<![CDATA[The Voynich Ninja - Voynich Talk]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/ Thu, 18 Jun 2026 02:11:44 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[How much time and effort may have been put in?]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5799.html Thu, 04 Jun 2026 14:57:39 +0000 eggyk]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5799.html
How much effort do you think could have been put into the VMS text, illustrations and/or ciphers?
How much effort from the author does a theory require before you dismiss it as unlikely, and why? 
How much effort would a potential decoding require before you dismiss the cipher as unlikely, and why?



I'll start: I think that any amount of effort/monotony, up to the scale of decades of work, sits within what's possible. There are countless examples of people doing extensive monotonous work for no specific reason beyond "why not?". Some people simply want to do something and do it, regardless of utility. 

You have communities and individuals everywhere that do things on this scale. Some people go out and collect rocks from different places, some people spend years organising and digitising manuscripts knowing that almost noone will ever look, others build an extensive library of all of the worlds road bollards, electrical posts, and plant species for no reason other than knowing where they are on geoguessr. A group of players in minecraft are attempting to build the entire earth at a 1:1 scale! 

Perhaps the most relevant example is the Voynich community itself. Many people set out to research and solve this manuscript, spending hours, days, weeks, months, sometimes years, and sometimes decades putting in 1000s of hours of effort in. Is it so unbelievable that someone may spend an entire year's worth of their free time writing a book meant to be unreadable, just for the sake of it? We tend to assume that if there is meaning in the text then there must have been a use case, but what if the author simply enjoyed writing weird/fancy books?]]>
How much effort do you think could have been put into the VMS text, illustrations and/or ciphers?
How much effort from the author does a theory require before you dismiss it as unlikely, and why? 
How much effort would a potential decoding require before you dismiss the cipher as unlikely, and why?



I'll start: I think that any amount of effort/monotony, up to the scale of decades of work, sits within what's possible. There are countless examples of people doing extensive monotonous work for no specific reason beyond "why not?". Some people simply want to do something and do it, regardless of utility. 

You have communities and individuals everywhere that do things on this scale. Some people go out and collect rocks from different places, some people spend years organising and digitising manuscripts knowing that almost noone will ever look, others build an extensive library of all of the worlds road bollards, electrical posts, and plant species for no reason other than knowing where they are on geoguessr. A group of players in minecraft are attempting to build the entire earth at a 1:1 scale! 

Perhaps the most relevant example is the Voynich community itself. Many people set out to research and solve this manuscript, spending hours, days, weeks, months, sometimes years, and sometimes decades putting in 1000s of hours of effort in. Is it so unbelievable that someone may spend an entire year's worth of their free time writing a book meant to be unreadable, just for the sake of it? We tend to assume that if there is meaning in the text then there must have been a use case, but what if the author simply enjoyed writing weird/fancy books?]]> <![CDATA[The Unsolved Mystery of Lorem Ipsum]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5796.html Tue, 02 Jun 2026 15:24:01 +0000 Torsten]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5796.html
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

A few points that I think could be of interest:

Lorem ipsum has been used as placeholder text since 1966. For decades nobody knew what it was or where it came from.

"Lorem ipsum" was created by taking real Latin text from Cicero and modifying it — removing key words that carried meaning, adding non-Latin letters, garbling phrases. The modifications were small and selective. The result looks like Latin but is unreadable. It fooled everyone for decades until one scholar noticed a rare word and traced it back to its source.]]>
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

A few points that I think could be of interest:

Lorem ipsum has been used as placeholder text since 1966. For decades nobody knew what it was or where it came from.

"Lorem ipsum" was created by taking real Latin text from Cicero and modifying it — removing key words that carried meaning, adding non-Latin letters, garbling phrases. The modifications were small and selective. The result looks like Latin but is unreadable. It fooled everyone for decades until one scholar noticed a rare word and traced it back to its source.]]> <![CDATA[Vegetius De re militari - the origin and purpose of military literature]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5750.html Sat, 16 May 2026 11:36:01 +0000 Bernd]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5750.html
The main source of medieval siege and military literature was You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., a Late Roman writer from the 4th century. His work De re militari, or Epitoma rei militaris remained a popular military literature until the 19th century. However, for different reasons that one might think. Jorge asked why many illustrations in the works of all authors who copied him make no sense and look like the artist had no idea about the machine depicted. The reason is the same as for fantastic and widely inaccurate plants in herbals. Vegetius himself was, as far as we know, nether a historian, soldier nor an engineer - but an aristocrat. Modern scholars are critical of his descriptions of the Roman army and note that he carelessly compiled material from different sources and time periods and is full of inconsistencies and obvious mistakes. Vegetius lived at a time of decline of the Roman Empire and reminisced a better (and obviously fictious) 'Golden Age', much like Plato's description of Sparta as an ideal state. In other words, even the original work was - basically a fake.

Quote:Although the text was historically taken at face value during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, as an accurate contemporary work on the Roman army and as a valuable military manual, modern historians have questioned the accuracy of the claims that Vegetius made about the state of the Roman army in his time. According to Michael B. Charles "many details that he provides about the [Roman] military are simply wrong", and said that it was "doubtful" that he had any military experience, arguing that the work was "not meant to be an accurate exposition of Roman military history, or indeed [then] present-day military activities", and that only "small but nonetheless valuable nuggets" of information in the text are actually valuable for understanding the Late Roman Army. The work has also been criticised on stylistic grounds. Sydney Anglo stated that the work was "mediocre" and that "its coverage of Roman military institutions is derivative, patchy, inconsistent and repetitious", and that Vegetius blended information from vastly different time periods in an unclear and confused way, with Anglo stating that "Vegetius's account of Roman military usage was not so much anachronistic as extra-chronistic. It was outside any specific time."

Now why would such a faux military guide be popular for 1500 years? First, it did contain some valid organizational and strategical advice, second, it was not intended to be used by military officers. Vegetius was an aristocrat, and his audience was nobility. We must see such works in a more abstract way. The historian Werner Leng wrote about the reception of Vegetius works from the middle ages to modernity that Vegetius was rarely seen as a military field guide for officers, but more of a cultural and aesthetic guide for nobility who sought to present themselves as the successors of the Roman Empire. Also as a political and moralistic guide on leadership and organization in line with the teachings of Aristoteles or Plato.

This is something we often tend to forget when we look at medieval manuscripts from a modern perspective. A herbal like Dioscorides was not created to be used by a physician to treat patients. A manuscript on warfare and engineering like Kyeser was not created to be used by a military officer or engineer. They were conversation pieces and collectibles for nobility that were meant to show the owner was familiar with the teachings of the re-discovered authorities of antiquity. Even the obviously practical notebooks of engineers like Taccola and Ghiberti were also representational. The machines are mostly useless. They are fantastic ideas, like one would draw a martian colony nowadays. Inspirational, aesthetic, fashionable. This is why we have all those copies of impossible machines. They were fancy. The question is who came up with the illustrations first? Like Dioscorides, the oldest copies of Vegetius appear to have been un-illustrated. At some point, an artist tried to create more-or less accurate illustrations of war and siege machines from the text, which were then copied further. But these were never technical drawings in a modern sense. Ideas at best, like Taccola's sketches. I'd say the Ghiberti cipher falls in the same category. It was a hot topic at the time. Something you'd incorporate into your works because it was the thing to do. Protecting ideas from casual readers surely also played a role, but not the main one.

In a harsh way you could say all those high-end manuscripts were fakes, pretending to be something they were not. Which was fine since the buyer did not use them for their alleged purpose anyway.

I'd still like to find early illustrated copies of Vegetius work and compare them to Kyeser's war machines. Early Kyeser illustrations are mostly flat and straight full medieval, while Taccola's drawings are much more organic and humanistic, more in line with VM drawings. Yet some elements like the wavy shore line are already present in Kyeser. So the question is - were Vegetius copies illustrated before Kyeser's 'Bellifortis' or did Kyeser invent those illustration and they found their way itto later Vegetius copies - and Taccola? The origin of the illustrations appears to be complex and cross-linked but paradoxically it appears all the war machine illustrations originate from Kyeser (who copied Vegetius' text), not from an illustrated Vegetius copy. Later ones like those of Valturius from 1470s (Rosenwald 5+6), likely copied from Taccola. And Ghiberti from either of those. But I'm not sure yet.]]>
The main source of medieval siege and military literature was You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., a Late Roman writer from the 4th century. His work De re militari, or Epitoma rei militaris remained a popular military literature until the 19th century. However, for different reasons that one might think. Jorge asked why many illustrations in the works of all authors who copied him make no sense and look like the artist had no idea about the machine depicted. The reason is the same as for fantastic and widely inaccurate plants in herbals. Vegetius himself was, as far as we know, nether a historian, soldier nor an engineer - but an aristocrat. Modern scholars are critical of his descriptions of the Roman army and note that he carelessly compiled material from different sources and time periods and is full of inconsistencies and obvious mistakes. Vegetius lived at a time of decline of the Roman Empire and reminisced a better (and obviously fictious) 'Golden Age', much like Plato's description of Sparta as an ideal state. In other words, even the original work was - basically a fake.

Quote:Although the text was historically taken at face value during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, as an accurate contemporary work on the Roman army and as a valuable military manual, modern historians have questioned the accuracy of the claims that Vegetius made about the state of the Roman army in his time. According to Michael B. Charles "many details that he provides about the [Roman] military are simply wrong", and said that it was "doubtful" that he had any military experience, arguing that the work was "not meant to be an accurate exposition of Roman military history, or indeed [then] present-day military activities", and that only "small but nonetheless valuable nuggets" of information in the text are actually valuable for understanding the Late Roman Army. The work has also been criticised on stylistic grounds. Sydney Anglo stated that the work was "mediocre" and that "its coverage of Roman military institutions is derivative, patchy, inconsistent and repetitious", and that Vegetius blended information from vastly different time periods in an unclear and confused way, with Anglo stating that "Vegetius's account of Roman military usage was not so much anachronistic as extra-chronistic. It was outside any specific time."

Now why would such a faux military guide be popular for 1500 years? First, it did contain some valid organizational and strategical advice, second, it was not intended to be used by military officers. Vegetius was an aristocrat, and his audience was nobility. We must see such works in a more abstract way. The historian Werner Leng wrote about the reception of Vegetius works from the middle ages to modernity that Vegetius was rarely seen as a military field guide for officers, but more of a cultural and aesthetic guide for nobility who sought to present themselves as the successors of the Roman Empire. Also as a political and moralistic guide on leadership and organization in line with the teachings of Aristoteles or Plato.

This is something we often tend to forget when we look at medieval manuscripts from a modern perspective. A herbal like Dioscorides was not created to be used by a physician to treat patients. A manuscript on warfare and engineering like Kyeser was not created to be used by a military officer or engineer. They were conversation pieces and collectibles for nobility that were meant to show the owner was familiar with the teachings of the re-discovered authorities of antiquity. Even the obviously practical notebooks of engineers like Taccola and Ghiberti were also representational. The machines are mostly useless. They are fantastic ideas, like one would draw a martian colony nowadays. Inspirational, aesthetic, fashionable. This is why we have all those copies of impossible machines. They were fancy. The question is who came up with the illustrations first? Like Dioscorides, the oldest copies of Vegetius appear to have been un-illustrated. At some point, an artist tried to create more-or less accurate illustrations of war and siege machines from the text, which were then copied further. But these were never technical drawings in a modern sense. Ideas at best, like Taccola's sketches. I'd say the Ghiberti cipher falls in the same category. It was a hot topic at the time. Something you'd incorporate into your works because it was the thing to do. Protecting ideas from casual readers surely also played a role, but not the main one.

In a harsh way you could say all those high-end manuscripts were fakes, pretending to be something they were not. Which was fine since the buyer did not use them for their alleged purpose anyway.

I'd still like to find early illustrated copies of Vegetius work and compare them to Kyeser's war machines. Early Kyeser illustrations are mostly flat and straight full medieval, while Taccola's drawings are much more organic and humanistic, more in line with VM drawings. Yet some elements like the wavy shore line are already present in Kyeser. So the question is - were Vegetius copies illustrated before Kyeser's 'Bellifortis' or did Kyeser invent those illustration and they found their way itto later Vegetius copies - and Taccola? The origin of the illustrations appears to be complex and cross-linked but paradoxically it appears all the war machine illustrations originate from Kyeser (who copied Vegetius' text), not from an illustrated Vegetius copy. Later ones like those of Valturius from 1470s (Rosenwald 5+6), likely copied from Taccola. And Ghiberti from either of those. But I'm not sure yet.]]> <![CDATA[The Voynich has been solved (The Internet told me so)]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5746.html Fri, 15 May 2026 23:12:59 +0000 asteckley]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5746.html The Voynich Manuscript has been solved!!
In fact, the number of Voynich solutions is growing exponentially. Of course, the probability that any particular one is correct is decaying at an even higher rate.

.png   voynich_youtube_total_vs_solution_claims.png (Size: 486.04 KB / Downloads: 91) ]]> The Voynich Manuscript has been solved!!
In fact, the number of Voynich solutions is growing exponentially. Of course, the probability that any particular one is correct is decaying at an even higher rate.

.png   voynich_youtube_total_vs_solution_claims.png (Size: 486.04 KB / Downloads: 91) ]]> <![CDATA[Maps showing the Frequency of Voynich related features]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5737.html Thu, 14 May 2026 14:29:04 +0000 Mark Knowles]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5737.html
As is well known, I have studied and collected ciphers from around the time at which the Voynich is carbon dated to. I had a thought about what a map would look like where each cipher is marked at a location that it is associated with. I suspect that broadly speaking it would not look so different from the swallow-tail merlons map in terms of the clustering of points in the same parts of Italy as on that map. Of course, they would not be identical. There are some geographical areas which have ciphers associated with them like the Kingdom of Aragon which have no swallow-tail merlons and some geographical areas which have swallow-tail merlons which have no known ciphers associated with them. However, overall I suspect the maps to be quite similar.

Obviously, there are other similar geographical distribution maps that could be produced.

One could produce a map of locations associated with alchemical herbal manuscripts or more generally herbal manuscripts from this period of history.

One could produce a map of locations associated with zodiac diagrams from this period of history where the distribution would be more skewed to South Germany/Northern Switzerland.

I am not sure how useful any of these maps might be. Though in theory they might be combined to produce some probability frequency distribution for the place of origin of the Voynich.

I myself have a theory as to precisely where the two sets of swallow-tail merlons on the Rosettes folio correspond to(Milan and Bellinzona) which is in part why I may not have been too focused on identifying all the locations with swallow-tail merlons on Koen's map.]]>
As is well known, I have studied and collected ciphers from around the time at which the Voynich is carbon dated to. I had a thought about what a map would look like where each cipher is marked at a location that it is associated with. I suspect that broadly speaking it would not look so different from the swallow-tail merlons map in terms of the clustering of points in the same parts of Italy as on that map. Of course, they would not be identical. There are some geographical areas which have ciphers associated with them like the Kingdom of Aragon which have no swallow-tail merlons and some geographical areas which have swallow-tail merlons which have no known ciphers associated with them. However, overall I suspect the maps to be quite similar.

Obviously, there are other similar geographical distribution maps that could be produced.

One could produce a map of locations associated with alchemical herbal manuscripts or more generally herbal manuscripts from this period of history.

One could produce a map of locations associated with zodiac diagrams from this period of history where the distribution would be more skewed to South Germany/Northern Switzerland.

I am not sure how useful any of these maps might be. Though in theory they might be combined to produce some probability frequency distribution for the place of origin of the Voynich.

I myself have a theory as to precisely where the two sets of swallow-tail merlons on the Rosettes folio correspond to(Milan and Bellinzona) which is in part why I may not have been too focused on identifying all the locations with swallow-tail merlons on Koen's map.]]> <![CDATA[Where is the Giant Tif of Marci Recto?]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5732.html Tue, 12 May 2026 14:48:28 +0000 proto57]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5732.html
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

... but when you click on the download link for "Full Size Original (Tiff)", you it downloads the 1170955.tif, which is "only" 3470 x 4952, 96 dpi, and 4952 pixels. The full size .tif was actually a massive 6500 x 7908, 600 dpi.
 
The reason I know this is because I do have both these recto and verso larger tiffs, labeled 1170955-600ppi (recto), and 15754261-600ppi (verso), and I believe I did get it, years ago, from the above link, by clicking on "Full Size Original (Tiff)" button.

The reason I would like the original 600 ppi tif is because my old download is corrupted. Here is a small version of it to illustrate this:
 

.jpg   Marci_reduced_jpeg_thumnail_of_tif.jpg (Size: 498.13 KB / Downloads: 139)

Now as I remember, "back in the day" I had tried several time to download a good copy of this image from the Beinecke link, but they were all corrupted. I do not know if this was a problem with the image stored at Yale, or some gremlin in my own computer at the time. In either case, it seems that this is the only copy I have of the recto in 600, and wondered if anyone here happened to have, or know the location, of a un-corrupted 1170955-600ppi.tif ?

Thanks in advance... Rich]]>
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

... but when you click on the download link for "Full Size Original (Tiff)", you it downloads the 1170955.tif, which is "only" 3470 x 4952, 96 dpi, and 4952 pixels. The full size .tif was actually a massive 6500 x 7908, 600 dpi.
 
The reason I know this is because I do have both these recto and verso larger tiffs, labeled 1170955-600ppi (recto), and 15754261-600ppi (verso), and I believe I did get it, years ago, from the above link, by clicking on "Full Size Original (Tiff)" button.

The reason I would like the original 600 ppi tif is because my old download is corrupted. Here is a small version of it to illustrate this:
 

.jpg   Marci_reduced_jpeg_thumnail_of_tif.jpg (Size: 498.13 KB / Downloads: 139)

Now as I remember, "back in the day" I had tried several time to download a good copy of this image from the Beinecke link, but they were all corrupted. I do not know if this was a problem with the image stored at Yale, or some gremlin in my own computer at the time. In either case, it seems that this is the only copy I have of the recto in 600, and wondered if anyone here happened to have, or know the location, of a un-corrupted 1170955-600ppi.tif ?

Thanks in advance... Rich]]> <![CDATA[Using AI to do research - Specifically online searching]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5699.html Thu, 30 Apr 2026 11:09:10 +0000 Mark Knowles]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5699.html <![CDATA[secretary hand and similarities with voynichese text]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5681.html Tue, 28 Apr 2026 03:01:42 +0000 dejiko]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5681.html
.png   secretary-hand-example-17th-century-1925396782.png (Size: 1.13 MB / Downloads: 76) ]]>
.png   secretary-hand-example-17th-century-1925396782.png (Size: 1.13 MB / Downloads: 76) ]]> <![CDATA[Discovery hash]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5671.html Fri, 24 Apr 2026 19:19:58 +0000 magnesium]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5671.html
Discovery 1

MD5 hash: accd21d66d530b1dd0879ee0669ccb2e

SHA1 hash: 681aa6c1ec66a38bea8f40af8283a2004d9e0ed9

Discovery 2

MD5 hash: 9cf6e942c8bcd6aacb5afd6e8df0421e

SHA1 hash: 08abfc44de0f0ffdafcdde92d433108775b4a24c

Discovery 3

MD5 hash: 9ed973b2c39d21a94957b64454b48b4a

SHA1 hash: c914da315b49aa245099af37fbd7a98735f9176a

These are the three key findings of a paper I am preparing for the Voynich 2026 conference. Over-the-top though it may seem, I am taking this step to establish priority in a public setting.]]>
Discovery 1

MD5 hash: accd21d66d530b1dd0879ee0669ccb2e

SHA1 hash: 681aa6c1ec66a38bea8f40af8283a2004d9e0ed9

Discovery 2

MD5 hash: 9cf6e942c8bcd6aacb5afd6e8df0421e

SHA1 hash: 08abfc44de0f0ffdafcdde92d433108775b4a24c

Discovery 3

MD5 hash: 9ed973b2c39d21a94957b64454b48b4a

SHA1 hash: c914da315b49aa245099af37fbd7a98735f9176a

These are the three key findings of a paper I am preparing for the Voynich 2026 conference. Over-the-top though it may seem, I am taking this step to establish priority in a public setting.]]> <![CDATA[How Many Common, Unique Letters Do *You* Think There Are?]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5391.html Sat, 21 Feb 2026 13:12:04 +0000 rikforto]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5391.html
Three things:

  1. I know you don't know. I don't know. None of us know. But if you had to put down one number, not a range, what would it be?
  2. The threshold for "common" is up to you.
  3. Unique means they aren't variants of each other. I think it's pretty common to take n to be a final form of i, and so that would be one letter, not two. Ligatures don't count as a new letter, either.

Feel invited to also expand your answer into a range, explain your cutoff, list your alphabet, and generally explain yourself. I'm curious about all that too!

(If you're wondering my motivations, I was working on something and I found myself asserting that most of us think there are fewer than a certain number of letters. I wondered if that impression was, you know, true?)]]>
Three things:

  1. I know you don't know. I don't know. None of us know. But if you had to put down one number, not a range, what would it be?
  2. The threshold for "common" is up to you.
  3. Unique means they aren't variants of each other. I think it's pretty common to take n to be a final form of i, and so that would be one letter, not two. Ligatures don't count as a new letter, either.

Feel invited to also expand your answer into a range, explain your cutoff, list your alphabet, and generally explain yourself. I'm curious about all that too!

(If you're wondering my motivations, I was working on something and I found myself asserting that most of us think there are fewer than a certain number of letters. I wondered if that impression was, you know, true?)]]> <![CDATA[New Phonetic-Pedagogical Theory: MS 408 as a Parental Survival Guide]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5387.html Fri, 20 Feb 2026 08:15:16 +0000 Rodrigo]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5387.html I’ve been studying the manuscript from a human perspective. My theory is that this isn't a complex military code, but a phonetic guide for oral transmission from parents to children.
Key points of my hypothesis:
  • The "8" symbol: I believe it represents a polarity marker (YES/NO), used as a quick visual cue for a child's behavior or safety.
  • Repetitions: These are not errors. They represent the musical rhythm of a voice (like a lullaby or a mantra) to help the child memorize survival advice.
  • Initial glyphs: They mark the beginning of a "lesson" or a song.
The manuscript is a tool to preserve a family’s voice and knowledge. I’d love to know if anyone else has looked at the "8" as a simple binary instruction for phonetic teaching.
Best regards!]]> I’ve been studying the manuscript from a human perspective. My theory is that this isn't a complex military code, but a phonetic guide for oral transmission from parents to children.
Key points of my hypothesis:
  • The "8" symbol: I believe it represents a polarity marker (YES/NO), used as a quick visual cue for a child's behavior or safety.
  • Repetitions: These are not errors. They represent the musical rhythm of a voice (like a lullaby or a mantra) to help the child memorize survival advice.
  • Initial glyphs: They mark the beginning of a "lesson" or a song.
The manuscript is a tool to preserve a family’s voice and knowledge. I’d love to know if anyone else has looked at the "8" as a simple binary instruction for phonetic teaching.
Best regards!]]> <![CDATA[[split] Volvelles or Disks]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5366.html Sat, 14 Feb 2026 13:36:18 +0000 AliciaNelPresente]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5366.html
I wanted to open a discussion on a specific possibility that seems to be gaining traction with the recent studies coming out.We have all seen the discussion around Greshko's "Naibbe Cipher" and how it generates text that statistically resembles the Voynich. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Then, Pincar’s model identifies a very specific dependency in the text. Essentially, he demonstrates that the ciphertext depends not just on the current symbol, but on the previous one as well meaning the system has "memory" or context. And let's be clear, he himself highlights the following in his article: “This model identifies the structure, but not the content. We cannot determine: the identity of the source language, the semantic meaning of any word, or whether the manuscript contains meaningful information.” You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

If we start from that basis, that there is a mechanical dependency between the previous state and the current one, could we be looking at the text result of a three part volvelle or cipher disk?

A device with concentric rings (Outer, Middle, Inner) would naturally force the rigid Prefix + Root + Suffix word structure that we see throughout the manuscript. Something like this: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I am curious to hear your thoughts. At first glance, what jars you about this idea? Does a mechanical "wheel" explanation fail to account for any specific linguistic features you've noticed?

Alicia]]>
I wanted to open a discussion on a specific possibility that seems to be gaining traction with the recent studies coming out.We have all seen the discussion around Greshko's "Naibbe Cipher" and how it generates text that statistically resembles the Voynich. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Then, Pincar’s model identifies a very specific dependency in the text. Essentially, he demonstrates that the ciphertext depends not just on the current symbol, but on the previous one as well meaning the system has "memory" or context. And let's be clear, he himself highlights the following in his article: “This model identifies the structure, but not the content. We cannot determine: the identity of the source language, the semantic meaning of any word, or whether the manuscript contains meaningful information.” You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

If we start from that basis, that there is a mechanical dependency between the previous state and the current one, could we be looking at the text result of a three part volvelle or cipher disk?

A device with concentric rings (Outer, Middle, Inner) would naturally force the rigid Prefix + Root + Suffix word structure that we see throughout the manuscript. Something like this: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I am curious to hear your thoughts. At first glance, what jars you about this idea? Does a mechanical "wheel" explanation fail to account for any specific linguistic features you've noticed?

Alicia]]> <![CDATA[Proposal for "EVA phonetics based theory jar" in the grand tradition of the swear jar]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5364.html Sat, 14 Feb 2026 00:29:31 +0000 kckluge]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5364.html Register or Login to view. Joshwaful said:

Quote:I think there's a language barrier between us. 
shol" is frequent because it is a Phonetic Homonym
Latin: Sol- (Sol-u-tio)
German: Schal- (Schal-e)
Czech: Sol- (Sol-i)
The Scribe's Brain: He hears the sound /sol/ in his head. Whether he means "Salt" or "Basin," he writes the same phonetic cluster. It's the same as todays doctors.

I hereby propose that every time we're subjected to a theory like this because the creators of EVA thought making Voynichese pronounceable was important Rene should have to put a Euro in the EVA phonetics based theory jar. Every time the jar gets full enough we'll have a pizza party or donate the money to Doctors Without Borders or something...]]> Register or Login to view. Joshwaful said:

Quote:I think there's a language barrier between us. 
shol" is frequent because it is a Phonetic Homonym
Latin: Sol- (Sol-u-tio)
German: Schal- (Schal-e)
Czech: Sol- (Sol-i)
The Scribe's Brain: He hears the sound /sol/ in his head. Whether he means "Salt" or "Basin," he writes the same phonetic cluster. It's the same as todays doctors.

I hereby propose that every time we're subjected to a theory like this because the creators of EVA thought making Voynichese pronounceable was important Rene should have to put a Euro in the EVA phonetics based theory jar. Every time the jar gets full enough we'll have a pizza party or donate the money to Doctors Without Borders or something...]]> <![CDATA[Observations on the Visual and Functional Structure of the Voynich Manuscript]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5340.html Sun, 08 Feb 2026 17:20:29 +0000 emanuele.pegorin]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5340.html
My name is Emanuele Pegorin, and I am an independent researcher with a strong interest in the Voynich Manuscript, particularly in its visual structure and internal logic.

I would like to share some methodological and descriptive observations, without proposing textual “solutions” or decipherments.

1. The manuscript appears to function as a graphic and operational modus operandi of a community of women working in the botanical field, including cultivation, processing, water management, and ritual purification.
2. Images dominate the manuscript and are intentionally enlarged, distorted, and repetitive, suggesting that the communication was designed for a semi-literate or non-literate audience. Written text appears secondary, likely intended for supervisory or intermediary roles.
3. Recurring structural principles are evident, such as centric–radial and centric–convex representations (e.g., foldouts f. 85v–86r), and hierarchical markers, like stars associated with figures and textual sections.
4. In later sections, water basins, hydraulic systems, and drainage channels highlight maintenance and practical management, rather than symbolic or cosmological meaning. The presence of birds nesting or flying in channels signals critical points and operational tasks to be monitored.
5. Jars appear as distinct functional items, each with specific shapes, decorations, and plant references, suggesting that they were intended for different uses or clients, and indicating an organized and diversified production system.

These observations are interpretative and not conclusively provable, but they provide a visual and methodological framework to view the manuscript as a coherent system of work, roles, and ritual practices.

I would be glad to receive any comments, insights, or suggestions on how to refine this image-centered analysis or integrate it with existing Voynich research.

Thank you very much for your attention,
Emanuele Pegorin]]>
My name is Emanuele Pegorin, and I am an independent researcher with a strong interest in the Voynich Manuscript, particularly in its visual structure and internal logic.

I would like to share some methodological and descriptive observations, without proposing textual “solutions” or decipherments.

1. The manuscript appears to function as a graphic and operational modus operandi of a community of women working in the botanical field, including cultivation, processing, water management, and ritual purification.
2. Images dominate the manuscript and are intentionally enlarged, distorted, and repetitive, suggesting that the communication was designed for a semi-literate or non-literate audience. Written text appears secondary, likely intended for supervisory or intermediary roles.
3. Recurring structural principles are evident, such as centric–radial and centric–convex representations (e.g., foldouts f. 85v–86r), and hierarchical markers, like stars associated with figures and textual sections.
4. In later sections, water basins, hydraulic systems, and drainage channels highlight maintenance and practical management, rather than symbolic or cosmological meaning. The presence of birds nesting or flying in channels signals critical points and operational tasks to be monitored.
5. Jars appear as distinct functional items, each with specific shapes, decorations, and plant references, suggesting that they were intended for different uses or clients, and indicating an organized and diversified production system.

These observations are interpretative and not conclusively provable, but they provide a visual and methodological framework to view the manuscript as a coherent system of work, roles, and ritual practices.

I would be glad to receive any comments, insights, or suggestions on how to refine this image-centered analysis or integrate it with existing Voynich research.

Thank you very much for your attention,
Emanuele Pegorin]]> <![CDATA[Another mention of "pox" in a 15th century manuscript]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5306.html Tue, 27 Jan 2026 19:20:21 +0000 JustAnotherTheory]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5306.html
I intend to add to this list, albeit only with the word "pox", describing the animal in question.

The manuscript is Der Renner from Hugo von Trimberg. This manuscript is peculiar because it contains 91 pen sketches, and instructions for the execution of these sketches can be found in the lower margins of the pages on which they appear. Here is the folio in question, f167r:


.png   qsdqsz.png (Size: 178.17 KB / Downloads: 102)

On the bottom it says:


.png   qsdqsdqsdsz.png (Size: 73.28 KB / Downloads: 101)

So yeah, there it is. Another mention of "pox". 

EDIT: here is the manuscript: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]>
I intend to add to this list, albeit only with the word "pox", describing the animal in question.

The manuscript is Der Renner from Hugo von Trimberg. This manuscript is peculiar because it contains 91 pen sketches, and instructions for the execution of these sketches can be found in the lower margins of the pages on which they appear. Here is the folio in question, f167r:


.png   qsdqsz.png (Size: 178.17 KB / Downloads: 102)

On the bottom it says:


.png   qsdqsdqsdsz.png (Size: 73.28 KB / Downloads: 101)

So yeah, there it is. Another mention of "pox". 

EDIT: here is the manuscript: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]>