Yesterday, 11:42 PM
Only translation from german to english made with AI. Please have a look at the attached pdf
Voynich-like Symbols in a Florentine Manuscript
While searching for the original Ars manuscript mentioned by Mary D’Imperio in An Elegant Enigma, I unexpectedly came across another version of the Ars held by the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 30.29.
The manuscript probably comes from France and dates to around 1250–1275. It contains an Ars attributed to Aristotle, which is referred to in different sources as Ars notaria, Ars notoria, or Ars notarie. These names sometimes seem to get mixed up, although they don't necessarily refer to the same thing.
What first caught my attention was f87r. It contains a number of unusual symbols, some of which look surprisingly similar to Voynich glyphs, at least to my eye.
But what I find even more interesting are the pages just before f87r. They contain tables, sequences of letters, and various symbols, sometimes combined with dots, strokes, or other elements. In places, it looks almost as if someone was experimenting with different signs or trying to combine them according to certain rules.
This made me wonder whether someone might have been trying to develop their own shorthand system, or at least experimenting with how such a system could be constructed.
Could There Be a Connection to Voynich?
One possibility that came to mind is that these tables and sequences might show someone trying to create a kind of shorthand using a limited set of basic signs, adding strokes or other elements, or combining them in different ways.
Could the Voynich script have been developed using similar ideas? Or could both even go back to some common predecessor?
Of course, there are other possible explanations. Someone might have been trying to decipher an unfamiliar script, or perhaps the symbols were copied from another source that we don't know about today.
For now, I think a direct connection to the Voynich Manuscript is less likely, especially since the symbol table on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. also contains quite a few signs that don't seem to appear in Voynich.
Still, I find the similarities worth looking into, particularly if we compare not just individual glyphs but also the way they might have been built and combined.
About the Attachments
I've put together a comparison of some symbols from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. that particularly reminded me of Voynich glyphs. I added the corresponding signs by hand.
I've also attached a few of the relevant pages from Plut. 30.29 and a more detailed, technically enhanced version of f87r. The original manuscript images were only adjusted to improve readability, without altering their content. My own annotations are clearly marked separately.
For some of the signs and letter sequences, I've tried to suggest possible readings.
I also tried comparing them with medieval Latin abbreviations using Cappelli, but that turned out to be quite difficult and time-consuming. Since I know very little about medieval shorthand or Latin abbreviations, please take my annotations as guesses rather than reliable readings.
Maybe someone here with more experience will recognise some of these signs or abbreviations, or perhaps even a familiar way of constructing characters.
I'd be especially interested to know whether the sequences on the preceding pages and those on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. might belong to the same system, and whether anyone has seen anything similar in other medieval manuscripts.
A Short Note on Provenance
The manuscript was probably written in 13th-century France, possibly in the wider circle of Richard de Fournival. How it later reached Italy is still unclear, but there are some interesting possible connections involving Fontana and the Flaminio family, especially Marcantonio and Giovanni Antonio Flaminio. It may have passed through Italian humanist circles, although that's still speculation. By 1571, it was in Florence.
We also don't know when the additional entries were made or who wrote them. They could theoretically have been added at any point between the 13th century and 1571, and there's no clear evidence that Flaminio was responsible.
It would also be interesting to compare the handwriting on the preceding pages with that on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to see whether they were written by the same person. To my eye, they look very similar, but I'm certainly no expert in medieval handwriting.
Last notice from me: i didnt found any informations about the plutei 30.29. in the ninja forum. Thank you
Voynich-like Symbols in a Florentine Manuscript
While searching for the original Ars manuscript mentioned by Mary D’Imperio in An Elegant Enigma, I unexpectedly came across another version of the Ars held by the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 30.29.
The manuscript probably comes from France and dates to around 1250–1275. It contains an Ars attributed to Aristotle, which is referred to in different sources as Ars notaria, Ars notoria, or Ars notarie. These names sometimes seem to get mixed up, although they don't necessarily refer to the same thing.
What first caught my attention was f87r. It contains a number of unusual symbols, some of which look surprisingly similar to Voynich glyphs, at least to my eye.
But what I find even more interesting are the pages just before f87r. They contain tables, sequences of letters, and various symbols, sometimes combined with dots, strokes, or other elements. In places, it looks almost as if someone was experimenting with different signs or trying to combine them according to certain rules.
This made me wonder whether someone might have been trying to develop their own shorthand system, or at least experimenting with how such a system could be constructed.
Could There Be a Connection to Voynich?
One possibility that came to mind is that these tables and sequences might show someone trying to create a kind of shorthand using a limited set of basic signs, adding strokes or other elements, or combining them in different ways.
Could the Voynich script have been developed using similar ideas? Or could both even go back to some common predecessor?
Of course, there are other possible explanations. Someone might have been trying to decipher an unfamiliar script, or perhaps the symbols were copied from another source that we don't know about today.
For now, I think a direct connection to the Voynich Manuscript is less likely, especially since the symbol table on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. also contains quite a few signs that don't seem to appear in Voynich.
Still, I find the similarities worth looking into, particularly if we compare not just individual glyphs but also the way they might have been built and combined.
About the Attachments
I've put together a comparison of some symbols from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. that particularly reminded me of Voynich glyphs. I added the corresponding signs by hand.
I've also attached a few of the relevant pages from Plut. 30.29 and a more detailed, technically enhanced version of f87r. The original manuscript images were only adjusted to improve readability, without altering their content. My own annotations are clearly marked separately.
For some of the signs and letter sequences, I've tried to suggest possible readings.
I also tried comparing them with medieval Latin abbreviations using Cappelli, but that turned out to be quite difficult and time-consuming. Since I know very little about medieval shorthand or Latin abbreviations, please take my annotations as guesses rather than reliable readings.
Maybe someone here with more experience will recognise some of these signs or abbreviations, or perhaps even a familiar way of constructing characters.
I'd be especially interested to know whether the sequences on the preceding pages and those on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. might belong to the same system, and whether anyone has seen anything similar in other medieval manuscripts.
A Short Note on Provenance
The manuscript was probably written in 13th-century France, possibly in the wider circle of Richard de Fournival. How it later reached Italy is still unclear, but there are some interesting possible connections involving Fontana and the Flaminio family, especially Marcantonio and Giovanni Antonio Flaminio. It may have passed through Italian humanist circles, although that's still speculation. By 1571, it was in Florence.
We also don't know when the additional entries were made or who wrote them. They could theoretically have been added at any point between the 13th century and 1571, and there's no clear evidence that Flaminio was responsible.
It would also be interesting to compare the handwriting on the preceding pages with that on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to see whether they were written by the same person. To my eye, they look very similar, but I'm certainly no expert in medieval handwriting.
Last notice from me: i didnt found any informations about the plutei 30.29. in the ninja forum. Thank you
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)
