- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
- The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
-
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Jorge_Stolfi > 09-12-2025, 05:19 AM
(08-12-2025, 11:25 AM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Jorge, do I presume correctly that you don't speak Chinese?
Correct, I don't speak Chinese, or any of the languages assumed by the "Chinese" theory (monosyllabic languages, which AFAIK are all from the area spanning from Tibet to China and Vietnam).
I studied Japanese for a couple of years, and as part of that I learned a couple dozen Chinese characters; but their reading in Japanese is usually very different. Japanese, by the way, is definitely not monosyllabic,
I learned a bit more about the "Chinese" languages during my VMS hacking, around 2000. Such as their computer encoding and the general nature of their phonetics, morphology, vocabulary, grammar. Enough to prepare some texts in some of those languages for meaningful statistical analysis.
Quote:do you actually see any chance that you will push it further and at some moment assign some Voynichese words to Chinese words?
I lost interest in the VMS around 2005 precisely because I became convinced of the "Chinese" theory, but I lacked the knowledge necessary to use it to read the book, and I stood no chance of acquiring that knowledge.
To do that one must guess the right language among 50 or so very different candidates, and know how that language was pronounced in the 1400s. Some of those languages had somewhat phonetic scripts since before that time, but others used non-phonetic Chinese characters. Not being bound by the writing, the pronunciation of the latter changed quite a lot since then, We know that because the poems from that era that were supposed to rhyme (even because poetry manuals said so) do not rhyme anymore.
But I now think I can still do some useful research on the VMS even with that handicap. Among other things, I think that I can produce additional evidence for the "Chinese" theory, that would convince the skeptics...
And I think I already made a few new discoveries, independent of the COT. Like the MRT. And the big water stain on f116v, that seems to explain why we can't read it...
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Aga Tentakulus > 09-12-2025, 12:22 PM
I have examined the water stain very closely, but I don't understand what you are trying to tell me. I have looked at your markings, but there is nothing there, or I simply cannot see it.
Please be more specific and, above all, tell me where. Send me an enlarged example.
I'm sure the stain appeared quite early in the book's history. At a time when it still had a wooden cover. So in the first binding.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version) -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Jorge_Stolfi > 09-12-2025, 12:43 PM
(09-12-2025, 12:22 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I don't understand what you are trying to tell me
I explained in a previous post what that stain tells me.
The water must have softened the ink of whatever was written at the top of the page, and even carried some of it down. The dark edge of the stain is dirt and possibly ink that was pushed by the edge of the water, like earth by a bulldozer.
What was left of the writing then must have been mostly erased by the mopping or wiping of the spill. Only the oror sheey at the lower right corner of the written area escaped the damage.
Then someone -- right after that accident, or any time later -- tried to repair the damage by retracing the few traces that remained. But those were just faint bits here and there, and the person did not know the Voynichese alphabet, and probably did not know even whether the original writing was in Voynichese or some other language. So he tried to "restore" those bits as Latin letters..
That is why we cannot read that sentence now. Both the indecipherable glyphs and the letters that we can read are just random noise, unrelated to the original text.
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Rafal > 09-12-2025, 12:52 PM
Quote:But I now think I can still do some useful research on the VMS even with that handicap.
Actually AI makes it today much more easier to work with foreign languages, even the ones we don't know.
But personally even with AI I wouldn't be able to break even simplest Chinese cipher. The language barrier is too big.
And, as you say, it doesn't have to be Chinese. It is actually "Far East monosyllabic language theory", not Chinese theory. And we are speaking of 600 years old dialects.
You probably know the idea of scientific falsifiability ( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ). Claims should be made that way that it is possible in practice to prove them wrong. I wonder if your Chinese theory is falsifiable for us. Personally I have no idea how I could prove that it isn't Chinese without speaking it.
And learning Chinese is a nightmare for someone with European background. I heard that 90% of people who start learning it at some moment give up. You learn it for half a year and you are unable to read the simplest text and you are unable to say any sentence correctly and be understood
I have also heard that Chinese uses a lot of sayings, proverbs and methaphors. If you don't use them and speak plainly then you are a boor
A Chinese girl won't say "I am pretty, you are ugly", she will say "I am a swan, you are a frog" and so on. I heard they use such stuff even in official legal documents. So you don't just learn language but also all these proverbs. It makes it really impenetrable.
But I am really curious what you will come to Jorge. -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Aga Tentakulus > 09-12-2025, 01:21 PM
I have now taken another, even closer look. There is nothing there, and there was nothing else in the spot other than what you see today.
Two VM words, and the rest is German.
Even if I deliberately try to clean the parchment by any means possible, it always remains visible, and that was probably just an accident. I've seen it a hundred times. It's even been overwritten three times.
For me, there was and is nothing ther
Translated with DeepL.com (free version) -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Jorge_Stolfi > 09-12-2025, 04:00 PM
(09-12-2025, 01:21 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There is nothing there
Agreed. Whatever was written there, besides the oror sheey, is completely lost. It is essentially invisible, even in the UV image, or covered by the "restored" traces.
Quote:the rest is German.
The rest is some Latin letters and incomprehensible glyphs. One must strain to read some of the letters
as a couple of German-like words. Whoever tried to restore the lost writing was probably a German speaker, or though that the text was in German for some reason. But he clearly could not make out a sentence that made any sense.
Quote:Even if I deliberately try to clean the parchment by any means possible, it always remains visible
That is a property of iron-gall ink, and that is why "anyone" who bothered to write anything on vellum would use iron-gall ink.
But the ink of the VMS is not iron-gall ink. That is established by the way it fades between near and far infrared images, and by how easily it is damaged by spills and paint-over elsewhere.
The above facts are consistent with the "ink" being a runny solid pigment suspension paint, like tempera or watercolor; consisting of sienna, the most common brown pigment, and a binder like gum arabic. That kind of ink does not penetrate the vellum, and the pigment does not bind to it; it is only glued to it by the binder. If the water spill was left over the ink for more than a few seconds, it would have softened the binder; and then wiping the spill off could well have erased the writing almost completely.
By the way, the red ink on Medieval manuscripts must have been a solid pigment suspension ink too, with minion or cinnabar as pigment. So I predict that it is much more easily damaged by water than the "black" iron-gall ink.
All the best, --stolfi -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Jorge_Stolfi > 09-12-2025, 07:52 PM
[Continuing here from another thread]
(09-12-2025, 03:39 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(09-12-2025, 02:55 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Well, name an example of such a community that actually existed and actually created something like Voynichese and the VMS.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Well, I'll be damned...
I can only grumble that- That example is from the 1730s, when sophisticated encryption schemes were already old stuff.
- The encryption is "a substitution cipher" of an European language. Which makes sense as the "priests" would have to learn to read it without juggling a box of index cards and grilles at every word. "It is not a 1-for-1 substitution but rather a homophonic cipher: each ciphertext character stands for a particular plaintext character, but several ciphertext characters may encode the same plaintext character." But this type of cipher has been tried on the VMS, with most European languages, with no success.
- The mere fact that the underlying language was European allowed it to be cracked, by the identification of words and structures, even without knowledge of the encryption itself. Why hasn't that approach worked with the VMS?
- The topic of that book was "masonic" rituals, which had to be totally secret by definition. But the topic of the VMS seems to be 5-6 separate treatises, with very different topics, none of them particularly sensitive. Are the images of the VMS just covers to mislead the "inquisition"? If the VMS is in an European language, why isn't there a single word in plain text, not even "Incipt Libris II" of the like?
Quote:Could you name one manuscript written in a made up alphabet to represent the sounds of a foreign language? +100 points if this manuscript wouldn't contain any notes in the original language of the author.
You mean, other than the VMS.
And I suppose you mean a new alphabet for a language X created by someone who was not himself a member of the X-speaking people. Otherwise there are many examples, from the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Examples of alphabets created by outsiders are the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. alphabet and possibly the Georgian Alphabet by the Armenian Medieval linguist You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.; and the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (~1830)
Matteo Ricci, a Jesuit who is considered the founder of the Catholic Church in China, invented what is essentially the pinyin script to transcribe Mandarin phonetically. He used it in the first Mandarin-Latin dictionary, published in Rome aroun (IIRC) 1580. I don't know whether he used it to transcribe Chinese books (which could perhaps be useful to missionaries who wanted to learn the spoken language, but not the written one). However he is not a good example because he based his phonetic script on Latin letters, with extra diacritics, and he actually learned the Chinese script and could translate Chinese books, instead of just transcribing them phonetically. He even translated Euclid and other Western books into Mandarin, with Chinese characters.
As for the lack of notes in European language: the book you cited is an example of a book written entirely in code without a single note by the Author in plain language. Do I get the 100 points for just that? At least 50 points?
As I argued before, maybe there were notes by the Author in his European language, but they were in a separate document (possibly paper, with bigger pages) and got lost or destroyed. Maybe there were such notes on the VMS itself, but Widemann or Voynich removed them in order to pass the book as something more valuable than it actually was.
Quote:
Quote:Could you please name one testable prediction of the "All Ink Is Original" theory? Or "The Language is Not Chinese" theory? Or "The Contents is Random Gibberish" theory?
No, but for the first two there is some good evidence: visible total lack of retracing in the text
This is simply and grossly false. There is tons of visible retracing, in the text and in the illustrations. The question is only whether this retracing was all done by the original Scribe himself, of some of it was done at a much later time by other people.
Quote:and clearly European background of the manuscripts, both images
The "European" character of the illustrations is all in decorative elements. Even that old-lady-with-staff-and-rosary picture, which I can believe was indeed copied from that German book (from memory, or though a long chain of bad copies), is just decoration. That indeed tells us that the Scribe was European and drew inspiration from other European illustrations.
But there is no detail of the images that shows specifically European contents. Not even that the Author was European (although the COT is neutral on this point).
Quote:and provenance
The ownership of the VMS has been traced only back to Barschius, and (less convincingly) to Widemann. That does not tell us anything about where the VMS was written, much less who was the Author.
Quote:[The evidence does not] unequivocally confirm the Chinese origin of the text. I was talking about predictions that can reasonably quickly let us identify if a theory is correct or definitely not.
Again, you are asking too much. For a theory to be "scientific", it only needs to make predictions that can be tested in (say) decades at a feasible cost, and could disprove the theory.
For an experiment to prove a theory, it would have to disprove all possible alternative theories, even those that haven't been formulated yet and may be supported by evidence that is not yet available.
All the best, --stolfi - That example is from the 1730s, when sophisticated encryption schemes were already old stuff.
-
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Rafal > 09-12-2025, 08:29 PM
Quote:As for the lack of notes in European language: the book you cited is an example of a book written entirely in code without a single note by the Author in plain language. Do I get the 100 points for just that? At least 50 points?
If we are talking about Copiale Cipher then you get 0 points
From Wikipedia
The Copiale cipher includes abstract symbols, as well as letters from Greek and most of the Roman alphabet. The only plain text in the book is "Copiales 3" at the end and "Philipp 1866" on the flyleaf. Philipp is thought to have been an owner of the manuscript.
Actually "Philipp" was a crib, this form of the name suggested that the language was German and it turned out to be true. -
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
oshfdk > 09-12-2025, 08:33 PM
(09-12-2025, 07:52 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- That example is from the 1730s, when sophisticated encryption schemes were already old stuff.
I'm not sure we need to discuss this book here. You asked for an example of a community that created some secret book, here is it. Of course it's not the same as the Voynich Manuscript, but is the difference that important?
(09-12-2025, 07:52 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Quote:Could you name one manuscript written in a made up alphabet to represent the sounds of a foreign language? +100 points if this manuscript wouldn't contain any notes in the original language of the author.
Examples of alphabets created by outsiders are the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. alphabet and possibly the Georgian Alphabet by the Armenian Medieval linguist You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.; and the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (~1830)
I wasn't asking for examples of alphabets. All alphabets have been created by some people for some people and I think this would normally be a lengthy process and mostly in some teaching context and accompanied by copious notes. I was asking about a single example of a manuscript written in a made up alphabet to represent sounds of a foreign language (made up to record this particular manuscript and not to fill in the void of missing script in some language). This is the scenario that you propose in the Chinese theory, as I understand it.
(09-12-2025, 07:52 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As for the lack of notes in European language: the book you cited is an example of a book written entirely in code without a single note by the Author in plain language. Do I get the 100 points for just that? At least 50 points?
The book I cited is a cipher manuscript and it's not a phonetic representation of another language. Bonus points were for a phonetic script book with no notes in plain language.
(09-12-2025, 07:52 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Quote:No, but for the first two there is some good evidence: visible total lack of retracing in the text
This is simply and grossly false. There is tons of visible retracing, in the text and in the illustrations.
I know of only two examples of retracing in the text of the MS. I've seen all the images you posted, unfortuantely, to me they don't look even remotely convincing.
(09-12-2025, 07:52 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The "European" character of the illustrations is all in decorative elements. Even that old-lady-with-staff-and-rosary picture, which I can believe was indeed copied from that German book (from memory, or though a long chain of bad copies), is just decoration. That indeed tells us that the Scribe was European and drew inspiration from other European illustrations.
But there is no detail of the images that shows specifically European contents. Not even that the Author was European (although the COT is neutral on this point).
Again, this is your interpretation of what is "decorative" and what are the "contents". I can name a lot of distinctively European things in the imagery.
1) European castle. 2) European dragon. 3) Quite European Zodiac figures. 4) European cloths. 5) European hair styles.
Can you name anything of Asian origin?
(09-12-2025, 07:52 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Again, you are asking too much. For a theory to be "scientific", it only needs to make predictions that can be tested in (say) decades at a feasible cost, and can disprove the theory.
For an experiment to prove a theory, it would have to disprove all possible alternative theories, even those that haven't been formulated yet and may be supported by evidence that is not yet available.
We are not trying to describe some natural law, we are trying to read a manuscript. If there is a solution, it's likely it will be a single final solution and its discovery will likely disprove all alternative theories, current or future, that are not compatible with this solution.
And I'm asking for what would it take for me to consider a theory that has basically no grounding in hard evidence. I can consider a theory based on conjectures, which I believe applies to MRT and the Chinese theory, if it can be quickly grounded by some clear and reproducible steps. For example, if any theory no matter how outrageous and bizarre will produce a repeatable and highly plausible plaintext for the manuscript that would match the linguistic and historical context, I would certainly prefer this theory to any reasonable and logical discourse that won't produce comparable results. - That example is from the 1730s, when sophisticated encryption schemes were already old stuff.
-
RE: The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against
Aga Tentakulus > 09-12-2025, 11:19 PM
@Jorge
Nevertheless, I find it difficult to believe. On the reverse side, we see the same problem.
Here, you can clearly see the sequence of events.
Wooden cover, water stain (yellow), ink dissolved by water and running (light blue). Worm eats water stain and glyph (orange).
Now I can no longer see the eaten glyphs, but I can see the water damage.
And that's just the beginning of the story.
For something like this to happen, the book must have been lying on a writing desk. A table with a slope.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)