Decoded at Last: The 'Ri-Language' Unlocks the 600-Year-Old Voynich Mystery [b]Ri language is very old ([b]Folk", "Rustic", or "Rura).[/b][/b]
When traditional decryption failed number of times.........
.... finally, our breakthrough arrived through a unique "Ri-Language," method, an ancient framework for encrypted communication. Remarkably, the structural patterns of this ancient language perfectly mirrored the Voynich script. This alignment led to our most significant discovery: Dynamic Contextual Pattern Formation. We realized the text operates dynamically. When a word repeats in a sentence, its meaning transforms based on the contextual flow to represent a completely different functional purpose. By shifting our analysis to encompass the entire line and paragraph context, we finally broke the cipher and revealed the book's true secrets.
I wasn't going to hop ship, but everyone got silent over there. It's weird when things get silent on Reddit. Anyway- a brief overview for those who may not have seen any of my stuff over there. Attached are the annotated versions presented as well as links to the original posts.
A few days ago I decided to dive into the Voynich, just as a curiosity. That was when I realized that by viewing the image on the left-hand side of p.67 as a proto-clock, you can (without stretching) arrive at the conclusion that there was a very short ~3.5 hour difference between sunrise and sunset. In my original post, I included calculations for 3-5 hours for safe margin- all of which leave you somewhere in the Arctic Circle.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I then took a bit of a closer look at the text, in which I analyzed the 'P' ('gallow') as a punctuation as opposed to a linguistic character. I know this is not the first time this concept has been floated, but I do not believe anyone has proposed it in the capacity I have. If they have, please let me know. I don't want to make inaccurate statements here or taking credit for long-standing ideas. By breaking it down by the prominence of 'P', a lingual structure seems to become easily visible with observable frequencies. This methodology is applicable to the entirety of the manuscript without variation.
In conversation to gain a better understanding regarding the conversion in terms of linguistic entropy, I also noted the consistency of '8' with certain characters throughout the entirety of the script, "a", "o", "low 9 (y)", "c-c", and "aN" throughout the entirety of the manuscript. Understanding the '8'->'8bre' in Italian clerical records, I wondered if a similar methodology would work here where the preceding and succeeding character represent different intonations to produce variations of "otto", such as "otti","otte", "ott", etc. It was called into question the consistency of this pairing, so I have attached a comprehensive version of a single page showing both the pairings with '8' and all content body breaks as well.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
There is one error line break in the bottom half in the third line up with the '8aN'. Please disregard that one.
This image is the initial model, although I also made additional variants based on my inability to differentiate a couple & have attached those below as well.
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 also analyzed 'Map with Ship' by Marco Polo, which seems to have revealed some interesting consistencies between the two- and a potentially corresponding page in the Voynich, based on both context and chemical irritant/staining and potentially some corresponding superficial lines. Based on this, I ponder/propose the Polo family as the potential authors of the Voynich, although perhaps later translated by scribes or simply transcribed a copy of a pre-existing body based on the Polos' work. I did elaborate a little more in an additional post as well.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Anyway, I just thought I would share this here as I was told you might enjoy it. I am willing to answer any questions or explore more, but please be respectful if you choose to engage- that's all I ask.
I recently put together a little tool to aid with analysing the text - a little project I'd wanted to do for a long while, and finally leveraged some AI coding tools to speed up the process. The tool inputs the ZL transcription - along with configuration as to how you want to pre-process the glyphs - and outputs a ton of aggregations for interrogation.
Tool: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Code & docs: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Currently, it shows the following:
* Basic transition probabilities (including word/line/paragraph/page boundaries)
* Ngram analyser (1-grams, 2-grams, 3-grams)
* Word position preference of glyphs
* Page position preference of glyphs (by character number / line number)
* Page position preference of glyphs (by physical position - data from Voynichese.com)
While most of this has been done before, the more novel part of the tool is that it additionally produces these visualises for a large number of subsets of the manuscript - by language (A, B); by scribe (1,2,3,4,5); by illustration. The cool part is then you can compare (e.g., Currier A vs B; or Hand 2 vs Hand 4) charts side-by-side, and even "diff" them to see at a glance where the large differences lie. This was largely as a response to the common critique of analyses where interesting signal may be lost by aggregating over non homogeneous pages of text.
If one was keen to change the preprocessing applied - while this can't be done in the hosted web app itself, it can be done by cloning the repo & making the changes. I may be happy to take requests here. There are a ton of other things it could show also which could be added to future releases - entropy, LAAFU stuff, word boundaries, glyph equivalence. Again, not that these things haven't been done before, but I believe the ability to interact with them and quickly & visually compare between sections is the most valuable.
Do let me know if it's useful and if you find any bugs, or have any suggestions.
This was inspired by writings by Nick Pelling, Rene Zandbergen, Patrick Feaster, Sean Palmer, Emma May Smith, Marco Ponzi, and many others.
Its a pretty interesting glyph, thought it should have its own thread.
picnic table glyph aka EVA-x
Pages with most appearances of Eva-x
9 appearances in f Ros
7 appearances in f 57v
5 appearances in f 66r
3 appearances in f 46r
Section by Illustration Type: T_ext, H_erbal, C_osmological, S_tars, fRos_ette
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
T fRos
x3 x4
In Labels <f66r> <fRos>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C fRos
x7 x5
In Circular text <f57v> <fRos>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H H T H S S S S S S S S S S S { 03 sections }
x3 x2 x2 x1 x1 x1 x2 x1 x1 x1 x1 x2 x1 x1 x2 { 22 count }
In Paragraphs f46r, f55r, f66r, f94r, f104r, f105r, f105v, f106v, f107v, f108r, f108v, f111r, f113v, f114v, f115v { 15 folios }
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total appearances:
C T H H H S fRos
<f57v> <f66r> <f46r> <f55r> <f94r>, 11x folios, 1x Rosettes
In 2 appearances the picnic_table looks like its left foot has a c-shape (or it is joined to Eva-e )
f66r Line 65 {left_foot_c}
f46 r Line 01 {left_foot_c}
See also:
Origin of the 'Picnic Table' Glyph
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
N.B. Counts using ZL3b-n.
Some counts maybe wrong.
fRos is a Cosmo page by illustration type but it is separate here.
Hi all,
I'm all new here, so please bear over if this issue has already been brought up a million times - but a search didn't bring it up as existing,
so I'll jump in both feet and kindly ask this forum for a heads-up on something that puzzles me.
I came across another book, called "Von dem Gang des Himels(sic) und Sternen" [HuS].
It's a German book from the second half of the 15th century, and freely accessible from the Morgan library.
It struck me, how the astrological illustrations are quite reminiscent of the same in the VM - only of higher quality.
I'm aware there are only so many ways you can illustrate an astrological ram, a lion, and say a set of scales, but the two artists in question share a surprising (to me) number of details.
The same paw is lifted, the same shape of tails, the extended tongue of leo, the sane angle on the "libra" scales, the band of stars connecting the pisces together.
There are so many similar details that, for the untrained eye, it would seem the illustrator of the VM simply made an exact (but hasty) copy of the HUS illustrations.
This may of course be a case of random similarity, or a question of one book inspiring the other.
My problem is, two-fold:
The VM was presumably never published to the broad public, so the author(s) of "Himels und Sternen" would not have access to reading it, thus inspiration would likely be in the
HuS -> Voynich direction.
And this proposes my problem 2: HuS is of a later date than the VM, which puts a spanner in the timing.
One Hand, Five Labels: A Critical Examination of the Five-Scribe Hypothesis for the Voynich Manuscript
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Torsten Timm
Quote:This paper presents a critical examination of the five-scribe hypothesis proposed for the Voynich Manuscript. The analysis suggests that the supposed distinctions between scribes may instead reflect a continuous development of a single evolving hand. It offers detailed observations on glyph forms, patterns of handwriting variation, and their broader implications for interpreting the manuscript’s text.
The x 'picnic table' glyph is similar to the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
Does this point to the possible inclusion of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. in the cipher manuscript?
GERSHA v9.2 — Functional Model of the Voynich Manuscript with External Control and Structural Analogues
I've been working on a corpus-based structural analysis of the Voynich manuscript for the past year. Before posting I want to be clear about what this is and what it isn't. What this is not: a decipherment. I make no claims about the language, the author, or the meaning of individual tokens. What this is: a reproducible functional model of the manuscript's architecture, verified on the full ZL v3b corpus (202 folios, 35,049 tokens), with an external control corpus and a decoded structural analogue.
The core claim (Level 1 — fully reproducible):
The manuscript is structured as a production cycle + influence calendar. The {P}-formant { -edy | -eedy | -ody | -eody } behaves as a process marker: it rises sharply in Balneo (23.2%), falls in Pharma (7.7%), and correlates with figures acting as agents of active processes rather than catalogue markers.
Three findings are confirmed, one was refuted and corrected in v9.2:
— Balneo TTR 0.424–0.475 vs Macer Floridus baseline 0.715+ (structural chasm, confirmed independently of counting method)
— Production chain H→B→P confirmed on full corpus
— Zandbergen cross-references H↔P: +14.4 pp -ol on 8/8 paired roots
— {P}≈0% for Astro was refuted: Astro {P}=10.3%, TTR=0.744. Corrected in v9.2. External control: Linear B (DAMOS)
The second document uses Linear B tablets from DAMOS (University of Oslo) as a decoded structural reference. Seven tablets across six series reveal a six-type document typology based on a single key finding: to-so marks a closed, totaled list regardless of series. Its absence is functional, not accidental.
This resolves a structural question about both Indus Script Type B inscriptions and the Voynich Zodiac section — both now have deciphered analogues in Linear B Series V (divine register, presence markers rather than quantities).
Voynich Balneo does not fit the accounting family (TTR 0.65–0.85, fixed positional architecture). It fits nothing in our Linear B sample. The process/instructional interpretation remains the only model consistent with all three comparisons simultaneously. Known limitations (honest):
— HMM transition matrix built on f75r/f78r only — full ZL v3b verification pending
— Geometric binding of {P} to illustrations not confirmed via line-position metric (r = −0.076)
— All cross-system parallels are Level 2 (structural hypotheses, not semantic claims)
— Everything depends on EVA as a correct morphological boundary Documents attached:
— GERSHA Protocol v9.2 (full corpus analysis, tables, verification status)
— GERSHA Comparative Framework v1.0 (Linear B structural control, 7 tablets, 6-type typology)
I'm genuinely interested in criticism of the method — particularly the EVA dependency and the Astro reclassification. Happy to share raw numbers. Grisha H.G. | February 2026
