- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Scribes and authorship of the text
- Scribes and authorship of the text
-
Scribes and authorship of the text
Rafal > 24-08-2025, 01:50 PM
Some loose reflections....
I believe a current mainstream view is that Voynich Manuscript was written by several scribes and Lisa Fagin Davis made some claims about it pointing out 5 different scribes or so.
While analysis of handwriting isn't my forte I also naively feel that the pages differ in style and were probably written by several people. Compare for example page f38v and page f39r:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
So let's assume there is one man writing with bigger letters and another man writing with smaller letters as it can be seen in the example.
The interesting observation is that the man who writes with small letters generates more text when describing plants. I haven't done any calculations but I feel it could be statistically proved with every page.
If they were just scribes and copying work of yet another man then there shouldn't be such result. If you tell some people to copy some existing herbal and assign randomly 10 pages to each guy then in theory, none of them should get regularly longer plant descriptions.
Unless they are actual authors of the written text and plants descriptions reflect their personal style. So the big letter guy is "lazy" and writes shorter passages and the small letter guy is hard-working and makes a lot of text.
But does it make sense? Several scribes are making a single herbal together and everybody writes what he wants? Not really for me
It would make more sense if the text was gibberish. Then several people could work on the same fake manuscript but have some degree of freedom. The rule would be - fill the page, don't make it look empty. So the small letter guy would need more text to do the job.
How do you think? Are they any explanations that some scribe regularly generates longer descriptions than the other one? -
RE: Scribes and authorship of the text
oshfdk > 24-08-2025, 03:22 PM
(24-08-2025, 01:50 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Are they any explanations that some scribe regularly generates longer descriptions than the other one?
Big letter guy: Hey, small letter guy, there is a shitload of text on this page, I guess you better take it.
Small letter guy: Sure, but then I'll be drawing some naked ladies.
Big letter guy: Deal. -
RE: Scribes and authorship of the text
nablator > 24-08-2025, 04:12 PM
Statistics from RF1a-n:
Herbal A (including labels):
Pages: 95
Words: 7791 (82 / page)
Characters (with spaces and uncertain spaces, without line endings): 44651 (470 / page)
Herbal B (including labels):
Pages: 32
Words: 3414 (107 / page)
Characters (with spaces and uncertain spaces, without line endings): 19985 (625 / page)
If f65 was included in Herbal B, it would add 2 pages with short texts, only 47 words, 268 characters:
Pages: 34
Words: 3461 (102 / page)
Characters (with spaces and uncertain spaces, without line endings): 20253 (596 / page)
(24-08-2025, 01:50 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It would make more sense if the text was gibberish. Then several people could work on the same fake manuscript but have some degree of freedom. The rule would be - fill the page, don't make it look empty. So the small letter guy would need more text to do the job.
Yes, but small letter guy (Herbal B, mostly) was writing small letters even when the available space was far more than sufficient, as in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. f50r You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. etc. so he was not just filling all the available space. -
RE: Scribes and authorship of the text
dashstofsk > 24-08-2025, 05:25 PM
(24-08-2025, 04:12 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.as in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f65
In the GC transliteration
38v was written by hand 1, in language A.
39r was by hand 2, language B.
41v, by hand 5, B.
65r and 65v, by hand 3, language C.
All different hands.
Even I who am not a trained handwritingologist can see differences in the writing. I suppose we just have to accept the awkward fact that the manuscript was written by more than one person. -
RE: Scribes and authorship of the text
nablator > 24-08-2025, 05:38 PM
(24-08-2025, 05:25 PM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(24-08-2025, 04:12 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.as in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f65
In the GC transliteration
38v was written by hand 1, in language A.
39r was by hand 2, language B.
41v, by hand 5, B.
65r and 65v, by hand 3, language C.
All different hands.
Even I who am not a trained handwritingologist can see differences in the writing. I suppose we just have to accept the awkward fact that the manuscript was written by more than one person.
Yes. I'm not sure if "small letters" is limited to language B. Probably not. The "letters" (if the glyphs represent letters, I don't think so) in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are slightly bigger, so f65 may or may not be included in the set. I don't see the difference between You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. but what do I know, I'm not a "trained paleographer".
I think the identification of languages and scribes should be done on measurable, repeatable criteria. The argument from authority (Currier languages, LFD hands) and subjective statements have little to no value. -
RE: Scribes and authorship of the text
R. Sale > 24-08-2025, 06:57 PM
The argument from authority designates the proper terminology - that is "hands" not "scribes". Sure, the five hands could belong to five scribes, but is that the only explanation?
The period of time covered by the C-14 dates is more than 30 years at a minimum. This span of time is virtually equivalent to the C-14 determination, but it covers a good portion of a human life. Handwriting can evolve. Accidental injury of the hand or arthritis may have had an effect on the written text.
There is also such a thing as intentionally writing smaller if there is a lot to be put on a page.
The various parts of the VMs may have been done by different people and potentially at different times over a couple of decades. Are there any solid reasons to presume that half a dozen people had worked night and day to make the VMs? -
RE: Scribes and authorship of the text
Jorge_Stolfi > 24-08-2025, 08:05 PM
(24-08-2025, 01:50 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.How do you think? Are they any explanations that some scribe regularly generates longer descriptions than the other one?
Why not the same scribe using a smaller "font" when a page has more text or less space, and bigger "font" in the opposite case?
It it quite natural for some plants to come with much longer texts than others. Check You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., for example. (search for "@section 1 {hb}".)
In fact, bells would ring like crazy if every Herbal page had about the same amount of text.
All the best, --jorge
PS. Rafal, do you know the story of Gaspar da Gama? -
RE: Scribes and authorship of the text
Kendiyas > 24-08-2025, 10:04 PM
(24-08-2025, 06:57 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The argument from authority designates the proper terminology - that is "hands" not "scribes". Sure, the five hands could belong to five scribes, but is that the only explanation?
The period of time covered by the C-14 dates is more than 30 years at a minimum. This span of time is virtually equivalent to the C-14 determination, but it covers a good portion of a human life. Handwriting can evolve. Accidental injury of the hand or arthritis may have had an effect on the written text.
There is also such a thing as intentionally writing smaller if there is a lot to be put on a page.
The various parts of the VMs may have been done by different people and potentially at different times over a couple of decades. Are there any solid reasons to presume that half a dozen people had worked night and day to make the VMs?
My handwriting is really bad and when I try to write something neat I always tend to make it smaller and it looks a lot more different. But smaller text is mainly on C. Language B that alone might be proof that another hand was involved.
Also one more thing I wonder, I have never used a quill does using different quills require you to write smaller? Or different? -
RE: Scribes and authorship of the text
Koen G > 25-08-2025, 07:39 AM
(24-08-2025, 05:38 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think the identification of languages and scribes should be done on measurable, repeatable criteria. The argument from authority (Currier languages, LFD hands) and subjective statements have little to no value.
When it comes to LFD, she is the right kind of authority, as opposed to Currier (who still had good intuitions and observations in my opinion). Besides, her argument does not follow from authority, but from the kind of analysis that is common in paleography. This includes a subjective component. Paleography is typically one of those subjects where you find handfuls of scholars hyperfocusing on extremely specific subjects and disagreeing with one another.
That said, I like your suggestion of a more testable, repeatable approach, which I have also considered. I'm not sure if it would change anyone's mind though. Objective measurements may not be able to capture all the nuances that define someone's handwriting. And at the other end of the spectrum, people who already think of "The Author", will just say that he wrote differently at different times of his life. -
Beyond the scribes: Who erased the marginalia and why
BessAgritianin > 25-08-2025, 08:03 AM
While significant scholarly effort has been dedicated to quantifying the number of scribers in VM production, I find that the value of this pursuit is inherently limited of if the text is a copy.
An underestimated line of inquiry concerns the post completion modification of the manuscript.
Specifically the deliberate erasure of alphabet key- You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and many other places.
Who expunged these marginalia, when and for what purpose?
1. Can the specific tool of erasure be determined with the modern multi spectral analysis?
2. Do these erasures correspond to specific historical period or cultural practice?
3. What do the specific targeting of explanatory notes, while leaving other marginalia imply about the motive?