• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Voynich Manuscript

Last edited by a moderator:
What a tease! No indication what the deciphered portions seem to say!

It would be a wonderful accomplishment if it's really been deciphered.
 
Hunh, saw this today and realized it wasn't mentioned here? weird....
this video is a bit hard to follow in parts because the older guy has bad English language diction and is also rather quiet. At any rate their idea is that it's an archaic Turkish dialect in a written form not seen elsewhere.

The fact they managed a semi-coherent translation is pretty neat.

OOH! followup vid!
He actually talks about Bax! Apparently he Thinks Bax's methodology was sound but that he missed the mark by using the wrong language as base?

so, their channel has those two videos and only those, what else is there to know of this attempt?
 
JamesWhitehead said:
This Youtube video does not break new ground but it seems to be a concise and sensible guide to the subject:

History with Kayleigh on Voynich Manuscript.

I may even have to review my prejudices about the name Kayleigh! :)
Click to expand...
You mean Kayley? :D

yeah, that vid by Kayleigh was... good for a basic explanation. It's not in-depth, but it's reasonably accurate. Also looking at the comments gave me reason to ponder this thing:
Bascanska_ploca-glagolitic.jpg

That look at all familiar to you? well it's a Glagolitic inscription thought to date to the 11th century. It's not the same symbol set as the Voynich manuscript, but.... it does show that there are REAL languages that can look like that.
 
marhawkman said:
You mean Kayley? :D

yeah, that vid by Kayleigh was... good for a basic explanation. It's not in-depth, but it's reasonably accurate. Also looking at the comments gave me reason to ponder this thing:
View attachment 51700
That look at all familiar to you? well it's a Glagolitic inscription thought to date to the 11th century. It's not the same symbol set as the Voynich manuscript, but.... it does show that there are REAL languages that can look like that.
Click to expand...

Some of those symbols remind me of the millennia older Vinča script.

vinca.png
 
Tunn11 said:
Most of the manuscript is about sex?

https://theconversation.com/for-600...tery-now-we-think-its-partly-about-sex-227157
Click to expand...
Came here to post about the same thing, you beat me to it....I read this article and it was quite interesting and plausible

For some time, scholars have wondered whether the Voynich manuscript may have something to do with women and may have been written by women for women. However, new research by Keagan Brewer and Michelle L. Lewis suggests it does indeed relate to women, but actually contains enciphered information related to sexual matters.

They reached this conclusion by examining the work of the Bavarian physician Johann Hartlieb, who lived around the same time that the manuscript was created.

Hartlieb, they explain, wrote about plants, women, magic astronomy, and baths, but also recommended the use of cyphers to obscure “sensitive information”. In particular, he recommended their use when discussing medical recipes and procedures related to contraception, abortion, and sterility. The main concern for Hartlieb, the authors argue, was that the free circulation of this information would lead to extramarital sex, which would incur God’s wrath.

https://www.iflscience.com/could-on...voynich-manuscript-relate-to-female-sex-73912

I find it plausible because this is well known to have been done repeatedly all over the place - Nostradamus and Leonardo Di Vinci for example, both enciphered their works to prevent the wrath of the church. Now I'm wondering if the writing was just there to look like a book or intellectual work, but the real information is in the illustrations, as perhaps some women were not able to read?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top