http://rs143.rapidshare.com/files/319338661/Das_Voynich_R__tsel.wmv

Oh, and yes: when I handled the VMs at the Beinecke, I left the job of opening the nine-rosette page till last… far too hair-raising to do on Day One!

I really enjoyed it, though. The program. The reconstructions were exquisite. I especially liked the Bacon ones where he is using the water lens. It was also great to see the VMS on tape. In the Mr. Sids, you don’t really get a feeling of how dry, thick or brittle the vellum is. In the program, I held my breath whenever they bent a page or folded out the sexfolio, fearing that the vellum would snap like a grissini* whenever too much strain was put on the folds. If ever presented with the VMS before me, I would barely dare to touch it out of fear of it spontaneously combusting at my touch.

It’s going to get interesting when the remaining forensic data gets published.

Rich (#14): While I guess it counts, I still think there’s a huge difference between using old vellum already bound into quires/folios used in a continuous ledger spanning several centuries, and storing the vellum unused. Especially with the diary-like property of the ledger; blank when you buy it, awaiting your pen.

René (#16): The same thought occurred to me. The probability curve we have from carbon-dating is 95%. Maybe, the odds that the VMS vellum wasn’t stored for a significant amount of time before use is also around the same. Maybe it’s 80%. If it’s 80%, doesn’t that then imply that the probability that the VMS was created around the 1420′s is really 20% smaller? This would correct the 95% to 94% (6% of it being wrong instead of 5%: 20% more). Note that I am of course not disputing the carbon dating, I’m just creating a main dating probability separate from the C-14 one by adding together the probabilities. Now, if we keep adding together probabilities (the 94% only include carbon dating and vellum storage, you could also include a lot of art history clues, whatever marginalia you think significant etc), we’ll probably (heh) end up with a 1404-1438 date probability of much less than 95%. Still more than 50% I think, but much less than 95%.

This number will then have been calculated using a large amount of approximations, some of which may vary hugely depending on who interprets the evidence, and thus the process itself would contribute to the probabilistic indeterminacy.

…My head is spinning.

* Is there a singular form of grissini? It sounds so much like a plural form and I keep wanting to spell its (probably imagined) singular form as the Latin-analogous “grissinus”.

of course I am not at all against doing multi-spectral imaging, quite
the contrary Compared to the other two types of analyses, it is for
me understandably of a secondary importance.

Anyway, w.r.t. the dates of the individual samples, the film states
that all four samples point to the same time, which is why they may
be treated as four observations of the same quantity, thereby
combining (and narrowing) the uncertainty. The differences between the
individual samples are statistically insignificant.

I personally find that an absolutely key result.

With the VMs’ four C14 dates, what I will be looking for in particular is the date of the Q9 vellum sliver. Remember that the statistics we have been given relate to the mean C14 ratio for the four samples… yet I suspect that samples from the unusual format bifolios will be a more accurate indication of age than samples from more conventional format bifolios (which could very possibly be “old (pre-cut) vellum”). We shall see! =:-o

I think Nick’s and Barbara’s remarks about the demand and use of parchment and paper during this period are relevant. Parchment was always scarce, demand for it was high, and it was likely to be used as quickly as produced. OTOH, paper use was climbing rapidly – but exactly when? The first or second half of the 15th century?

More historical and economic info would help. Of course, the whole 15th century was the beginning of the Renaissance – quite a period of transition! Sometimes that will make things easy to identify, sometimes the contrary!