This technique has been used to determine that the parchment of the Voynich MS is from the species cow,
but is producing all sorts of other interesting results:

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

I offer the attached. Included are the new incarnation of Voynich Lite (not much changed) and the continuation for the next 413 words.

Thank you.

Don of Tallahassee

Attached Files

  Voynich Lit1.pdf (Size: 397.46 KB / Downloads: 122)
  Deconstruction of the 413 words foun1.pdf (Size: 238.18 KB / Downloads: 52)
  Deconstruction of words found 4 & 3 times in VMS.pdf (Size: 284.76 KB / Downloads: 88)

Many people who have studied the text of the Voynich Manuscript have come to see the character [n] as not different or independent from [i]. Either it they see it as simply a final variant or they see [in], [iin], and [iiin] as single characters. I'm slowly believing that one of these is likely to be true.

But how can we prove that this is the case? The three bits of evidence I would put forward are:

1) the strong link between [i] sequences and [n]: over 90% of [i] are followed by another [i] or [n], and something like 97% of [n] are preceded by [i]; and
2) [i] and [n] have complementary distribution at the end of words: [i] is practically never word final while [n] is practically always word final; and
2) both [i] and [n] greatly prefer following [a] than [o]: the ratio is 20:1 and 25:1 respectively.

What else could we say to strengthen the case, and what would prove it?

The Golden Key is a text segment located in the outer text ring of White Aries. If the investigation of correspondence between traditional heraldic patterns and the designs of the tubs in the VMs Zodiac continues to its historical grounding, then it is clear that the pope has two keys and this is the one that is golden. The pair of Stolfi's markers, in the textual bands, have essentially been given a sort of sacred validation.

So in addition to being highly recommended by the internal workings of the Zodiac illustrations, the text found in the segment has some unusual characteristics. In a way, keeping with the multiple examples of pairing in the astrological medallions of the first five houses, and with numerous paired, heraldic examples, this text also has multiple examples of double and triple word repetition. Something that is unique in all VMs Zodiac text segments.

Secondly, there is a decided preference in this segment for words that start with the EVA letter "o". And this is the same letter generally conceded to be first in the seventeen symbol sequence from f57v.

And third, the words from the Golden Key text segment use a very limited selection of symbols that come from the seventeen symbol sequence almost exclusively.

Positional confirmation is found in VMs heraldry. It is used in the seventeen symbol sequence. Positional confirmation is objective, where illustrative interpretations are subjective. So I expect position to be significant in the process of interpretation for this VMs text segment.

Hi everyone,

Warning: Poorly researched post ahead! This thread would greatly benefit from the input of someone with proficiency in Serbian or in Balkan history.

This came up originally because of the "armadillo" on f80v, but I was hesitant to post about it. I made a quick note about it on S.Bax's site, but that was even more poorly researched. 
Finally I decided to post this here after reading JuergenW's paper and its discussion, as it might bring an interesting angle, and maybe, just maybe, might point towards an interchangeability of dragons and dogs in certain contexts.

So: Dragons, armadillos, or... armored dogs?

Apparently there is a medieval tradition of armored dogs used in battle.
In Serbia, these dogs were called zmaj, which is also the word for dragon. The dog breeders who trained and kept these military dogs were called zmajari (dragoneers).
My dubious source for this is here, and I don't know what the poster is quoting from: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Apparently these armored dogs appear elsewhere in Europe too, although I can't find any link to dragons there:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I'm curious to know what the best arguments are for the Voynich manuscript being a cipher.

I'm specifically interested in the thoughts of those who believe in a cryptological solution. What made you follow this path? What do you consider strong evidence for it?

I'm most wanting the positive arguments rather than the negative ones: why it is a cipher rather than why it isn't one of the alternative solutions.

Somewhere else in this forum I suggested that the 'simple' containers in the pharma section (3 bifolios in quires 15 and 19) look as if they could be made of wood. This could also be true for the more elaborate ones, but let's look at the simpler ones first.

These are found on the two bifolios of quire 19, up to and including f102 recto. On f102 verso the more elaborate containers start, which are then continued on the earlier bifolio in quire 15.

They look like 'open' containers that could also have a lid, and only one of them seems to have a lid, though this is far from certain from the drawings.

Typical "open" container on f99r:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Perhaps only closed one on f100r:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The following page (in German, with pictures) gives some real examples from our time frame of interest:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

This page tries to sell medieval-like containers and the point is that the modern 'replicas' (shown in the upper left corner) are accurate, as based on old receords and old finds. The picture in the right margin shows original examples found in East Germany.

Some of the text on the page is of interest. It says (among others):

Wooden boxes, at home and in the kitchen (11th - 15th Century).
Wooden objects found many different applications in the middle ages, and were manufactured in several different ways. (I would like to highlight: by turning).
Their shapes remained largely unchanged over several centuries.

Examples.
The larger container was based on finds in Brandenburg (i.e. East Germany) around the 10th-11th Century. Illustrations and finds of containers created and decorated in similar ways may be found up into the 15th Century.
The smaller containers were based on finds in the Augustine monastery of Contance. Also these are attested in similar forms until after 1500.

Often, these containers are shown (drawn) in connection with pharmacies, ointment containers of Saints, or for conservation of herbs and spices.
(end of summarised translation).

The bit I don't understand is about the ointment of/for Saints....

There are some sources listed under 'Quellen' which seem to be manuscripts with relevant illustrations. I have not seen any of them.
They should be of interest.

Here are some lines of text with structures that are similar in some way.  I'm not sure if any of these have been noticed before.

I've tried to format these so that the structure is evident.  Hopefully it shows up properly for everyone

Two from different pages of Herbal A:

<f35r.P.14;C>      cthol.  chol.     aiin. qotchy. otchor. daiin- {plant}shol. qotaiin-
<f44v.P.2;C>      yolkol. cheol. qokchain.   daly. otchol. daiin.        shol. qotor. ar-

A few examples where the lines occur on the same page.  f85r1:


<f85r1.P.7;H>      pchedy.oraiin.shefchdy.qopar. sheedy.qokedy.qotchedy. kchdar. ypchdy.ldo-
<f85r1.P.20;H>     pcheoy.kshedy. qocphdy.qofol.shdaldy.dairar.cheeteey.otchedy.qokchdy.dy-

And f113r:


<f113r.P.29;A>     ysheeoaiin.alkeeol.chtchol.kcheody.lkchedy.okaiin.  chal.taiin.oteedy=  
<f113r.P.32;A>       shodaiin.shkaiin.chcthal.okshedy.   otal.okaiin.cphoal.otain.okaiin.chedy.qotal- 

Here's a case of four similar words in succession, but with the order jumbled up (there seems to be lots of this kind of thing in Herbal A):

<f16r.P2.8;F>      shotchy.ydain.yky.shody.otol.daiin-{plant}  
<f16v.P.12;H>                    daiin.yky.otor.chody-{plant}

And finally, the entire four-line paragraph on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. seems to have some kind of structure, though maybe I'm just seeing things here:

<f69r.P.1;H>    tcheeos.      shey.          opaiin.  chey.    shey.  qokeey  shdy.   ol. ot. otal. sar-
<f69r.P.2;H>    daiin.        shey.          okaiin.  shkechy. sheey. tey.    chy.    cthy.   otol. cham-
<f69r.P.3;H>    sheosaiin.    ctar. choetey. okal.    chy.            ykar.   ytchey.         cheotam-
<f69r.P.4;H>    ycheo. raiin. ychey.         otaiin.  okchor.         yty.    chkal.          shol=

Please post any further examples if you know of any.

Hi all,
As I was reading about medieval medical literature I stumbled upon a page about John of Arderne, and a remark made on
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. which I found interesting and relevant to this debate, so am copying it here:
"The text in this section is discussing the properties of dragancia (arum dracunculae) and ivy (hedera); the illustration depicts ivy twined around the distinctive stalk of the dragancia, resulting in the creation of a hybrid plant."

I looked around and in fact, depending on the versions of Arderne's work, the same combo of two plants can appear rather different and sometimes completely fused together, really giving the impression of a hybrid:

I wonder if, in the Voynich, some of the plants might be the result of this type of illustrative practice (a single illustration combining two plants mentioned in the adjoining text paragraphs), rather than depicting grafted plants or other explanations?

I'm currently looking at working to break up the Voynich words into syllables (yes, I believe in a linguistic solution) and I wonder what methods have been tried previously, and by whom, to achieve this.

I only know of Stolfi's work, where he considers each word a syllables in itself, but what others are out there?