Comments on: Become A Voynich Manuscript Expert In Just 5 Minutes…

By: nickpelling

nickpelling — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 22:05:06 +0000

cj: as with all things Voynichian, there are indeed similarities… though many dissimilarities, too. Swim carefully!

By: cjbearden

cjbearden — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 20:45:13 +0000

Dear VMSer’s,
Some of the mysterious plants contained in the VMS, are not plants at all…they are animals.
These animals are part of a marine life family called Crinoidea.
In size, its list of members is astonishing, but include Star Fish, Feather Stars, and Neocrinus Decorous, which is identical in shape to a Sunflower.
From the strange “flowers”, oddly shaped “leaves”, down their “stalks”, and to their gnarly or tubular “roots”, this marine life is nearly a perfect match. For a more detailed description (hope you have a dictionary handy!) please refer to The Marine Life Information Network’s website @ http://www.marlin.ac.uk

I am trying to positively identify three different Crinoidea in the VMS now, but there are so many!
For a photo sampling, please google Sea Lilies on the google image page : )

By: cjbearden

cjbearden — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 23:45:32 +0000

Hmmm…designed to be written?…now that’s cryptic!

By: nickpelling

nickpelling — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 13:16:03 +0000

cj: …or it suggests that Voynichese was designed to be written. As ever, you can read the evidence in multiple ways. =:-o

As to the proof the Voynich Manuscript is encrypted, I’ll have Graydon Harvitz debating that fairly shortly…

By: cjbearden

cjbearden — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 03:55:01 +0000

Nick,
Playing Devil’s advocate here but…dare I ask?…what proof exists that the VMS is truly encrypted? Glyphs, contractions, and repetition of words abound, yet the cadence remains uninterrupted. This suggests the VMS was written to be read. If so, why the need for encryption?
On a personal note, your website is fabulous and fun…thanks much! cjb

By: nickpelling

nickpelling — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:57:48 +0000

cj: the marginalia on f17r and f116v both contain fragments of Voynichese, so it seems very likely that they were both written by the original author. Early Modern Irish, though? Could be, though it still doesn't quite explain why only a tiny handful of words are even partially readable. I've long said that the first step with these marginalia should be codicological analysis, separating out the various layers and emendations: just guessing at the language isn't really good enough, for something that seems to have been written by the original author unencrypted.

By: cjbearden

cjbearden — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 14:53:21 +0000

Nick,
I’m a newcomer, but I love a good mystery and the VMS certainly meets this criteria. I have experience in translating unknown words from extinct Indian Languages, which has taught me invaluable research techniques. Slim credentials stated, I shall proceed. Page 116v is written in Early Modern Irish. Beginning with Line 1, the first two words “nos lebor” mean “traditional book”. The last line, word #8, “geis” means “taboo”, used in the spirit of “thou shalt not…”. I believe St. Seanan’s mother, Davina, is mentioned on this page, too, but…it’s hard to be certain. Okay, does anyone know if this page was written by the author(s), or 15th century editors, or simply notations made by an Irish code breaker?

By: Brandon Matush

Brandon Matush — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:05:32 +0000

Well, I didn’t realize that, thanks!
Will ordering your book via PayPal cover shipping to the USA?

By: nickpelling

nickpelling — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 22:18:53 +0000

Brandon: actually, general levels of literacy were surprisingly good in the fifteenth century, particularly in locations such as Florence. Some Victorian historians liked to kid themselves that history only happened to important people, but for every one person we do know about there was a huge cloud of people just out of sight who were essentially just as able.

By: Brandon Matush

Brandon Matush — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:55:42 +0000

I’m just a casual browser to this site, so I apologize in advance if I am covering old ground.
Has anyone tried to approach this from the direction of authorship? By this I mean narrowing the field based on the accepted evidence, like the 400 year period you mentioned in the main article. I have read that few people in Europe were literate at the time, and taking the cost of materials into account might also help narrow the field. I think it might be useful to assume that the author lived in or near a city as well, assuming that clergy and nobility could be excluded as potential authors. Or one could start by considering what was know about European clergy and nobility at the time, and work from the opposite angle.
But back to my original question: Has anyone narrowed down the field of suspects in any fashion?