)
</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">700 nm (infrared):</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">
<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=15279" target="_blank" title="">f17r-MB700IR_008_F-C4.jpg</a> (Size: 266.69 KB / Downloads: 238)
 </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">940 nm (infrared):</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">
<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=15278" target="_blank" title="">f17r-MB940IR_012_F-C4.jpg</a> (Size: 224.18 KB / Downloads: 236)
</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">Thus the text ink on that page becomes transparent and invisible between 700 and 940 nm.  It is not IGI, but probably some iron-containing brown mineral pigment like sienna.  </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">The report itself admits that the quire numbers (Sample 19) did not show significant iron contents.   Which is not strange: quire numbers, unlike the folio numbers, were only temporary instructions to the bookbinder; and thus were probably made with some other ink, like lampblack (india) ink -- with is much easier to make than IGI, lasts indefinitely in a closed bottle, and is better than IGI for writing on paper.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">Another common mis-interpretation of that report is the claim that they determined that all inks and pigments were original from the 1400s. </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">First, as the report admits, they failed to identify many of the pigments, including the text ink and the green paint that is used on the leaves of most of the plants. (They only determined that it contained copper but was not crystalline, and guessed that it could be some unidentified organic salt of copper.)  And they mis-identified others, like a red pigment as "palmierite" (which is an extremely rare colorless mineral, found only around fumaroles in volcanic areas.)</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">And, for those paints that they <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">did</span> identify, they did <span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">not</span> </span></span><span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">not determine any dates.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">All they found is that the pigments that they did identify, like azurite (but not that "palmierite") were available and used in the 1400s.  That is, none of the pigments <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">that they could identify</span> was a synthetic pigment that became available only after 1700 (like the titanium white that debunked the Vinland Map).  </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">But all those pigments that they did identify are still available today, and would have been used by a painter or forger at any time before 1911...</span></span><br />
<br />
All the best, --stolfi]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[100 sheets of stolen vellum]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5620.html</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 06:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=3105">JustAnotherTheory</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5620.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[I had this thought experiment lately. Assuming that the VMS was not written in a scriptorium (i.e., not in an "official" place filled with dozens of professional scribes where one could easily notice that someone is writing a hundreds of pages of secret text in broad daylight), we could assume that it was written in a more secluded place, outside the scope of prying eyes. <br />
<br />
One way to do so could be to take the vellum from a scriptorium using theft, and then write the MS in a "safe place". After all, iron gall ink was not difficult to make "at home", so all that was needed for writing the manuscript DYI-style was a lot of vellum.<br />
<br />
So I wonder, how easy would it be to steal 100 sheets of vellum from a scriptorium, and whether such a theft would go unnoticed (are 100 sheets "a lot" or "a little" in the scope of a professional workshop)? Would such a theft be recorded in the inventory of a scriptorium?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I had this thought experiment lately. Assuming that the VMS was not written in a scriptorium (i.e., not in an "official" place filled with dozens of professional scribes where one could easily notice that someone is writing a hundreds of pages of secret text in broad daylight), we could assume that it was written in a more secluded place, outside the scope of prying eyes. <br />
<br />
One way to do so could be to take the vellum from a scriptorium using theft, and then write the MS in a "safe place". After all, iron gall ink was not difficult to make "at home", so all that was needed for writing the manuscript DYI-style was a lot of vellum.<br />
<br />
So I wonder, how easy would it be to steal 100 sheets of vellum from a scriptorium, and whether such a theft would go unnoticed (are 100 sheets "a lot" or "a little" in the scope of a professional workshop)? Would such a theft be recorded in the inventory of a scriptorium?]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Trying to identify the ink binder...]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5451.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 15 Mar 2026 10:41:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=896">kckluge</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5451.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[So we knew from the original report and Joseph Barabe's Zoom talk the the ink binder isn't gum arabic<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14625" target="_blank" title="">JBarabeZoomTalk_InkVsGumArabic.png</a> (Size: 67.44 KB / Downloads: 143)
<br />
<br />
Beyond saying, "Infrared spectroscopy identified the binding medium of the writing and drawing inks as a gum; see the reference spectrum for gum Arabic (Figure 1D). The spectra include several sharp peaks in the region 1100-1000 cm-1 that are not expected for a gum as per the spectra in our library. This suggests the possibility of other constituents, which remain unidentified as of this date. Most recipes for iron gall inks include gum, usually gum Arabic, as an ingredient." the report doesn't attempt to further identify which gum was used. <br />
<br />
A number of sources including the physical findings essay in the Yale facsimile volume identify cherry gum as a substitute used for gum arabic in iron gall inks. Comparing the cherry gum FTIR spectum from You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. with the spectrum from Sample 16 (drawing black ink) in the McCrone report, my (openly admittedly untrained) impression is that it looks like a credible candidate:<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14642" target="_blank" title="">FTIR_TextInkSample16VsCherryGum.jpg</a> (Size: 90.69 KB / Downloads: 140)
<br />
<br />
Anyone interested in crowdsourcing trying to identify other candidates?<br />
<br />
You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. may be of some help in narrowing down candidates.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[So we knew from the original report and Joseph Barabe's Zoom talk the the ink binder isn't gum arabic<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14625" target="_blank" title="">JBarabeZoomTalk_InkVsGumArabic.png</a> (Size: 67.44 KB / Downloads: 143)
<br />
<br />
Beyond saying, "Infrared spectroscopy identified the binding medium of the writing and drawing inks as a gum; see the reference spectrum for gum Arabic (Figure 1D). The spectra include several sharp peaks in the region 1100-1000 cm-1 that are not expected for a gum as per the spectra in our library. This suggests the possibility of other constituents, which remain unidentified as of this date. Most recipes for iron gall inks include gum, usually gum Arabic, as an ingredient." the report doesn't attempt to further identify which gum was used. <br />
<br />
A number of sources including the physical findings essay in the Yale facsimile volume identify cherry gum as a substitute used for gum arabic in iron gall inks. Comparing the cherry gum FTIR spectum from You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. with the spectrum from Sample 16 (drawing black ink) in the McCrone report, my (openly admittedly untrained) impression is that it looks like a credible candidate:<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14642" target="_blank" title="">FTIR_TextInkSample16VsCherryGum.jpg</a> (Size: 90.69 KB / Downloads: 140)
<br />
<br />
Anyone interested in crowdsourcing trying to identify other candidates?<br />
<br />
You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. may be of some help in narrowing down candidates.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Bleedthrough/marks on f96v]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5354.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2026 10:10:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=2381">eggyk</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5354.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Hello all,<br />
<br />
I've been going through pages and doing some image processing on them to check if there's any unusual bleedthrough of ink/paint anywhere. <br />
 You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. / You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. are obviously an interesting pair of pages, given the missing pages between them. I decided to check the bleedthrough and compare to f96r (the back of f96v) to see any differences. <br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14063" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110757296.png</a> (Size: 563.61 KB / Downloads: 139)

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14064" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110813868.png</a> (Size: 524.4 KB / Downloads: 141)
<br />
<br />
So far so good, the text, leaves, roots and flower all match as expected. There are, however, marks that do not align with f96r. These marks are visible on f96v, but are not from You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. and have not bled through to f96r. Here are a couple:<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14065" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110831907.png</a> (Size: 420.02 KB / Downloads: 142)

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14066" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110844073.png</a> (Size: 181.79 KB / Downloads: 142)
<br />
<br />
Due to this, I checked whether the marks lined up with f99r, to see whether the paint has marked the page. I think some of these may match, but i'm not sure. The containers are the best evidence of this I think; the areas with less marking seeming to roughly correspond to the unpainted areas of the containers. Two of the leaves and the small green berries somewhat line up with some other marks as well.<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14067" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110900463.png</a> (Size: 780.44 KB / Downloads: 143)
<br />
<br />
Firstly, I need people to tell me whether this is pareidolia   <img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/smilies/tongue.png" alt="Tongue" title="Tongue" class="smilie smilie_5" /><br />
<br />
If this does match, does it have any implications for the the timing of the removal of f97-98?<br />
<br />
Additionally, could it be possible -through theoretical MSI passes in the future or further work- to seperate which marks are bleedthrough, which are from f99r, which are from water damage or spillage, and potential remainders of marks from the missing page?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Hello all,<br />
<br />
I've been going through pages and doing some image processing on them to check if there's any unusual bleedthrough of ink/paint anywhere. <br />
 You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. / You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. are obviously an interesting pair of pages, given the missing pages between them. I decided to check the bleedthrough and compare to f96r (the back of f96v) to see any differences. <br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14063" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110757296.png</a> (Size: 563.61 KB / Downloads: 139)

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14064" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110813868.png</a> (Size: 524.4 KB / Downloads: 141)
<br />
<br />
So far so good, the text, leaves, roots and flower all match as expected. There are, however, marks that do not align with f96r. These marks are visible on f96v, but are not from You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. and have not bled through to f96r. Here are a couple:<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14065" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110831907.png</a> (Size: 420.02 KB / Downloads: 142)

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14066" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110844073.png</a> (Size: 181.79 KB / Downloads: 142)
<br />
<br />
Due to this, I checked whether the marks lined up with f99r, to see whether the paint has marked the page. I think some of these may match, but i'm not sure. The containers are the best evidence of this I think; the areas with less marking seeming to roughly correspond to the unpainted areas of the containers. Two of the leaves and the small green berries somewhat line up with some other marks as well.<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=14067" target="_blank" title="">image_2026-02-12_110900463.png</a> (Size: 780.44 KB / Downloads: 143)
<br />
<br />
Firstly, I need people to tell me whether this is pareidolia   <img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/smilies/tongue.png" alt="Tongue" title="Tongue" class="smilie smilie_5" /><br />
<br />
If this does match, does it have any implications for the the timing of the removal of f97-98?<br />
<br />
Additionally, could it be possible -through theoretical MSI passes in the future or further work- to seperate which marks are bleedthrough, which are from f99r, which are from water damage or spillage, and potential remainders of marks from the missing page?]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Was VM cut at the bottom?]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5330.html</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2026 11:40:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=1821">Rafal</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5330.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[It feels like Voynich Manuscript pages were once a bit higher and at some moment were trimmed at the bottom:<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=13896" target="_blank" title="">x.png</a> (Size: 181.19 KB / Downloads: 183)
<br />
<br />
It seems to me that it is not a single page case but it rather occured on many (if not all) pages.<br />
<br />
There is probably some old discussion about it  <img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/smilies/wink.png" alt="Wink" title="Wink" class="smilie smilie_2" /> but I am curious to hear current views.<br />
<br />
- do you agree that it was trimmed at the bottom?<br />
- when could it happen?<br />
- why was it done?<br />
<br />
For me it seems that:<br />
- it was cut before binding as quire numbers aren't cut and are aligned to the new bottom<br />
- it was done in a very rough way, the edges are "wavy" and irregular like it was done by some drunken butcher in one swift move of his butcher knife  <img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/smilies/wink.png" alt="Wink" title="Wink" class="smilie smilie_2" /><br />
- I have no idea why it was done<br />
- I also don't know if such things were commonly done to other manuscripts<br />
<br />
Any opinions?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[It feels like Voynich Manuscript pages were once a bit higher and at some moment were trimmed at the bottom:<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=13896" target="_blank" title="">x.png</a> (Size: 181.19 KB / Downloads: 183)
<br />
<br />
It seems to me that it is not a single page case but it rather occured on many (if not all) pages.<br />
<br />
There is probably some old discussion about it  <img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/smilies/wink.png" alt="Wink" title="Wink" class="smilie smilie_2" /> but I am curious to hear current views.<br />
<br />
- do you agree that it was trimmed at the bottom?<br />
- when could it happen?<br />
- why was it done?<br />
<br />
For me it seems that:<br />
- it was cut before binding as quire numbers aren't cut and are aligned to the new bottom<br />
- it was done in a very rough way, the edges are "wavy" and irregular like it was done by some drunken butcher in one swift move of his butcher knife  <img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/smilies/wink.png" alt="Wink" title="Wink" class="smilie smilie_2" /><br />
- I have no idea why it was done<br />
- I also don't know if such things were commonly done to other manuscripts<br />
<br />
Any opinions?]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ORIGINAL stains on the vellum]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5277.html</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2026 18:51:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=2733">Jorge_Stolfi</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5277.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[While re-transcribing You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. (Bio) I noticed this detail:<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=13562" target="_blank" title="">f77v-stain-lines-37-38.jpg</a> (Size: 31.29 KB / Downloads: 141)
<br />
It would seem that the Scribe squeezed the word <span style="font-family: Eva;" class="mycode_font">Cheey</span> upwards in order to avoid the orangeish stain below it.<br />
<br />
If so, it shows that <span style="text-decoration: line-through;" class="mycode_s">all cows in Scotland are black</span> some of the stains were on the vellum before the Scribe did his job.   Which would be another reason for the VMS vellum to be second-grade, if not a "factory reject".<br />
<br />
All the best, --stolfi]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[While re-transcribing You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. (Bio) I noticed this detail:<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=13562" target="_blank" title="">f77v-stain-lines-37-38.jpg</a> (Size: 31.29 KB / Downloads: 141)
<br />
It would seem that the Scribe squeezed the word <span style="font-family: Eva;" class="mycode_font">Cheey</span> upwards in order to avoid the orangeish stain below it.<br />
<br />
If so, it shows that <span style="text-decoration: line-through;" class="mycode_s">all cows in Scotland are black</span> some of the stains were on the vellum before the Scribe did his job.   Which would be another reason for the VMS vellum to be second-grade, if not a "factory reject".<br />
<br />
All the best, --stolfi]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Question about Binding]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5194.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2025 17:19:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=3225">ben._corley</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5194.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Hello! I recently watch Lisa's lecture at the University of Toronto, available here (You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view.). She presented some evidence that the MS was originally meant to to be a collection of singlians, kinda like a pamphlet today if I understand correctly, instead of bound as a book. She explained it much clearer and accurate than I have here, so I recommend you watch.<br />
<br />
This prompted a question for me: was the intention to have the MS bound despite its singlian nature? This, of course, prompts several follow-up questions. <br />
1) Would a 15th century scribe be aware/knowledgable about binding practices?<br />
2) Would a typical MS be bound before being authored or authored then bound?<br />
3) What does the handwriting/paleography of the script suggest about the authors' experience and knowledge of writing?<br />
4) If the authors were not experienced, could they have written the MS as singlians still intending for them to be bound?<br />
<br />
I do not have any answers for these, just some questions I was left with after watching. I would love to hear what you guys have to think about this!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Hello! I recently watch Lisa's lecture at the University of Toronto, available here (You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view.). She presented some evidence that the MS was originally meant to to be a collection of singlians, kinda like a pamphlet today if I understand correctly, instead of bound as a book. She explained it much clearer and accurate than I have here, so I recommend you watch.<br />
<br />
This prompted a question for me: was the intention to have the MS bound despite its singlian nature? This, of course, prompts several follow-up questions. <br />
1) Would a 15th century scribe be aware/knowledgable about binding practices?<br />
2) Would a typical MS be bound before being authored or authored then bound?<br />
3) What does the handwriting/paleography of the script suggest about the authors' experience and knowledge of writing?<br />
4) If the authors were not experienced, could they have written the MS as singlians still intending for them to be bound?<br />
<br />
I do not have any answers for these, just some questions I was left with after watching. I would love to hear what you guys have to think about this!]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Statistical Codicology]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5168.html</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2025 07:52:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=3212">DG97EEB</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5168.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi All,<br />
<br />
I watched LFD's video on quire reordering. Has anyone run any statistical analysis to see if it can be inferred from content alone? For example do certain folios contain more similar vocabulary than others? I think I remember reading somewhere that folios 42, 49, and 56 all share a lot of vocabulary with each other (way more than typical herbal folios do), suggesting they came from the same production batch, even though they're now in different quires.<br />
<br />
Thanks]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Hi All,<br />
<br />
I watched LFD's video on quire reordering. Has anyone run any statistical analysis to see if it can be inferred from content alone? For example do certain folios contain more similar vocabulary than others? I think I remember reading somewhere that folios 42, 49, and 56 all share a lot of vocabulary with each other (way more than typical herbal folios do), suggesting they came from the same production batch, even though they're now in different quires.<br />
<br />
Thanks]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Quire 13. Text first. Pictures after.]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5134.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2025 13:31:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=2049">dashstofsk</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5134.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Has it ever been discussed that in quire 13 it seems that the pictures might have been done after the text had been written? The writer left spaces for the drawings to be added later? And all the tubes, ponds and flower pot things were then sized to fit the available space? Here is some evidence.<br />
<br />
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f79r and f79v. The text margin is straight and does not flow around the contours of the pictures.<br />
</li>
</ul>
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f81r. Space had been left on the right of the page for drawings that were never made. There wasn't enough space at the top to fully draw the bath tub thing that was intended. The bath tub at the bottom has also not been completed. Perhaps the writer just got annoyed with himself and abandoned this page.<br />
</li>
</ul>
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f84v. The text on the right does not align with the bulk of the text. If text came last then it would have aligned. So it looks like that text was added after the drawings were done, and these drawings after the main text was done.<br />
</li>
</ul>
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f75r. If drawings came first then it is unlikely the first drawing would have been done slanty.<br />
</li>
</ul>
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f82v and other pages. The drawings on the right hand sides were done cramped. Had they been done first they would have commanded more space and the writing would have stopped short.<br />
</li>
</ul>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Has it ever been discussed that in quire 13 it seems that the pictures might have been done after the text had been written? The writer left spaces for the drawings to be added later? And all the tubes, ponds and flower pot things were then sized to fit the available space? Here is some evidence.<br />
<br />
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f79r and f79v. The text margin is straight and does not flow around the contours of the pictures.<br />
</li>
</ul>
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f81r. Space had been left on the right of the page for drawings that were never made. There wasn't enough space at the top to fully draw the bath tub thing that was intended. The bath tub at the bottom has also not been completed. Perhaps the writer just got annoyed with himself and abandoned this page.<br />
</li>
</ul>
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f84v. The text on the right does not align with the bulk of the text. If text came last then it would have aligned. So it looks like that text was added after the drawings were done, and these drawings after the main text was done.<br />
</li>
</ul>
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f75r. If drawings came first then it is unlikely the first drawing would have been done slanty.<br />
</li>
</ul>
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>f82v and other pages. The drawings on the right hand sides were done cramped. Had they been done first they would have commanded more space and the writing would have stopped short.<br />
</li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[About the binding(s?) and missing folios]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5122.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2025 15:48:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=3125">Cuagga</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5122.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Hello Voynich ninja, <br />
<br />
Reading Rene Zandbergen's blog, a few things jumped to my mind. In You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view., he retraces the most probable evolution of the manuscript in these terms :<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>The points that have been presented in relation to the order of production of the MS may now be summarised. <br />
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>The MS was produced in a bifolio-per-bifolio manner, with the drawing outlines inked first, followed by the inking of the text; <br />
</li>
<li>The quire numbers were added before the folio numbers; <br />
</li>
<li>The page order has been disturbed, and this happened before both sets of numbers were added; <br />
</li>
<li>The painting was done before the present binding; <br />
</li>
<li>The quire and folio numbers were added before the present binding; <br />
</li>
<li>Some of the painting appears to have been done after the folio numbers were added; <br />
</li>
<li>Twelve of the fourteen missing folios were lost after the folio numbers were added, but before the present binding. <br />
</li>
</ul>
<br />
This leads to the following tentative reconstruction: <ul class="mycode_list"><li>All bifolios of the MS were prepared: the drawing outlines and the text were added in ink; <br />
</li>
<li>Sometime after this, the planned order of the bifolios was disturbed. The bifolios were stacked anew in an incorrect order (implying that the person who did this was not the original author) but the set was still complete. (The interesting task of identifying the original page order has not been completed, and has mainly been driven by Nick Pelling); <br />
</li>
<li>The quires were numbered first, the MS may have been bound, and the folios were numbered after that. (This initial binding is not necessary but would explain the inconsistency of the quire and folio numbers of quire 9); <br />
</li>
<li>At this point, the book had all folios including the now missing ones, and was not painted, or only partially painted. Folio 42 would not have been painted yet; <br />
</li>
<li>The MS was disassembled and painted (or the partial painting completed). Six bifolios were lost or removed at this point; <br />
</li>
<li>Shortly after the painting, the MS was rebound in the same order, but with the six bifolios missing. Folios 12 and 74 would have still been there. Especially the blue paint transferred on opposite pages; <br />
</li>
<li>Folios 12 and 74 were cut out sometime later<br />
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
We know that the quire numbers were added before the folio numbers, and that this indicates the presence of a first binding, or at least that the manuscript was prepared for binding (the same page mentions earlier that the marks on q9 only show a preparation for binding but no trace of finishing it at this point). <br />
<br />
Is there ANY reason that this first preparation for binding might prepare quires consisting of only one bifolio, and that it woud put those single-bifolio quires at any other point than the edges of the finished product ? If there is not, it indicates that q16 and q18 were composed of 4 bifoliae each, like most of the others, but that 3 of those had disappeared by the time the folio numbers were added (Looking further, I suppose it is likely that those pages were foldouts, like q14 through q19 have in abundance, but this doesn't prevent the existence of more missing unnumbered bifoliae)<br />
<br />
Then, for which reason would the first preparator prepare uneven quires (I can see two of them, but none can apply to q8 : either a clear semantic/stylistic link, which explains q20 but q8's remaining bifoliae aren't clearly semantically tied, or the physical unwieldyness of long quires with foldouts, which explains q14 through 19 but can't explain LONGER than usual quires) ? q8 is longer than all other quires (except q20, with its very different text layout than the rest), and as long as q13, which is stylistically coherent, but f57, 58, 65 and 66 are quite different to each other, and they aren't even consistent recto to verso (f57r and You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. can be in the same section, but they are clearly different from the pair f57v-f66r). Currier finds both Language A and Language B in this quire, and the images look to belong in different sections, which indicates one of the following :<br />
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>There is a hidden semantic connection justifying to join together bifoliae like that, and the quirer understood the language (very unlikely, as Lisa Fagin Davis' work tends to suggest that quiring itself was a misunderstanding of the book, which should have stayed as a collection of loose leaves, or should have been quired as a thick pile of singulions)<br />
</li>
<li>The missing bifoliae contain drawings and text bridging the gap (possible, but unhelpful)<br />
</li>
<li>Q8 was from the start a patchwork quire, gathering everything that doesn't fit (this indicates that q16 and q18 were bigger than a sigular bifolio without foldouts each, as else they could have been joined into q8 and the resulting quire would still not have been thicker than q20, which by its existence, shows that quires this big are practical ; it doesn't explain, though, why it would have been numbered this low, rather than being put at the end)<br />
</li>
<li>All quires were initially this big and we shouldn't read into 8's length (not really realistic, as it means 7 bifoliae are missing, one in each of the first 7 quires; the most probable outcome would have been to have unequal quires at the start)<br />
</li>
</ul>
<br />
The most probable outcome, for me and for now, is the proposition 3 : q16 and q18 were longer than one standard bifolio each, but all the unnumbered ones were lost between quiring and foliating. I still don't have a good idea of why the quirer would create distinct-length quires in the middle of the book rather than counting the extra leaves at the end of the quiring process, but that might be tied to the process itself, in which case I'd love an idea]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Hello Voynich ninja, <br />
<br />
Reading Rene Zandbergen's blog, a few things jumped to my mind. In You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view., he retraces the most probable evolution of the manuscript in these terms :<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>The points that have been presented in relation to the order of production of the MS may now be summarised. <br />
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>The MS was produced in a bifolio-per-bifolio manner, with the drawing outlines inked first, followed by the inking of the text; <br />
</li>
<li>The quire numbers were added before the folio numbers; <br />
</li>
<li>The page order has been disturbed, and this happened before both sets of numbers were added; <br />
</li>
<li>The painting was done before the present binding; <br />
</li>
<li>The quire and folio numbers were added before the present binding; <br />
</li>
<li>Some of the painting appears to have been done after the folio numbers were added; <br />
</li>
<li>Twelve of the fourteen missing folios were lost after the folio numbers were added, but before the present binding. <br />
</li>
</ul>
<br />
This leads to the following tentative reconstruction: <ul class="mycode_list"><li>All bifolios of the MS were prepared: the drawing outlines and the text were added in ink; <br />
</li>
<li>Sometime after this, the planned order of the bifolios was disturbed. The bifolios were stacked anew in an incorrect order (implying that the person who did this was not the original author) but the set was still complete. (The interesting task of identifying the original page order has not been completed, and has mainly been driven by Nick Pelling); <br />
</li>
<li>The quires were numbered first, the MS may have been bound, and the folios were numbered after that. (This initial binding is not necessary but would explain the inconsistency of the quire and folio numbers of quire 9); <br />
</li>
<li>At this point, the book had all folios including the now missing ones, and was not painted, or only partially painted. Folio 42 would not have been painted yet; <br />
</li>
<li>The MS was disassembled and painted (or the partial painting completed). Six bifolios were lost or removed at this point; <br />
</li>
<li>Shortly after the painting, the MS was rebound in the same order, but with the six bifolios missing. Folios 12 and 74 would have still been there. Especially the blue paint transferred on opposite pages; <br />
</li>
<li>Folios 12 and 74 were cut out sometime later<br />
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
We know that the quire numbers were added before the folio numbers, and that this indicates the presence of a first binding, or at least that the manuscript was prepared for binding (the same page mentions earlier that the marks on q9 only show a preparation for binding but no trace of finishing it at this point). <br />
<br />
Is there ANY reason that this first preparation for binding might prepare quires consisting of only one bifolio, and that it woud put those single-bifolio quires at any other point than the edges of the finished product ? If there is not, it indicates that q16 and q18 were composed of 4 bifoliae each, like most of the others, but that 3 of those had disappeared by the time the folio numbers were added (Looking further, I suppose it is likely that those pages were foldouts, like q14 through q19 have in abundance, but this doesn't prevent the existence of more missing unnumbered bifoliae)<br />
<br />
Then, for which reason would the first preparator prepare uneven quires (I can see two of them, but none can apply to q8 : either a clear semantic/stylistic link, which explains q20 but q8's remaining bifoliae aren't clearly semantically tied, or the physical unwieldyness of long quires with foldouts, which explains q14 through 19 but can't explain LONGER than usual quires) ? q8 is longer than all other quires (except q20, with its very different text layout than the rest), and as long as q13, which is stylistically coherent, but f57, 58, 65 and 66 are quite different to each other, and they aren't even consistent recto to verso (f57r and You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. can be in the same section, but they are clearly different from the pair f57v-f66r). Currier finds both Language A and Language B in this quire, and the images look to belong in different sections, which indicates one of the following :<br />
<ul class="mycode_list"><li>There is a hidden semantic connection justifying to join together bifoliae like that, and the quirer understood the language (very unlikely, as Lisa Fagin Davis' work tends to suggest that quiring itself was a misunderstanding of the book, which should have stayed as a collection of loose leaves, or should have been quired as a thick pile of singulions)<br />
</li>
<li>The missing bifoliae contain drawings and text bridging the gap (possible, but unhelpful)<br />
</li>
<li>Q8 was from the start a patchwork quire, gathering everything that doesn't fit (this indicates that q16 and q18 were bigger than a sigular bifolio without foldouts each, as else they could have been joined into q8 and the resulting quire would still not have been thicker than q20, which by its existence, shows that quires this big are practical ; it doesn't explain, though, why it would have been numbered this low, rather than being put at the end)<br />
</li>
<li>All quires were initially this big and we shouldn't read into 8's length (not really realistic, as it means 7 bifoliae are missing, one in each of the first 7 quires; the most probable outcome would have been to have unequal quires at the start)<br />
</li>
</ul>
<br />
The most probable outcome, for me and for now, is the proposition 3 : q16 and q18 were longer than one standard bifolio each, but all the unnumbered ones were lost between quiring and foliating. I still don't have a good idea of why the quirer would create distinct-length quires in the middle of the book rather than counting the extra leaves at the end of the quiring process, but that might be tied to the process itself, in which case I'd love an idea]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Teachings of the Unwashed Paintbrush.]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5113.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 07 Dec 2025 13:58:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=68">Koen G</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5113.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[There's a lot of uncertainty about the paint in the manuscript. <br />
<br />
Some people (like me) believe that it is most likely original and informed.<br />
Some people (probably most notably Nick Pelling?) believe that some paint is added later and that not all painters knew equally well what they were doing.<br />
Some people (like Stolfi) believe none of the paint is original/reliable.<br />
<br />
Regardless of one's view though, there are things we can say about which paints were applied in the same session, because apparently the painter did not always clean their brush properly. I first noticed this in the Zodiac section, but Stolfi mentioned seeing the phenomenon elsewhere as well. <br />
<br />
This is most obvious on the Libra page. The central emblem is first painted in blue. Then the brush is not completely cleaned when the painter switches to yellow, and the first star (1) comes out very blue. The blue components remain in the brush for a bit longer, but eventually fade out.<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=12846" target="_blank" title="">pains.jpg</a> (Size: 433.72 KB / Downloads: 99)
<br />
<br />
What's fun about this is that we can retrace the steps of the painter and follow along as they color the page. I believe it may even be possible to expand this to the whole foldout, where blue is a major part of all the central emblems, and a switch to yellow occurs when the last one (scales) has been done. I quickly drew on some arrows to indicate the general direction of coloring;<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=12847" target="_blank" title="">paints2.jpg</a> (Size: 202.74 KB / Downloads: 98)
<br />
<br />
This teaches us that:<br />
* Yellow and blue were applied in the same session. Blue first, then yellow.<br />
* The whole foldout was likely painted at once, with perhaps some utilitarian considerations: blue central figures, "clean" brush once, then yellows starting with all the stars. (This part is more speculative).<br />
<br />
Are there other places like this in the MS?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[There's a lot of uncertainty about the paint in the manuscript. <br />
<br />
Some people (like me) believe that it is most likely original and informed.<br />
Some people (probably most notably Nick Pelling?) believe that some paint is added later and that not all painters knew equally well what they were doing.<br />
Some people (like Stolfi) believe none of the paint is original/reliable.<br />
<br />
Regardless of one's view though, there are things we can say about which paints were applied in the same session, because apparently the painter did not always clean their brush properly. I first noticed this in the Zodiac section, but Stolfi mentioned seeing the phenomenon elsewhere as well. <br />
<br />
This is most obvious on the Libra page. The central emblem is first painted in blue. Then the brush is not completely cleaned when the painter switches to yellow, and the first star (1) comes out very blue. The blue components remain in the brush for a bit longer, but eventually fade out.<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=12846" target="_blank" title="">pains.jpg</a> (Size: 433.72 KB / Downloads: 99)
<br />
<br />
What's fun about this is that we can retrace the steps of the painter and follow along as they color the page. I believe it may even be possible to expand this to the whole foldout, where blue is a major part of all the central emblems, and a switch to yellow occurs when the last one (scales) has been done. I quickly drew on some arrows to indicate the general direction of coloring;<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="JPG Image" border="0" alt=".jpg" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=12847" target="_blank" title="">paints2.jpg</a> (Size: 202.74 KB / Downloads: 98)
<br />
<br />
This teaches us that:<br />
* Yellow and blue were applied in the same session. Blue first, then yellow.<br />
* The whole foldout was likely painted at once, with perhaps some utilitarian considerations: blue central figures, "clean" brush once, then yellows starting with all the stars. (This part is more speculative).<br />
<br />
Are there other places like this in the MS?]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Palmierite (and atacamite?)]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5084.html</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2025 08:05:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=27">ReneZ</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5084.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite><span> (28-11-2025, 08:32 AM)</span>Jorge_Stolfi Wrote:  You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view.</cite>I had to remove a line from the article about the mineral You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. that claimed that it was used as a paint pigment in the VMS.  Just because the McCrone technician copy-pasted the output of their spectrum-matching software onto the report, without checking what palmerite was.<br />
<br />
I just removed that reference to the VMS from the You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. article.  And another one from the You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. article.  See the respective Talk pages.  Please let me know if you find other cases.</blockquote><br />
<br />
To be honest, from where I stand the removal of the plant ID hypotheses is fully justified, but the removal of the line about palmierite is doing the opposite: replacing information from a technical report by an opinion of a non-expert. <br />
Strictly speaking, the report says: "possibly minor amounts of lead sulfide and palmierite", so at least the word "possibly" (or equivalent) should have been there.<br />
<br />
However, I don't want to make a point of it, because the whole article says noting at all, and having just the Voynich MS reference doesn't really make any sense.<br />
<br />
<br />
In earlier days there was a similar discussion about atacamite, which some people thought was non-European. This material was found in other pieces of art in Italy, though. (This is from memory so "C.E.").]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite><span> (28-11-2025, 08:32 AM)</span>Jorge_Stolfi Wrote:  You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view.</cite>I had to remove a line from the article about the mineral You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. that claimed that it was used as a paint pigment in the VMS.  Just because the McCrone technician copy-pasted the output of their spectrum-matching software onto the report, without checking what palmerite was.<br />
<br />
I just removed that reference to the VMS from the You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. article.  And another one from the You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. article.  See the respective Talk pages.  Please let me know if you find other cases.</blockquote><br />
<br />
To be honest, from where I stand the removal of the plant ID hypotheses is fully justified, but the removal of the line about palmierite is doing the opposite: replacing information from a technical report by an opinion of a non-expert. <br />
Strictly speaking, the report says: "possibly minor amounts of lead sulfide and palmierite", so at least the word "possibly" (or equivalent) should have been there.<br />
<br />
However, I don't want to make a point of it, because the whole article says noting at all, and having just the Voynich MS reference doesn't really make any sense.<br />
<br />
<br />
In earlier days there was a similar discussion about atacamite, which some people thought was non-European. This material was found in other pieces of art in Italy, though. (This is from memory so "C.E.").]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[f115r / Hand @ or Hand 3 ?]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5067.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2025 11:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=2049">dashstofsk</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5067.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Could anyone say why it is that You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. needs to have '&#36;H=@' in the transliteration page header?<br />
<br />
This seems to me to be wrong.<br />
<br />
Pages You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. and You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. are on the same side of the parchment sheet. You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. is on the left side, You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. is on the right side. Now, if you look closely at You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. you will see that the writing is in a colour that is darker than normal for quire 20. Also the top lines in f115r are similarly dark. Moreover because there is good evidence that the manuscript was written sheet-by-sheet and not in book page order it is likely that You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. and the top lines in f115r were written in one sitting by the same person.<br />
<br />
Would this not be sufficient reason for making hand 3 the writer of f115r?<br />
<br />
Some of you will notice that You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. which faces You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. also has its top lines dark. However I still believe sheet-by-sheet to be the most likely conjecture.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Could anyone say why it is that You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. needs to have '&#36;H=@' in the transliteration page header?<br />
<br />
This seems to me to be wrong.<br />
<br />
Pages You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. and You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. are on the same side of the parchment sheet. You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. is on the left side, You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. is on the right side. Now, if you look closely at You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. you will see that the writing is in a colour that is darker than normal for quire 20. Also the top lines in f115r are similarly dark. Moreover because there is good evidence that the manuscript was written sheet-by-sheet and not in book page order it is likely that You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. and the top lines in f115r were written in one sitting by the same person.<br />
<br />
Would this not be sufficient reason for making hand 3 the writer of f115r?<br />
<br />
Some of you will notice that You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. which faces You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. also has its top lines dark. However I still believe sheet-by-sheet to be the most likely conjecture.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[f57v Circles]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5039.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2025 19:09:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=2049">dashstofsk</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5039.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Is anyone able to say how the circles in You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. were drawn. The lines are very thin and look unlikely to have been drawn with the pen used for the words which have thick lines. They seem to have used a pair of compasses and you can see the centre point slightly to the bottom of the centre of the flowery thing in the middle. But what was it that they placed on the drawing compass? An ink quill? Pencil?<br />
<br />
The circles in the image on You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. are not entirely circular. The circles are slightly oval and standing upright. Perhaps that page was just photographed at an angle.<br />
<br />
But also the circles on this page are the best quality ones within the manuscript. For example the ones in f72v1 are drawn wobbly, and incomplete. Any ideas anyone why these should have came out wobbly?<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=12127" target="_blank" title="">f72v1.png</a> (Size: 61.5 KB / Downloads: 90)
<br />
<br />
<br />
( EDIT. Just noticed that a similar topic was raised not too long ago. Never mind. )]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Is anyone able to say how the circles in You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. were drawn. The lines are very thin and look unlikely to have been drawn with the pen used for the words which have thick lines. They seem to have used a pair of compasses and you can see the centre point slightly to the bottom of the centre of the flowery thing in the middle. But what was it that they placed on the drawing compass? An ink quill? Pencil?<br />
<br />
The circles in the image on You are not allowed to view links. <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=login">Login</a> to view. are not entirely circular. The circles are slightly oval and standing upright. Perhaps that page was just photographed at an angle.<br />
<br />
But also the circles on this page are the best quality ones within the manuscript. For example the ones in f72v1 are drawn wobbly, and incomplete. Any ideas anyone why these should have came out wobbly?<br />
<br />

<br />
<img src="https://www.voynich.ninja/images/attachtypes/image.png" title="PNG Image" border="0" alt=".png" />
&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="attachment.php?aid=12127" target="_blank" title="">f72v1.png</a> (Size: 61.5 KB / Downloads: 90)
<br />
<br />
<br />
( EDIT. Just noticed that a similar topic was raised not too long ago. Never mind. )]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[A question about foldouts]]></title>
			<link>https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5023.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2025 14:48:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator><![CDATA[<a href="https://www.voynich.ninja/member.php?action=profile&uid=2332">Mauro</a>]]></dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5023.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[I have always supposed that the foldouts are made of a single piece of vellum cut at a longer length than usual (and a greater height too, in the case of the rosettes page). Is this true?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I have always supposed that the foldouts are made of a single piece of vellum cut at a longer length than usual (and a greater height too, in the case of the rosettes page). Is this true?]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>