I've started an experiment to see if it's possible to generate word tokens from word types under certain conditions. The following conditions must be met:

• The ratio of word types to word tokens should be as similar as possible to the VMS ( as extrapolated ).
  
• The method should be simple enough to use, i. e. conversion to ciphertext and back to plain text should be possible without using a codebook or other tools.
  
• Only character set A-Z and 0-9 was used.
  
• All text should be generated with only one method. Subsequent adjustments were excluded.
  

• The first letter is always single, so "D" is 4.
  
• If char is A-Y then it must be replaced with a number ( A=1, B=2, C=3 ...).
  
• "Z" is space.
  
• If char is a number then no change is needed.
  
• If the second and third chars are "AZ" ( 1 ) then no division or swap is needed ( see  "CAZC" ).
  

Hi everyone,
I'm starting this thread because I'm scratching my head over a specific vord, otaly.
Voynichese.com gives 19 occurrences of otaly throughout the manuscript.
It is found in both the main text and the labels. It appears nowhere in the initial big plant series of quires.
Focusing on the labels, here are the things that are labeled as otaly:
Nymphs/stars in the Pisces, Dark Taurus, Libra and Leo pages of the zodiac section (one in each).
A piece of tubing/fluid flow in Q13, and two different plants/roots from the small plants sections.
(It does appear in the text on one of the Q17 big plant pages, f94r, but again this plant looks very different from the two in the small plants section.)




Full otaly search results: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

It seems to label completely unrelated things... or is there a connection between those things?

I know there are other examples of "labels" that label seemingly unrelated things, but this one really stood out for me.

Hello, 

I have researched to try find if this is a long found and now dead argument regarding this topic but I couldn't see much apart from some articles showing "volcano images" (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.) also on the page I am talking about (hopefully that is a good sign!). This is an image link to my comparison. Hopefully this is a good topic for discussion. 

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I have some pretty wild theories regarding this fold out page but putting them aside, I think this particular comparison of the central image is very striking. The right side image is from Kircher entitled on wikipedia as "earths internal fires"  (Kircher was said to be very interested in the Voynich Manuscript and also had it donated to him, the validity of this letter within the manuscript is obviously up for debate).

I feel tempted to note the way both images have 4 "Volcanoes" in the north west and 3 in the north east, breaking the symmetry of both images, and that the most north west "Volcano" on each images is nearest the central north "fire?" (Edit: I think this is meant to be water?), but the page fold is as such that it may be a false conclusion, still, interesting. 

Kirchers version shows 11 "Volcanoes" where the VM shows 12. 

Also note the castles in the south east and west of Kirchers images and the castles present on the full foldout. I'm yet to properly evaluate this and (obviously) lack the historical base knowledge to draw comparisons, but again an interesting similarity. [EDIT: These are not castles. I have managed to find a much higher quality images and they are boats!] 

High quality image - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Worth noting the images are believed to be over 200 years apart (1404-1436 and 1640-1660).


Very interested to hear what you think.




Thanks Vviews and Koen GH for making me feel welcome to post . Hopefully this is decent material.

I am wondering what 'am' stands for. Any hint? I would be very grateful.

species intelligibiles am?? connaturales...

Attached Files

Thumbnail(s)
   

Just delete the thread please admin.

I noticed that on bifolio 104v-115r on sections 2 and 4, ink was applied, which are not found in color on other pages. On site 3, in the process of writing quality of writing letters worsens , either the ink in the ink tank dried up, or the feather worn out. Finding such ink supports the version that the text was written before stitching.

   
I decided to intersecting the words of the text on this bifolio.
V (tx) - the amount of text on the pages.
N - is the number of identical words.
N (un) - the number of unique words on the page.
N (U) - is the number of intersecting words, taking into account the repetition on the corresponding page.
It is necessary to introduce the term V (∩) volume of overlapping information. This ratio is N (U) / V (tx), expressed as a percentage.
               V(tx)      N(un)                 N                     N(υ)                V(∩)  

104V        458        64=14,0%          93                   207                  45,2%
115R        444        64=14,4%          93                   206                  46,4%
The flip side of this bifolio gives results worse.
               V(tx)      N(un)                 N                     N(υ)                V(∩)  

104R        438        74=16,9%          80                   158                  36,1%
115V        399        74=18,5%          80                   137                  34,3%

114V/115R      V(tx)=362/444    N=74   N(υ) =133/160      V(∩)  = 36,7/36,0%
104V/105R      V(tx)=458/370    N=60   N(υ)  =142/120     V(∩)  = 31,0/32,4%  
103V/104R      V(tx)=450/438    N=67   N(υ)  =196/147     V(∩)  = 43,6/33/5%
104R/104V     V(tx)=438/458     N=73   N(υ) = 153/178     V(∩)  = 34,9/38,9%
Even higher results for bifolio 78V-81R, where the left and right pages are connected by pipes.
               V(tx)      N(un)                 N                     N(υ)                V(∩)  

78V       292        13=4,45%          53                   157                  53,8%
81R       207        14=6,76%          53                   112                  54,1%

A high result (albeit a little lower), in bifolio 79v-80r, where stitching is done.
               V(tx)      N(un)                 N                     N(υ)                V(∩)  

79V        355       35=9,86%           66                     169                  47,6%
80R        441       44=10.0%           66                     225                  51,0%

I did about 40 comparisons, from Pn = n! = 204!
The minimum V (∩) I received

  1R/104V      V(tx)=210/458    N=28  N(υ)  =58/56   V(∩)  =27,6/12,2% 
49V/104V      V(tx)=142/458    N=22   N(υ)  =42/46   V(∩)  =29,6/10,0%  
 But here V (tx) can exert a great influence.
 
 
 
 

So apparently there's a Japanese manga called The Voynich Hotel.


Synopsis:

"Welcome to the Voynich Hotel, a rundown resort located on an all but deserted island in the South Pacific. Owned by former Mexican wrestler Kandre Umeda, the hotel is maintained by two mysterious maids, Elena and Beluna, as well as a homicidal chef named Amelia.
Kuzuki Taizou, a Japanese tourist, comes to stay at the hotel to escape from his dark past. Soon he discovers that the strange occupants and happenings of the island are even more abnormal than what he is used to. Taizou quickly becomes embroiled in the spiderweb of affairs on the island, growing close to many of the residents and helping them out, though often causing even more problems for himself. But when Taizou's past comes to the island to haunt him, his new friends jump to his aid." (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)

So far, there are only fan-made translations (for example You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ; the texts are translated but the layout is still right to left, so takes some getting used to) but it has been licensed to Seven Seas Entertainment who will be releasing an official English language version in June 2018.

I don't really know if any part of it has anything to do with the manuscript, but perhaps that gets revealed in one of the chapters.

I finished uploading the interview with Adam Lewis, who is writing his You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. on the subject of Voynich research. I trimmed down the video to about 25 minutes, for a more streamlined viewing experience. This time I had to do the interview without David so please don't make fun of me

So, here is a major omission on my part in not posting the comparative counting of the undulations for VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the Oresme cosmos (BNF fr. 565)
Original comparison by E. Velinska in 2014.

This nice comparison posted to an earlier thread by nablator.



Having 43 undulations in both illustrations is either a highly unusual coincidence or a strong indication that the VMs artist was very familiar with the illustration in the Oresme text.


Comparative points of similarity:
Same type or style of cosmos: a simplified version rather than the more common complex representation with all the concentric planetary orbits.

Similar comparative parts.
1.  The central Earth is an inverted T-O representation
2.  The Earth is surrounded by stars
3.  The cosmos is bounded by a cloud band or nebuly line consisting of 43 undulations. There is an etymological equivalence between the words "nebuly" and "cloudy."

Does the VMs cosmos 'mimic' or derive from the Oresme illustration?

Comparative points of difference:
1.  The T-O earth in Oresme has a pictorial representation. In the VMs, the representation has labels.
2.  The stars in Oresme are scattered. In the VMs, the stars are line up in a circle. (Is this serious, or a play on the idea of "surrounded"?)
3.  The visual differences between the Oresme cloud band and the VMs nebuly line are obvious.
4.  The VMs cosmos has a circular wheel and curved spokes consisting of textual banners. (Textual banners are ephemeral. This is the big fake out- a total distraction for the sake of visual difference.)

The structural similarities confirm that the VMs cosmic representation was derived from the Oresme image. The differences are part of an intentional disguise by the VMs creator.

Do you agree or disagree?

I'm not sure whether  to post here, or to ask the moderators for a whole category called 'History of Voynich Studies' or something of that kind.

Time-lines are so important in my work that I may over-estimate their importance for other people,  but I do like to have such things in order so that I can read from beginning to end to see how a theme has been developed, distorted, done justice (or not) over time.



As far as I know, these are the only mentions of  matters related to any 'Cuman theme' (not 'theory') in Voynich studies . If members can add items of which I'm ignorant, please do.   

If the moderators want to re-locate the thread, that's fine. 

-----
2004.  First 'Cuman-related' item.  Not sure what got Leonard Fox onto that track, but on November 6th. of that year he wrote to the Jim's [first] Voynich mailing list about his own friend and colleague Peter Golden who had already written several essays on the Codex Cumanicus and who had already pointed out that the text's Turkic language was "quite closely related to Karaim"...  'Karaim' is how Golden and Fox speak of the Karaite dialect spoken by Jews of the Crimea.   Fox said in that message that he could confirm the the similarity, because Karaim (or Karaite) was the language of his own childhood.  


In 2004, Fox already had a completed English translation of  Simon Szyszman’s book “Le Karaisme: ses doctrines et son histoire,” but was looking for a translator. 



2011/12.  I spoke about Cuman before 2012, and about Karaites from rougly that time, but elsewhere.   2012 is the first mention on my  Voynichimagery blog.  There are 13 posts which come up if you search 'Cuman' though they'll all be in the context of historical and cultural background clarifying the implications of the imagery or my reading of it.   

2016. Koen tells me that Emma  referred to the Codex Cumanicus in Feb. 2016, while talking more generally about language-groups and Turkic languages in connection with the structures of the Vms text.


 2014-2018. The video by the Turkish family  says they've been working on the text for four years. (Video published, unbeknownst to me, on Feb.22nd)

Feb 27th.  2018: My post goes up saying,  "my opinion is that the language is very likely Cuman and the script quite likely derived from Uyghur script, influenced by others which I think include Sephardi script."  A few days earlier, on another blog, I'd quoted a passage from a letter written by a Catalan Franciscan during the first half of the fourteenth century.

Feb. 28th.2018  Nick Pelling posts the Turkish gentleman's video with some others which, altogether, left a less pleasant taste.

March 1st. 2018: Conversation gets going at Voynich ninja, in a post called 'Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript'.


As a personal note:  I'm rarely excited by ideas asserted by members of a group already united by bonds of friendship, earlier collaboration, or common adherence to a  theory.  In this case we have four people, three highly competent in the historical lingusitics side of Turkish/Cuman/Karaim and me, who has come to the same view by a very different route through contextualising and analysing the Voynich imagery.  None of us has worked with the other; none of us has a theory-in-common that we're all trying to promote.  None of us (so far as I know) has any private correspondence with the other.   And, to top it off, Cuman/Old Turkish/Karaim  is far from what anyone would expect to occur, given the century-old ideas still so pervasive.

Four people well qualified, reaching the same general point of view without communicating with each other and (as it would seem) without even knowing what the other was doing.  Well, I like it.