There is a lot of talk about "Voynich armadillo" but very little talk about supposed creature in Rosettes page:
   

It is in the top right circle, close to the castle.

It is absent for example here, in the discussion of Voynich animals:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I think the main dilemma here is if it is some creature at all or not. I included a poll for that.
But hey, it has head, eye, four legs and a tail.

How do you think, what could it be?

For me it looks very alienish. Of course some alien straight from sci-fi movie would be a bit anachronistic, although not as much as you could think.
But I asked AI to reimagine this picture as alien creature and that's what I got:
   

The following is a call for help based on a reading of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the manuscript as Arabic (with Syriac inflections). The glyph-to-phoneme mapping was produced by cross-referencing Maimonides' Medical Glossary and Paul Sbath's translation of the Kitāb al-Azmina (Book of Times) by Ibn Māsawayh against the MS. A majority of findings came from treating the manuscript's sections as transformative "gates", mapping token transitions and noting Galenic quality changes.

This framework suggests the manuscript was written by an East Syriac (Church of the East) physician-monk from the Mosul–Alqosh corridor, c. 1400–1440, using a purpose-built phonemic cipher to encode Arabic pharmaceutical content within a Syriac liturgical framework. My assumption is that the folio is a colophon, an introductory text for the MS. Its token structure is different to anything in the other sections.

I have rendered You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. into phonemes. If anyone here can lend an eye and ear and sound out the phonemes, I would appreciate a "reading" and interpretation if there is one to be had. Specifically:

  • Do the voiced phonemes sound like recognisable Arabic or Syriac words?
  • Are the proposed readings phonetically plausible given the encoding rules?
  • Can you identify words I have marked as unknown (marked ___)?
  • Does the colophon structure match known East Syriac manuscript conventions?


ENCODING RULES & PHONEME MAPPINGS

The script encodes phonemes (sounds), not a one-to-one letter substitution.

  Glyph    Phoneme      Notes
  ─────    ───────      ─────
  d        /d/          dāl — also covers dhāl (d/dh merged)
  r        /r/          rāʾ
  l        /l/          lām
  k        /k/          kāf — also covers qāf (q/k merged)
  m        /m/          mīm
  s        /s/          sīn — also covers zāy (z/s merged). Standalone s = bi- particle
  t        /tˤ/        ṭāʾ — also covers tāʾ (ṭ/t merged)
  p        /b/          bāʾ
  f        /f/          fāʾ
  y        /j/          yāʾ
  n        /n/          nūn (97.7% follows i — degree counter terminator)
  a        /a, aː/      fatḥa / alif — moisture degree counter
  e        /a/ (short)  thermal degree counter: e=°1, ee=°2, eee=°3
  o        /ʕ/ or /uː/ ʿayn (initial) or wāw (medial)
  i        /iː/        kasra / yāʾ vocalic — degree counter stroke
  g        —            word-final marker only (possibly tanwīn)
  ch      /ħ, x/      ḥāʾ/khāʾ merged (bracket glyph)
  sh      /ʃ/          shīn (bracket glyph with curl)
  cth      /θ/          thāʾ (t inside bracket)
  ckh      /dʒ/        jīm (k inside bracket)
  cph      /sˤ/        ṣād (p inside bracket)
  cfh      /dˤ/        ḍād (f inside bracket)

Informal Arabic shorthand rules:
  – Gemination (shaddah) is never marked: khall → khal, ʿaṭṭār → ʿaṭār
  – Hamza is elided: dāʾira → dāira, maʾ → ma
  – Hāʾ is dropped in unstressed positions
  – Tāʾ marbūṭa dots absent
  – Accusative case endings absent (colloquial register)
  – Writing direction reversed: left-to-right (not right-to-left)


THE TEXT

Each line shows:
  (1) EVA glyphs
  (2) Voiced phonemes
  (3) Arabic / Syriac identifications
  (4) Proposed reading
Unknowns are marked ___.

LINE 1
  EVA:    fachys  ykal  ar  ataiin  shol  shory  ses  y  kor  sholdy
  Voiced:  faḥyṣ  ykāl  ʿar  ʿaṭāʾīn  šūl  šūry  ses  y  kūr  šūldy
  Arabic:  فحص  يقال  عر  عطائين  —  —  —  —  كورة  —
  Syriac:  —  —  —  —  ܫܐܠܐ  ܫܘܪܝܐ  —  —  —  ܫܐܠܬܐ
  Read:    faḥṣ  yukāl  ʿar  ʿaṭāʾīn  sheʾlā  shūrāyā  asās  —  kūra  sheʾltā

LINE 2
  EVA:    sory  ckhar  or  kair  chtaiin  shar  ois  cthar  cthar  dan
  Voiced:  ṣūry  ǧār  ʿr  kāyr  ḥṭāyīn  šār  āys  θār  θār  dān
  Arabic:  صورة  جار  عرض  خير  خطّاين  شرح  ايش  ثروة  ثروة  —
  Syriac:  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  ܕܝܢ
  Read:    ṣūra  jār  ʿarḍ  khayr  khaṭṭāyin  sharḥ  aysh  tharwa  tharwa  dēn

LINE 3
  EVA:    syaiir  sheky  or  ykaiin  shod  cthoary  cthes  daraiin  sa
  Voiced:  syāʾīr  šeky  ʿr  ykāʾīn  šūd  θūāry  θes  dārāyīn  sā
  Arabic:  سيّارة?  —  عرض  —  —  ثوري  ثمن?  داراين  —
  Syriac:  —  ܫܟܝܚ?  —  ܟܝܢܐ?  ܫܘܕ  —  —  —  —
  Read:    sayyāra?  shkīḥ?  ʿarḍ  kyānā?  shōd  thawrī  thaman?  dārayn  sā

LINE 4
  EVA:    ooiin  oteey  oteos  roloty  cthar  daiin  otaiin  or  okan
  Voiced:  ʿūʿīn  ʿṭeey  ʿṭeūs  rūlūṭy  θār  dāʾīmān  ʿṭāʾīn  ʿr  ʿkān
  Arabic:  عيون  عطيّة  ___  ___  ثروة  دائماً  عطائين  عرض  ___
  Read:    ʿuyūn  ʿaṭīyya  ___  ___  tharwa  dāʾimān  ʿaṭāʾīn  ʿarḍ  ___

LINE 5
  EVA:    dair  chear  cthaiin  cphar  cfhaiin  ydaraishy
  Voiced:  dāyr  ḥeʿar  θāʾīn  ṣār  ḍāʾīn  ydārāyšy
  Arabic:  دير  خير  ثاني  صبّار  —  —
  Syriac:  ܕܝܪܐ  —  —  —  —  ܝܕܪܫ?
  Read:    dayr  khayr  thānī  ṣabbār  [ḍād demo]  yadrusī?

LINE 6
  EVA:    odar  shol  cphoy  oydar  s  cfhoaiin  shodary
  Voiced:  ʿudār  šūl  ṣūy  ʿydār  s  ḍūʿāyīn  šūdāry
  Syriac:  ܥܘܕܪܢܐ  ܫܐܠܐ  ܨܒܝܢܐ  ܥܕܪܐ  ܘ  —  ܫܕܪ
  Read:    ʿudrānā  sheʾlā  ṣebyānā  ʿeḏrā  w-  ___  shdārā

LINE 7
  EVA:    yshey  shody  okchoy  otchol  chocthy  oschy  dain  chor  kos
  Voiced:  yšey  šūdy  ʿkḥūy  ʿṭḥūl  ḥūθy  ʿsḥy  dāʾīm  ḥūr  kūs
  Arabic:  يشير  —  —  عطول?  —  —  دائم  حور  —
  Syriac:  —  ܫܘܕܝܐ  ܥܘܩܒܐ?  —  ܚܘܬܐ?  ܥܫܝܢ?  —  —  ܟܣܐ
  Read:    yushīr  shōdāyā  ʿuqbā?  ʿuṭūl?  ḥōthā?  ʿeshyānā?  dāʾim  ḥawr  kāsā

LINE 8
  EVA:    daiin  shos  cfhol  shody  dain  os  teody
  Voiced:  dāʾīmān  šūs  ḍūl  šūdy  dāʾīm  ʿs  ṭeūdy
  Arabic:  دائماً  شروط?  ظلّ?  —  دائم  —  —
  Syriac:  —  —  —  ܫܘܕܝܐ  —  ܐܬ?  ܬܘܕܝܬܐ
  Read:    dāʾimān  shurūṭ?  ḍill?  shōdāyā  dāʾim  ōthā?  tōdīthā

LINE 9
  EVA:    ydain  cphesaiin  ol  cphey  ytain  shoshy  cphodales  es
  Voiced:  ydāʾīm  ṣesāʾīn  ʿl  ṣey  yṭāʾīn  šūšy  ṣūdāles  es
  Arabic:  يدوم  صفات?  على  صفاء?  —  —  صيدلة  —
  Syriac:  —  —  —  —  —  ܫܘܫܦܐ?  —  ܐܝܬ?
  Read:    yadūm  ṣifāt?  ʿalā  ṣafā?  ___  shōshēp̄ā?  ṣaydala  ʾīth?

LINE 10
  EVA:    oksho  kshoy  otairin  oteol  okan  shodain  sckhey  daiin
  Voiced:  ʿkšū  kšūy  ʿṭāʾīrīn  ʿṭeūl  ʿkān  šūdāʾīn  sǧey  dāʾīmān
  Read:    ___  ___  ___  ___  ___  ___  ___  dāʾimān

LINE 11
  EVA:    shoy  ckhey  kodaiin  cphy  cphodaiils  cthey  she  oldain  d
  Voiced:  šūy  ǧey  kūdāʾīmān  ṣy  ṣūdāʾīīls  θey  šē  ʿldāʾīn  d
  Read:    ___  ___  ___  ___  ___  ___  shē  ___  d-

LINE 12
  EVA:    dain  oiin  chol  odaiin  chodain  chdy  okain  dan  cthy  kod
  Voiced:  dāʾīm  ʿūyīn  ḥūl  ʿūdāʾīmān  ḥūdāʾīn  ḥdy  ʿkāʾīn  dān  θy  kūd
  Read:    dāʾim  ʿuyūn  ḥawl  ___  ___  ___  ___  dēn  ___  ___

LINE 13
  EVA:    daiin  shckhey  ckeor  chor  shey  chol  chol  kor  chal
  Voiced:  dāʾīmān  šǧey  keūr  ḥūr  šey  ḥūl  ḥūl  kūr  ḥāl
  Read:    dāʾimān  ___  ___  ḥawr  ___  ḥawl  ḥawl  kūra  khall

LINE 14
  EVA:    sho  chol  shodan  kshy  kchy  dor  chodaiin  sho  keeap
  Voiced:  šū  ḥūl  šūdān  kšy  kḥy  dūr  ḥūdāʾīmān  šū  keeāb
  Read:    ___  ḥawl  ___  ___  ___  dawr  ___  ___  ___

LINE 15
  EVA:    ycho  tchey  chokain  pshol  dydyd  cthy  daicthy
  Voiced:  yḥū  ṭḥey  ḥūkāʾīn  bšūl  dydyd  θy  dāyθy
  Arabic:  —  تحيّة  —  —  —  —  —
  Syriac:  ܘܗܘ  —  ܚܘܟܡܐ  ܒܫܐܠܐ  ܕܝܕܝ ܕ  ܬܝ?  ܕܐܝܬܝ
  Read:    wa-hū  taḥīyya  ḥūkkāmā  b-sheʾlā  dīdī-d  thī?  d-āythī

LINE 16 ★ KEY LINE
  EVA:    yto  shol  she  kodshey  cphealy  dar  dasain  dain  ckhyds
  Voiced:  yṭū  šūl  šē  kūdšey  ṣeāly  dār  dāsāʾīn  dāʾīm  ǧyds
  Syriac:  ܝܬ  ܫܐܠܐ  ܫܐ  ܩܘܕܫܐ  ܨܠܘܬܐ  —  ܕܐܣ̈ܝܐ  —  —
  Arabic:  —  —  —  —  —  دار  —  دائم  جيّدين?
  Read:    yāt  sheʾlā  shē  qudshā  ṣlōtā  dār  d-āsāyē  dāʾim  jayyidīn?

LINE 17 ★ KEY LINE
  EVA:    dchar  shcthaiin  okaiir  chey  rchy  potol  cthols  dlocta
  Voiced:  dḥār  šθāʾīn  ʿkāʾīr  ḥey  rḥy  bṭūl  θūls  dlūktā
  Arabic:  ذخيرة  ___  —  —  —  —  —  —
  Syriac:  —  —  ܥܩܪܐ  ܚܝܠܐ  ܪ̈ܚܡܐ  ܒܬܘܠܬܐ  ܬܠܝܬܝܘܬܐ  ܕܘܟܬܐ
  Read:    dhakhīra  ___  ʿaqqārā  ḥaylā  raḥmē  btūltā  tlītāyūtā  duktā

LINE 18
  EVA:    shok  chor  chey  dain  ckhey  otol  daiiin
  Voiced:  šūk  ḥūr  ḥey  dāʾīm  ǧey  ʿṭūl  dāʾīmīn
  Arabic:  شكر  حور  —  دائم  —  عطا?  دائمين
  Syriac:  —  —  ܚܝܠܐ  —  ܓܠܐ?  —  —
  Read:    shukr  ḥawr  ḥaylā  dāʾim  gālē?  ʿaṭā?  dāʾimīn

LINE 19
  EVA:    cpho  shaiin  shokcheey  chol  tshodeesy  shey  pydeey  chy  ro  dar
  Voiced:  ṣū  šāʾīn  šūkḥeey  ḥūl  ṭšūdeesy  šey  bydeey  ḥy  rū  dār
  Read:    ___  ___  ___  ḥawl  tashkhīṣī?  ___  ___  ___  ___  dār

LINE 20
  EVA:    doin  chol  dain  cthal  dar  shear  kaiin  dar  shey  cthar
  Voiced:  dūn  ḥūl  dāʾīm  θāl  dār  šeʿar  kāʾīn  dār  šey  θār
  Read:    dēn  ḥawl  dāʾim  thālith?  dār  shaʿāʾir?  kāʾīn  dār  ___  tharwa

LINE 21
  EVA:    choo  kaiin  shoaiin  okol  daiin  far  cthol  daiin  ctholdar
  Voiced:  ḥūū  kāʾīn  šūʿāʾīn  ʿkūl  dāʾīmān  fār  θūl  dāʾīmān  θūldār
  Read:    ___  kāʾīn  shuʿāʿīn?  ʿuqūl  dāʾimān  farr/farḍ?  thaqīl  dāʾimān  thaqīl-dār?

LINE 22
  EVA:    ycheey  okay  oky  daiin  okchey  kokaiin  chol  kchy  dal
  Voiced:  yḥeey  ʿkāy  ʿky  dāʾīmān  ʿkḥey  kūkāʾīn  ḥūl  kḥy  dāl
  Read:    yuḥyī?  ʿaqqār?  ___  dāʾimān  ___  ___  ḥawl  ___  dāll

LINE 23
  EVA:    deeo  shody  koshey  cthy  okchey  keey  keey  dal  chtor
  Voiced:  deeū  šūdy  kūšey  θy  ʿkḥey  keey  keey  dāl  ḥṭūr
  Syriac:  —  ܫܘܕܝܐ  ܟܘܫܝܐ?  —  —  —  —  —  —
  Arabic:  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  دالّ  خطور?
  Read:    ___  shōdāyā  kūshāyā?  ___  ___  hot°2  hot°2  dāll  khuṭūr?

LINE 24
  EVA:    chol  chok  choty  chotey  dchaiin
  Voiced:  ḥūl  ḥūk  ḥūṭy  ḥūṭey  dḥāʾīn
  Arabic:  حول  حكّ  خطا  خطط  —
  Syriac:  —  —  —  —  ܕܟܐܐܝܢ
  Read:    ḥawl  ḥakk  khuṭā  khuṭāṭ  d-kāʾīn

Unknowns (___) are the primary targets for review. All feedback welcome.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The Voynich Manuscript, Codex Gigas, and Codex Rohonczi are not literature. They are fragments of a single planetary typescript, encrypted through a system of coordinate ports (micro-per-forations) and alignments. 
All of this became known to Steven Korj through his newest Techno-Resonant Structural-Algorithmic Method. This book contains a seal and The Korj formula, which can be used to instantly translate any page. However, Leonardo da Vinci actually wrote the entire side of page 81 in his own hand! He wrote over the typescript during a restoration in the Vatican. Also, the algae in the book, Sargassum, are his drawings.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Attached Files

Thumbnail(s)
   

In folios f68r1 and f68r2 we have very characteristic pictures of the sky with Sun, Moon and stars:
   

The stars are placed into a circle. I believe that such thing - some art in manuscript put into a circle is often called "medallion".

The stars have labels. It would seem very natural that they are names of the stars but unfortunately nobody was able to read any of them, just like the rest of Voynich Manuscript.

Of course, it would be great to find the inspiration for this picture in another source, with stars signed in normal alphabet. Then we could match the Voynichese labels and the other labels.

As far as I know such inspiration is unknown. I have seen several similar pictures but in all of them the stars were without labels.
Have a look:
   
   
   

All these examples are actually not astronomical but religious and are sacral art about the creation of the world. The stars in them are generic and don't represent real, distinct stars having names.

Woukd you say that these kinds of pictures are inspiration for f68r1 and f68r2 or not?

If they are inspiration then it would mean the Voynich artist added labels to generic, nameless stars in his source. Would you agree?

In such case what would such labels mean? Some star names assigned randomly?
Or could he have another inspiration, different from these religious pictures?
Are there any "maps of the sky" in medieval manuscripts with sky presented in similar "medalion" way but with proper stars, signed and properly positioned?

Hi friends! I just came across the following manuscript (BSB Cgm 8873). It seems to have some likeness to the handwriting of the VMS marginalia on folios You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f116v. It comes from a German Carthusian monastery in 1431. Here are some examples:

   

What do you think?

EDIT: here is a link to the MS: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

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

"The situation is much more complex than just an overenthusiastic blue painter:

• there is also too much white (blank)
  
• frequent, seemingly intentional combination of blue and blank elements
  
• there is too much yellow in the stems, a color notably lacking from the flowers
  
• calyxes in other manuscripts are green as a rule. While almost every large-plant page has green available to it (for the leaves), a disproportionate amount of other colors is preferred for calyxes."
  

Hello all,

to all of us who are digging in the analysis of the MS text, I think it might be interesting to have a brief summary of the confirmed text features. That's why I have created this file: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

It is open to be improved with your thoughts (proven facts) (in order to keep a proper view, it is not open to edit). I thik it may be a useful tool for keep on analysing the text and not forget already proven features (and not repeat too much testing).

Feel free to comment, add fetures (via reply in the thread) and join the discussion.

(By the way, my two lines in the "generative facts" page, if you think they are not confirmed or are uncertain, please tell me)

Thank you

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

Hi Everyone, I'm new here. I've been working on a structural analysis of the Voynich manuscript and wanted to share the results.

The paper takes a statistical approach to the herbal section, treating the script as a system to be characterised rather than a language to be identified. The core finding is that label morphemes encode plant-architecture features (stem type, root form, leaf shape, complexity) that can be tested against the illustrations - and that prose behaves differently depending on how much descriptive work the labels already do.

It's built on falsification throughout - every claim has a permutation test, several hypotheses were killed along the way (including my original language candidate), and there's an explicit claims ledger in the appendix showing what survived and what didn't.

What the paper does NOT claim: decipherment, a source language, or readings. The last line is literally "What it does not yield - and may never yield through structural analysis alone - is a reading."

Happy to take questions or pushback - that's what it's for.

Paper description
This paper presents a falsifiable structural model of the Voynich manuscript (Beinecke MS 408), based on computational analysis of the complete ZL IVTFF 2b transcription (36,234 tokens, 226 folios, 8 sections). Rather than attempting to identify an underlying natural language, the study asks what kind of system the manuscript implements, and answers through holdout-validated formal analysis, independent unsupervised confirmation, and cross-modal testing against the manuscript's illustrations.

The model establishes five principal findings. First, a four-layer morphological grammar classifies 91-97% of tokens across six stratified holdout blocks spanning five manuscript sections, three or more scribal hands, and both Currier languages, with zero stacking-order violations in any block and no parameter adjustment after model freeze. Second, the invariant formal system is deployed in at least six distinct compositional regimes -- loop-based prose, topic-dominant chaining, nominal labelling, weakened-loop variant, closure-weighted operational mode, and balanced connective mode -- varying systematically by section and hand. Two regimes were discovered only upon unsealing the sealed reserve holdout, demonstrating that the taxonomy expands under evaluation. Third, discourse-framing density in text predicts visual complexity of herbal illustrations (Spearman rho = 0.600, p < 0.0001, n = 43), confirmed by pre-registered holdout with minimal attenuation. At the label level, specific morphemes predict specific plant features across five independent visual channels, and morpheme bundles predict multi-feature plant profiles compositionally (LOO AUC p = 0.0006). Fourth, a 17-mapping codebook decodes plant architecture from herbal labels at 58.5% accuracy across 72 folios and is bidirectional: image features recover label morpheme sets above chance (p < 0.0001), with forward-greater-than-inverse asymmetry diagnostic of selective encoding rather than cipher. Labels and prose perform complementary, load-balanced functions confirmed by an adaptive compensation mechanism (rho = -0.337, p = 0.011). Fifth, the system meets 8 of 10 criteria for restricted technical notation while failing the criterion most diagnostic of natural language: lexical recoverability.

These findings are independently triangulated: a rule-based grammar, holdout replication across two evaluation stages, and unsupervised HMM recovery of grammar classes from suffix sequences alone (NMI = 0.181, entity purity 0.53) converge on the same structural conclusions. The architecture is inconsistent with simple cipher, random generation, hoax, or classical mnemonic systems.

The study also situates the manuscript within the documented manuscript ecology of the eastern Mediterranean, presenting quantitative visual comparisons against six comparator manuscript traditions. The herbal section aligns closely with early encyclopedic Qazwini copies (Euclidean distance 2.37), while the zodiac section occupies a distinct visual regime matching no tested tradition, combining Latin computational diagram architecture with Byzantine Greek medico-astrological content and a unique figurative encoding system.

The manuscript is best understood as a structured, sectionally differentiated technical system with partially recoverable semantics -- structurally technical but lexically local. Its grammar is real and invariant. Its regimes are real and section-specific. Its text and images interact. Its labels carry structured semantic content. What it does not yield through structural analysis alone is a reading.

This deposit includes the pre-submission draft (v5.0), analysis scripts, data files, and figures.

Most discussions about the Voynich already agree on a few basic points: the text is not random, similar words tend to appear near each other, and position within the line matters. What is less clear is how this structure is actually generated.

I have been working in a pipeline that lets me analyze the structure of the MS. The goal of this analysis was not to describe patterns, but to test concrete generative hypotheses against the data. The question was always the same: if this were the real mechanism, would it reproduce what we observe? Running different models through the same pipeline makes it possible to discard entire classes of explanations, not just speculate about them.

• The text is not governed by simple sequential rules. Token-to-token models fail to capture the structure, even when extended beyond basic Markov assumptions.
  
• It is not generated by copy-and–modify or parent-based derivation. These mechanisms overproduce similarity and impose chains that are not present in the data.
  
• There is no single dominant local source for most tokens. The local neighborhood is too ambiguous, with multiple equally plausible candidates.
  
• The strongest and most stable structure appears at the level of the full line. Lines form a small number of latent types with distinct formal profiles and non-random sequencing.
  

1. The line type defines a space of possible forms. 
   
2. The local context restricts this space further by favoring forms that are compatible with nearby words. 
   
3. But within that constrained space, the final choice is weakly determined. Many candidates are acceptable, and no single one is strongly preferred. 
   

This is probably just a coincidence, but it looks cool:

   

The MS on the right is the Kitāb Arshimīdas fī al-binkāmāt (British Library, Add MS 23391). It's a 13th century Arabic treatise on hydraulic machinery. I thought some of the machines looked a bit like VMS plant roots.

EDIT: I rotated the Arabic picture upside-down so that it matches the orientation of the VMS root.