• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

No text, but a visual code

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Analysis of the text
  • No text, but a visual code
• No text, but a visual code

• RE: No text, but a visual code

  Antonio García Jiménez > 22-08-2023, 04:03 PM

  I know that what I propose may seem a little crazy to many. But think about the principle of Ockham's razor: usually the simplest solution is the most likely.

• RE: No text, but a visual code

  Antonio García Jiménez > 26-08-2023, 12:36 PM

  It is quite possible that the glyphs have their own meaning, that they do not have to be replaced by something else. In any case, any transliteration is an adulteration of reality.
  
  I think that until this forum ends or until I die I will continue saying the same thing: It is possible that each of the glyphs is a symbol with its own meaning, be it the one I say or another.

• RE: No text, but a visual code

  Antonio García Jiménez > 02-09-2023, 04:51 PM

  I believe that an in-depth examination of each of the glyphs, of their shape, can give rise to some insights.
  
    For example, let's look at the oblique stroke that is usually transliterated as i. Why did the scribe not write it straight but oblique? It seems like a minor issue but I think that analyzing these details is how we can move forward.
  
  Let's look at this drawing that has been called the clock
  
  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  
  Inside the sphere those lines are repeated. Some appear straight, others slanted. They are strokes, three by three, that exist in other drawings of the codex. Does this line of the drawing have to do with the glyph of the so-called text? Curiously, the glyph can be doubled and tripled as in the drawing.
  
  What emerges from this comparison is an insight into why the glyph is oblique and not straight. Is the scribe thinking in the sphere and that is why he writes it tilted?

• RE: No text, but a visual code

  Antonio García Jiménez > 19-09-2023, 09:45 AM

  Much of the Voynich enigma is an epistemological problem, that is, what approach to knowledge is appropriate, how to see it as an enlightened person of the same era would see it.
  
  For example, pretending that script is a complex encrypted language is completely anachronistic; It's like pretending that when the telephone was invented in the 19th century, mobile phones were also invented. The same reasoning applies when trying to find an oriental, minority or exotic language for a product of the 15th century with marked Western European characteristics.
  
  In the iconographic interpretation the errors are patent. There are many solutions that see in Quire 13 something biological related to women. One of the most recurrent medieval motifs is ignored. At that time allegory and personification were frequently used. In Voynich we clearly see this metaphorical resource when we see the sun and the moon with human faces. Why would the female figures that we see in the zodiac and in Quire 13 be anything other than a personification of the stars?
  
  At a time when we see realistically drawn herbaria, why is it so difficult to identify plants at Voynich? Could it be that the author had no interest in drawing real herbs, but rather in transmitting another type of message?
  
  For all these reasons and others, as important as studying Voynich is knowing how to study it.

• RE: No text, but a visual code

  Antonio García Jiménez > 25-09-2023, 09:32 AM

  In my previous post I forgot to mention the enormous importance of astrology at the time. Without being aware of it, I believe that one cannot think about Voynich.
  
  I will only give one example so that you can reflect on it: a cardinal of the Catholic Church like Pierre d'Aylli thought that the dates of the main events in History could be determined by astronomical calculations.
  
  Astrology was not something marginal but was part of the official culture of the time.
• Next Oldest Next Newest