• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

[split] Big f116v spillover thread.

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Marginalia
  • [split] Big f116v spillover thread.
• [split] Big f116v spillover thread.

• RE: [split] Big f116v spillover thread.

  oshfdk > 4 hours ago

  (5 hours ago)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@ oshfdk If you're talking about cramped letters, then what's this?

  
  I'm not sure I understand the logic of your question. I'm saying "gasmich" has no signs of cramped letters so there was no clear reason so squeeze a ligature to make it look like a single letter. Your reply is pointing to a different line which has some very messy word, which indeed looks messy, and not at all neat like gasmich. I don't really understand your point here?

• RE: [split] Big f116v spillover thread.

  Aga Tentakulus > 4 hours ago

     
  I’ll take it a step further.
  Red is a form of Latin.
  Blue is a form of German. Probably Bavarian.
  Green is VM.
  I can understand the leap from red to blue.
  But the idea that a third language (green) should pop up in the red-to-blue leap is, to me, nonsense.
  Either VM is German or Latin.
  For me, it’s Latin; for JoJo_Jost, it’s Bavarian.
  
  Ich gehe noch weiter.
  Rot ist eine Form von Latein.
  Blau ist eine Form von Deutsch. Wahrscheinlich bairisch.
  Grün ist VM.
  Der Sprung von Rot zu Blau kann ich nachvollziehen.
  Aber das im Sprung Rot-Blau noch eine dritte Sprache (Grün) auftauchen soll, ist für mich blödsinn.
  Entweder ist das VM deutsch oder latein.
  Für mich ist es Latein,  für JoJo_Jost ist es bairisch.

• The UV image

  Jorge_Stolfi > 2 hours ago

  This thread was supposed to be a debate about the image shown in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. on another thread, but perhaps some here have not seen it.  Forgive me for reposting it:
  
     
  
  Basically (A) is the edge of the pooled water, and (B) would be the lower limit of the area where the spill was wiped off.
  
  

  (22-06-2026, 09:17 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.We have MSIs of f116v, from them personally to me it's absolutely clear that no massive retracing happened on this page whatsoever. There is only one very clear layer of text and no clear outline of any other text is visible anywhere (if we don't count the see-through from the recto of the same folio).

  
  To my eyes there are two very clear layers of text, neither of them the original (Rt0) Voynichese text.  Check the "s" of "six", for example.  Which means that the restoration pass of the "Massive Retracing" theory (Rt1) happened after the spill and after this specific attempt at restoring the wiped-out text (RtS).  But let's leave this discussion for the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
  
  Here let me address the (implied?) claim that no Voynichese (Rt0) layer is seen under the "Germolatinish" script (RtS, whether there is Rt1 not).  
  
  The fact that the MSI images were taken with somewhat narrow-band light does not necessarily mean that vestiges of erased ink would be more visible in them than with the naked eye.  Thus any vestige of the Rt0 Voynichese layer that we could see here was probably seen also seen and traced over by the RtS Restorer, usually with the assumption that it was a Latin letter.
  
  But in fact there are a couple o bits of faint traces that seem to be explained only as remains of the Voynichese layer.  Like the diagonal strokes on the "+" signs:
  

  (22-07-2026, 08:56 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.By the way, two of the crosses (after "multod" and after "cere") are closed at the northwest quadrant by a diagonal line, so that they look more like a "4".  But crosses are normally drawn with a vertical down stroke and a left to right horizontal stroke.  If the quill is not completely lifted off the vellum between the two traces, the result would be a diagonal line closing off the southwest or northeast quadrant, depending on which stroke is drawn first.  The diagonal line at the northwest suggests that what the Restorer saw there was a "4", not just a cross.  Like a partially erased q...

  
  And then there are the garbled unreadable glyphs, like the one before the "cere" and the "paldcn" -- which I can only explain as the Restorer himself being unable to guess which "Latin letters" those smudges could have been. 
  
  By the way, I noticed that the "c" of "paldcn" has a short plume, which would make it a Voynichese s There is a stain right over it, but I think it is still quite clear, and in ink -- not a vellum defect.
  
  All the best, --stolfi

• RE: The UV image

  oshfdk > 21 minutes ago

  (2 hours ago)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.But in fact there are a couple o bits of faint traces that seem to be explained only as remains of the Voynichese layer.  Like the diagonal strokes on the "+" signs

  
  These diagonal strokes and serifs are not exceptional and certainly don't need an imaginary Voynichese layer to explain them. There are many similar examples in this thread: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
  
  Some of them:
  
     
• Next Oldest Next Newest