# To unbundle, sh this file echo README 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >README <<'//GO.SYSIN DD README' -Currier's papers. - -Jim Reeds -Jan 1992 - -Includes my current best V font. - -To turn the troff source (extension .ms) into postscript files -(extensions .ps and .rps), type - - mk -or - sh script - -(Surely the way you teach troff about a private PS font will differ -at your site. I am using ``10th Edition Research Unix'', as described -in the Mauve and Turquoise Saunders books, ``Unix Research System, Tenth -Edition''.) - -Each .ps or .rps file can then be sent independently to the printer. -Some of the tables look better rotated. - -Table 3 made my site's "tbl" program have tummy ache, it was so big. - -README this file -NVoynich.ps my best font -V troff width table to go with -mkfile mk rules. -script sh rules -p.ms the paper -tab.A.ms table A -tab.1.ms table 1 -tab.2.ms table 2 -tab.3.ms table 3 -tab.4.ms table 4 -tab.5.ms table 5 -tab.6.ms table 6 -tab.0.ms alphabet sheet -tmac.voy macros //GO.SYSIN DD README echo mkfile 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >mkfile <<'//GO.SYSIN DD mkfile' -REG= tab.0.ps tab.1.ps tab.4.ps tab.6.ps -ROT= tab.A.rps tab.2.rps tab.3.rps tab.5.rps -FONT=NVoynich.ps -TBL=/usr/reeds/bin/tbl - - -# p.ps is the paper sans tables -# $REG is the right-side-up tables -# $ROT is the rotatable tables - - -all:VN: $REG $ROT p.ps - - -# turn troff intermediate into postscript, both regular and rotated - -%.ps: %.tr - dpost -C$FONT $stem.tr > $stem.ps - -%.rps: %.tr - dpost -pl -C$FONT $stem.tr > $stem.rps - - -# formatting instructions: -# turn into \fVXYZ\fP -# tbl -# troff - - -%.tr: %.ms - sed -e 's//\\fP/g' $stem.ms | - $TBL | troff -ms tmac.voy - > $stem.tr - - - -# make care packages - -toguy: - bundle tab.?.ms >toguy - -bundle: p.ms script - bundle README mkfile script tab*.ms p.ms $FONT V tmac.voy> currier.sh - compress currier.sh - uuencode currier.sh.Z < currier.sh.Z > tojim - -script: mkfile - mk -a -n > script - -clean: - rm -f p.ps tab.*.ps tab.*.rps *.tr currier.sh toguy //GO.SYSIN DD mkfile echo script 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >script <<'//GO.SYSIN DD script' -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' tab.0.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > tab.0.tr -dpost -CNVoynich.ps tab.0.tr > tab.0.ps -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' tab.1.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > tab.1.tr -dpost -CNVoynich.ps tab.1.tr > tab.1.ps -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' tab.4.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > tab.4.tr -dpost -CNVoynich.ps tab.4.tr > tab.4.ps -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' tab.6.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > tab.6.tr -dpost -CNVoynich.ps tab.6.tr > tab.6.ps -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' tab.A.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > tab.A.tr -dpost -pl -CNVoynich.ps tab.A.tr > tab.A.rps -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' tab.2.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > tab.2.tr -dpost -pl -CNVoynich.ps tab.2.tr > tab.2.rps -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' tab.3.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > tab.3.tr -dpost -pl -CNVoynich.ps tab.3.tr > tab.3.rps -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' tab.5.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > tab.5.tr -dpost -pl -CNVoynich.ps tab.5.tr > tab.5.rps -sed -e 's//\\fP/g' p.ms | - /usr/reeds/bin/tbl | troff -ms tmac.voy - > p.tr -dpost -CNVoynich.ps p.tr > p.ps //GO.SYSIN DD script echo tab.0.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tab.0.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tab.0.ms' -.nr PS 13 -.nr VS 15 -.LP -Transcription Alphabet -.TS -center tab(;) box; -c c | c | c c. -(1);(2)*;;(3);(4) -_ -<4>;4;;A; -;O;[``oh''];B; -<8>;8;;C; -<9>;9;resemblance;D; -<2>;2;;E; -;E;;F; -;R;;G; -_ -;S;voiced;H; -;Z;unvoiced;I; -_ -
;P;voiced & unvoiced;J; -;B;pairs of labials;K; -;F;and fricatives;L; -;V;;M; -_ -;Q;;N; -;W;arbitrary;O; -;X;;P;
-;Y;;Q; -_ -;A;;R; -;C;;S; -_ -;I;;T; -;G;;U; -;H;;V; -<1>;1;;W; -_ -;R;[out of order] -;T;;X; -;U;;Y; -<0>;0;[zero];Z; -_ -;D;;1;<1> -;N;resemblance;2;<2> -;M;;3;<3> -<3>;3;;4;<4> -_ -;J;;5;<5> -;K;;6;<6> -;L;;7;<7> -<5>;5;;8;<8> -_ -<6>;6;;9;<9> -<7>;7;;0;<0> -.TE -.LP -* -.I Note. -This order of letters has been arbitrarily chosen as the ``alphabetical -order'' for -.I "all ordering and sorting. //GO.SYSIN DD tab.0.ms echo tab.1.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tab.1.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tab.1.ms' -.TS -center tab(;) box; -c | c s | c s | c s | c s | c s | c s | c -c | n n | n n | n n | n n | n n | n n |;n. -;HERB A;PHAR A;HERB B;PHAR B;BIOL B;REC;ASTRO -_ -;118;3;50;;119;;27;;81;1;146;;92 -;212;26;58;2;5;;18;;3;;124;4;73 -;24;;13;;38;1;16;;67;;58;1;25 -;45;10;16;;4;1;7;1;5;;39;2;14 -_ -<4OP>;496;144;244;21;212;18;261;10;1359;156;1556;49;55 -;651;106;392;20;377;11;313;5;606;19;1669;61;801 -<9P>;298;51;97;24;171;42;153;20;71;19;171;39;148 -;3;;6;;9;2;25;1;56;;371;3;2 -;8;;11;1;29;1;76;4;153;7;115;19;9 -_ -<4P>;2;;22;;;;;;6;;3;;2 -<4OEP>;;;;;1;;;;30;;4; -;;;;;;;6;;;;31; -;;;;;;;;;2;;11; -<4CP>;;;;;5;;;;10;;2; -_ -
;207;37;64;43;96;58;95;32;136;49;746;102;46 -;29;27;32;20;50;35;39;28;93;71;221;162;9 -;263;18;69;18;110;6;42;5;103;5;262;18;27 -;26;4;5;1;11;;4;;6;;35;12; -_ -;76;1;20;;63;;29;;146;1;167;;10 -;33;1;28;;7;;3;;;;31;1;15 -;17;1;6;1;4;;6;;103;1;58;;4; -;11;;19;3;12;1;4;;2;1;9;;2 -_ -<4OQ>;23;1;36;1;3;;4;;9;;17;;3 -;19;1;15;2;15;;9;2;7;;15;;23 -<9Q>;6;1;1;;1;;;;1;1;;; -; - -_ -<4Q>;;;;;5;;2;;10;;6; -_ -;326;3;80;;19;;2;;19;;15;3;13; -;67;1;15;;7;;4;;7;;15;;3; -;82;;59;;14;;;;7;;9;;7 -;14;;6;;3;;1;;2;;1;; -_ -.T& -c | c s | c s | c s | c s | c s | c s |;n. -Wds.;c.6500;c.2900;2700;c.2200;6500;11000 -Lines;1085;c.360;315;c.220;780;1076 -.TE -.SH -TABLE 1. -.LP -Frequency of initials with medial () and () -Total in col 1, line-initial in col. 2. //GO.SYSIN DD tab.1.ms echo tab.2.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tab.2.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tab.2.ms' -.nr PS 8 -.pl 8.5i -.ll 9i -.TS -center tab(;) box; -c c| c c c | c c c | c c c c c | c c c c | c c | c c | c c c c c c -c c| n n n | n n n | n n n n n | n n n n | n n | n n | n n n n n n. -;;<9>;<89>;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;<2>;<8>;<8A>;;;;;; -_ -HERB A;;585;15;84;33;64;4;17;26;78;;19;554;440;221;27;10;6;2;3;73;28;71;28;18;12 -6500;;268;1;15;7;24;;4;3;18;;2;58;57;;;;21;;;21;5;16;6;1; -_ -PHAR A;;39;9;39;1;7;;;1;;;;129;70;;3;1;7;1;1;23;8;34;23;3; -2900;;127;7;57;5;;;;;;;1;117;80;;12;;10;;1;34;7;15;28;5; -_ -HERB B;;61;143;20;2;6;;;;1;;2;31;12;;;2;5;10;47;1;3;5;4;2;2 -2700;;76;158;23;1;4;;;;;;1;15;5;; ;;16;7;12;10;3;2;10;1;1 -_ -PHAR B;;52;100;24;3;9;;;;3;;1;34;31;1;;;3;7;44;3;3;8;2;1;3 -2200;;105;123;17;1;3;;;;1;;;12;5;;;;16;6;30;6;2;4;6;1;1 -_ -BIOL B;;66;97;;23;15;;1;2;1;;5;55;10;;;14;6;3;13;;;1;;; -6500;;438;859;;22;13;;;;1;;2;94;24;;;;28;30;49;;;;;; -_ -REC;;163;183;35;44;62;;4;14;15;;7;126;58;2;;23;12;12;78;15;8;45;21;2;18 -11000;;593;801;74;26;29;;;3;1;;4;143;42;;1;;41;28;154;47;12;58;31;5;22 -_ -ASTRO;;73;20;11;15;12;;;;2;;4;58;13;;;4;12;;11;13;;8;5;1;4 -;;111;34;24;6;4;;;;;;;30;17;;;;34;1;14;10;;12;12;2;1 -.TE -.nr PS 10 -.SH -TABLE 2. -.LP -Frequency of finals following / , both initial and medial. //GO.SYSIN DD tab.2.ms echo tab.3.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tab.3.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tab.3.ms' -.nr PS 6 -.nr VS 9 -.TS -center box tab(;); -c|c| c c c c c c c c | c c c c c c c c | c c c c c c | c c c c c c c | c c c c c c c| c -c|c| n n n n n n n n | n n n n n n n n | n n n n n n | n n n n n n n | n n n n n n n| n. -;;<9>;;;<89>;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;<8>;;<8A>;;;;;;;;;Tot -_ -;HERB A;53;10;24;1;;;4;;6;8;;1;1;28;;5;46;8;29;3;8;2;;;2;;;;;5;1;;1;;;227;493 -<4OP>;BIOL B;92;49;96;;204;194;2;;154;65/6;2;;175;100;;4;30;3;5;4;;;7;2;2;;12;;7;;;;;;;57;1350 -;HERB B;8;3;7;2;47;13;4;6;14;22;1;;4;11;;2;7;3;1;1;;;;1;2;;2;;6;;;;;1;2;28; -_ -;HERB A;41;4;11;2;;1;3;2;32;12;3;;6;63;1;13;58;13;30;7;4;3/2;;;2;;;1;;3/1;5/3;2;2/2;3;;258;1042 -;BIOL B;33;24;34;;96;60;;1;60;47;3;;68;46;;1;21;16;4;;;;;;;;3;;12;;;;;;;42;606 -;HERB B;23;8;1;;44;13;2;11;34;48;6;;11;29;;18;13;10;6;5;;;;1;3;;3;7;;2;2;1/4;1;;3;45; -_ -;HERB A;31;3;11;;;;2;2;6/2;6;3;1;2;22;;5/1;23;1;16;2;6;;;;;1;;;;1;3/2;;1;3;;122;749 -<9P>;BIOL B;1;1;12;;14;13;;;4;2;;;5;4;;1;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;5;71 -;HERB B;6;6;15;1;23;15;;7;6;14;6;;3;9;1;5;2;4;2;;;;;;1;;;1;;;1/2;2;;;3;32; -_ -;HERB A;;;;;;;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;5;6 -;BIOL B;3;1;3;;10;3;;;1;6;;;6;6;;1;1;1;;;;;2;;;;1;;;;;;;;;;56 -;HERB B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -;HERB A;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;8 -;BIOL B;12;6;23;;23;20;;;7;7;2;;21;12;1;2;2;1;1;;1;;1;;;;1;;;;;;;;;;153 -;HERB B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -;HERB A;30;2;4;;;;5;;3;6/1;;1;2;12/1;;;9;;8;;1;1;;;1;;;;;;1;1;1;1;;37;221/118 -;BIOL B;13;13;2;;11;2;;;5;6;1;1;10;2;;;5;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;9;148 -;HERB B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -;HERB A;51;1;9;;;;3;4;2;2;1;2;3;14;;2;16;4;9;3;1;;;;2;;;;;;1;1;;4;;70;45/212 -;BIOL B;4;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;8 -;HERB B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -;HERB A;44;11;1;;;;2;;5;;;1;;1;;;5;;4;;;;;;;;;;;;;2;;;;;43 -;BIOL B;144;30;;11;18;;;;3;;;;;;;;;1;;;;;;1;;1;;;;;;;;;;;244 -;HERB B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -;HERB A;34;4;;;;;1;;;1;;;;;;;2;;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;44 -;BIOL B;1;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;1/2 -;HERB B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -;HERB A;11;3;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;23 -<4OQ>;BIOL B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;9 -;HERB B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -;HERB A;7;;;;;;3;;1;;;;;1;;2;1;;3;;;;;;;;;;;;1;1;;;1;;19 -;BIOL B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;7 -;HERB B;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -<9Q>;;;1;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;6 -.TE -.nr PS 8 -.nr VS 10 -.SH -TABLE 3. -.LP -Freq. of finals following medial
, . -.DS -HERB A \(em 6500 wd. -BIOL B \(em 6500 wd. -HERB B \(em 2700 wd. -.DE //GO.SYSIN DD tab.3.ms echo tab.4.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tab.4.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tab.4.ms' -.fp 7 V /usr/reeds/psi/V -.TS -center tab(;) box; -c | n n | n n | n n | n n | n n . -<4OS>;11;6;;;3;;12;2;2; -;38;26;4;;9;5;34;17;4;3 -<9S>;78;65;16;10;40;33;121;112;31;28 -<8S>;163;63;21;15;64;48;68;61;34;23 -<2S>;33;16;4;1;26;14;10;10;13;3 -;7;4;13;7;185;17;203;7;3; -;17;4;17;3;118;12;70;19;22; -<4OES>;;;;;50;2;5;;1; -;7;;2;;31;;17;;1; -;22;13;1;;1;;13;6;2; -;115;40;29;33;36;22;79;53;16;9 -;45;31;30;21;47;27;115;74;17;10 -;136;23;22;4;14;;49;9;8;2 -;18;9;10;;6;2;26;7;3; -_ -.T& -c | c s | c s | c s | c s | c s. -;HERBAL A;HERBAL B; BIOLOGICAL; RECIPIES;PHARMA- -;;;B;;CEUTICAL A -_ -Words;6500;2700;6500;11000 -Lines;1085;315;740;1076 -L/W;1/6;1/9;1/9;1/10 -.TE -.SH -TABLE 4. -.LP -Frequencies of / medials showing (1) total and (2) line initial -counts. -.LP -Note: the line/word ratio is a rough approximation of the percentage -of the total frequency expected in line-initial position. //GO.SYSIN DD tab.4.ms echo tab.5.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tab.5.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tab.5.ms' -.nr PS 6 -.TS -center tab(;) box; -c | c c c c c c || c | c c c c c c || c | c c c c c c || c | c c c c c c . -;;740;2800;900;900;500;;;740;2800;900;900;500;;;740;2800;900;900;500;;;740;2800;900;900;500 -(1);Tot;L.I.;<9>;;;;(2);Tot;L.I.;<9>;;;;(3);Tot;L.I.;<9>;;;;(4);Tot;L.I.;<9>;;;; -_ -.T& -c | n n n n n n || c | n n n n n n || c | n n n n n n || c | n n n n n n . -;464;10;114;124;149;55;;81;1;28;32;8;8;;;;;;;;;141;1;40;59;20;26 -;68;5;26;11;17;6;;3;;2;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -;446;16;101;110;127;92;;67;;18;26;8;12;;;;;;;;;103;;31;36;17;16 -;64;6;19;20;8;8;;6;1;4;;;1;;;;;;;;;2;1;;;; -_ -<4O>;49;10;35;;2;;<4OP>;1359;156;1051;31;76;21;<4OS>;3;;3;;;;<4OW>;9;3;4;;1; -;35;6;6;10;8;5;;606;19;320;130;78;65;;9;5;2;;;2;;7;;;;; -<9>;20;4;3;8;2;3;<9P>;71;19;24;7;2;7;<9S>;40;33;2;;4;1;<9W>;1;1;;;; -<8>;385;57;196;40;83;12;<8P>;7;;5;1;;1;<8S>;64;48;11;;3;1;;;;;;; -<2>;250;124;78;10;21;4;<2P>;5;;3;1;1;;<2S>;26;14;11;;2;;;;;;;; -;112;8;94;4;6;1;;56;;46;;10;;;185;17;149;;14;;;;;;;; -;290;4;77;74;53;53;;153;7;52;36;21;28;;118;12;48;18;24;12;;;;;;; -<4OE>;106;13;85;1;10;;<4OEP>;31;2;25;3;;;<4OES>;52;2;40;1;4;1;;;;;;; -;92;;74;2;12;1;;1;;;;;;;37;;34;;3;;;;;;;; -;102;3;28;11;23;18;;;;;;;;;7;;6;;1;;;;;;;; -_ -
;100;28;46;1;21;;;;;;;;;;36;22;7;;5;1;;;;;;; -;46;45;1;;;;;;;;;;;;47;27;15;;5;;;;;;;; -;81;5;36;2;39;3;;;;;;;;;14;;9;;4;1;;;;;;; -;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;6;2;;;;;;;;;;; -_ -;17;2;9;3;2;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -;7;1;2;2;1;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -;7;1;2;2;1;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -;2;;;1;;1;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; -.TE -.nr PS 10 -.LP -.B "TABLE 5. -.LP -BIOL. B. (pp147-166) -(740 lines, 6500 wds = 9 W/L) -.IP (a) -Line-initial frequencies -.IP (b) -Frequency of -.I finals -<9> (<9>, <89>, ); - (, , , ); - (, , , ); - (, , ) -preceding the -.I initials -listed in cols 1, 2, 3, 4. -.IP -.I "Col. 1: -all occurences not included in cols 2, 3, and 4. -.IP -.I "Col. 2: -medial
(=
, , , ). -.IP -.I "Col. 3: -medial (=, ). -.IP -.I "Col. 4: -medial (= , , , ). -.IP -.I "Figures above L.I. = -number of lines in the BIOL. B section; -above the four finals -(<9>, , , ) = total frequency of each in final position. //GO.SYSIN DD tab.5.ms echo tab.6.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tab.6.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tab.6.ms' -.nr PS 9 -.nr VS 10 -.TS -center tab(;) box; -c c c s s s s s s s s s -c c c c c c c c c c c c. -;Line;Precede words with initial: -;final;<4O>;;<9>;<8>;<2>;;;;; -_ -.T& -c | n n n n n n n n n n. -<4OFAE>;;6;6;;17;2;2;;24;22 -<4OPAE>;1;2;1;1;4;1;;;6;2 -;2;1;2;;3;1;;;4;3 -;3;2;4;;1;;;;6;5 -<8AE>;10;2;3;2;8;2;4;1;8;6 -<2AE>;3;;2;;2;;;;3;4 -_ -<4OFAR>;;5;3;1;1;;;;8;21 -<4OPAR>;;;2;1;;1;;;4;2 -;;2;5;;;;;;4;4 -;1;;5;1;3;;;;5;1 -<8AR>;5;3;9;2;4;1;1;;5;10 -<2AR>;4;;;;;1;1;;1;3 -_ -<4OFAN>;;7;26;;14;1;;;42;30 -<4OPAN>;1;;4;;;1;;;11;3 -;3;3;3;2;1;1;;;8;11 -;1;;8;1;;;;;4;5 -<8AN>;2;1;6;;4;1;;;14;6 -<2AN>;2;1;4;;;;;;3;7 -<4OFAM>;;3;12;;5;2;;;29;20 -<4OPAM>;1;3;;;;1;;;6;2 -;3;1;6;;3;;;;8;5 -;;;3;;;;;;2;3 -<8AM>;8;2;9;2;7;;;;22;14 -<2AM>;3;2;1;;2;2;;;9;11 -_ -;;;;;;;;;236;200 -_ -<4OFC89>;4;54;19;1;12;4;16;7;15;16 -<4OPC89>;3;17;6;;2;1;;4;4;2 -;1;11;8;1;5;1;6;2;1;4 -;2;15;7;1;4;1;1;1;4;5 -;11;86;19;1;13;6;13;3;13;10 -;9;118;17;4;8;5;7;1;10;14 -<4OFCC89>;3;70;15;2;7;2;16;6;11;6 -<4OPCC89>;3;18;5;;2;;4;1;3;1 -;4;10;4;;2;;2;1;2;4 -;2;7;4;;;1;1;1;6;1 -;2;11;1;;;1;4;;1; -;;20;3;;1;;4;4;2;2 -;3;15;4;;3;4;4;;1;2 -<4OPC9>;;4;2;;;;1;;; -;1;3;1;;2;;3;;1; -;;2;3;;1;;2;;1;1 -;5;30;3;;7;1;13;6;1; -;3;40;5;;7;;7;1;2;2 -<4OFCC9>;3;20;16;1;6;;13;9;6;2 -<4OPCC9>;;2;1;;;;1;1;1;1 -;;5;1;;3;;4;;1; -;1;8;2;;;;3;;1;1 -;1;10;2;;5;1;3;5;1;3 -;;16;5;1;;;2;1;3; -_ -;;;;;;;;;91;77 -.TE -.SH -TABLE 6. -.LP -Effect of final on initial `letter' of following word in Biol. B. -.LP -Selected high frequency `words' with , , , <9> finals -showing that -.IP (a) -`words' ending in , , and are followed -most frequently by `words' with initial / and only rarely or not -at all by `words' with initial or . -.IP (b) -`words' ending in <9> are followed most frequently by `words' with initial -<4O>; and includes most `words' with initial or . //GO.SYSIN DD tab.6.ms echo tab.A.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tab.A.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tab.A.ms' -.nr PS 8 -.TS -center box tab(;); -n c | l c || n c | l c || n c | l c || n c | l c || n c | l c . -(1);(2);(3) (4);(5);(1);(2);(3) (4);(5);(1);(2);(3) (4);(5);(1);(2);(3) (4);(5);(1);(2);(3) (4);(5) -_ -1;A;1 2;1;26;B;44 45;2;51;A;99 100;1;76;B;149 150;2;101;A;205 206 207 208;4? -2;A;3 4;1;27;A;46 47;1;52;A;101 102;1;77;B;151 152;2;102;A;209 210 211 212; -3;A;5 6;1;28;A;48 49;1;53;A;103 104;1;78;B;153 154;2;103;B;213 214;X -4;A;7 8;1;29;A;50 51;1;54;A;105 106;1;79;B;155 156;2;104;B;215 216;X -5;A;9 10;1;30;A;52 53;1;55;B;107 108;2;80;B;157 158;2;105;B;217 218;Y -6;A;11 12;1;31;B;54 55;2;56;A;109 110;1;81;B;159 160;2;106;B;219 220;X -7;A;13 14;1;32;A;56 57;1;57;B;111 112;2;82;B;161 162;2;107;B;221 222; -8;A;15 16;1;33;B;58 59;2;58;A;113 114;;83;B;163 164;2;108;B;223 224; -9;A;17 18;1;34;B;60 61;2;59;\_;\_;;84;B;165 166;2;109;\_;\_; -10;A;19 20;1;35;A;62 63;1;60;\_;\_;;85;B;167 168 169 170 171 172;3;110;\_;\_; -11;A;21 22;1;36;A;64 65;1;61;\_;\_;;86;B;173 174 175 176 177 178;3;111;B;225 226; -12;\_;\_;;37;A;66 67;1;62;\_;\_;;87;A;179 180;4;112;B;227 228; -13;A;23 24;1;38;A;68 69;1;63;\_;\_;;88;A;181 182;4;113;B;229 230; -14;A;25 26;1;39;B;70 71;2;64;\_;\_;;89;A;183 184 185 186;;114;B;231 232; -15;A;27 28;1;40;B;72 73;2;65; ;115 116;;90;A;187 188 189 190;;115;B;233 234; -16;A;29 30;1;41;B;74 75;2;66;B;117 118;;91;\_;\_;;116;B;235 236; -17;A;31 32;1;42;A;76 77;1;67; ;119 120;;92;\_;\_;;;;; -18;A;33 34;1;43;B;78 79;2;68; ;;;93;A;191 192;4;;;; -19;A;35 36;1;44;A;80 81;1;69; ;;;94;B;193 194;5;;;; -20;A;37 38;1;45;A;82 83;1;70;\_;\_;;95;B;195 196 197 198;5;;;; -21;A;39 40;1;46;B;84 85;2;71; ;;;96;A;199 200;4;;;; -22;A;41 42;1;47;A;86 87;1;72; ;;;97;\_;\_;;;;; -23;A;43 44;1;48;B;88 89;2;73; ;;;98;\_;\_;;;;; -24;A;45 46;1;49;A;90 91;1;74; ;;;99;A;201 202;4?;;;; -25;A;47 48;1;50;B;92 93;2;75;B;147 148;2;100;A;203 204;4?;;;; -.TE -.LP -.B "TABLE A. -.LP -Voynich MS Pagination -.DS -(1) Folio -(2) `Language' -(3) (4) Page -(5) Hand -.DE //GO.SYSIN DD tab.A.ms echo p.ms 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >p.ms <<'//GO.SYSIN DD p.ms' -.nr PS 12 -.nr VS 16 -.TL -Papers on the Voynich Manuscript -.AU -Captain Prescott H. Currier -.LP -These papers and statistical tabulations -by Prescott Currier -originally -appeared in -.I -New Research on the Voynich Manuscript: -Proceedings of a Seminar. -.R -This privately circulated typewritten manuscript, -dated -30 November 1976, -Washington, D.C., -was edited by M. E. D'Imperio, -who served as moderator at the seminar. -Jacques Guy and Jim Reeds -transcribed Currier's work into its present form -in January 1992. -.bp -.DS C -Captain Prescott H. Currier (USN Ret.) -.DE -.PP -Captain Currier received an A.B. in Romance Languages at George -Washington University, and a Diploma in Comparative Philology at the -University of London. He began his cryptologic career in 1935, and -was called to active duty with the Navy in 1940. He has served in -many distinguished capacities in the field, and from 1948 to 1950, -was Director of Research, Naval Security Group. Since his retirement -in 1962, he has continued to serve as a consultant. His -interest in the Voynich manuscript has been of very long standing, -and he has devoted an impressive amount of rigorously scientific -analytic effort to the problem in recent years. We are fortunate -indeed that Captain Currier has consented to come from his lovely -home in Maine to speak to us today about his research. -.bp -.TL -Some Important New Statistical Findings -.PP -I will start out by saying that I don't have any -``solution.'' I have a succession of what I consider to be -rather important facts which I would like to review briefly. -The two most important findings that I think I have made -are the identification of more than one hand and the -identification of more than one ``language.'' The reason they -are important is that, if the manuscript were to be -considered a hoax as it is by some, it's much more difficult -to explain this if you consider that there was more than one -individual involved, and that there is more than one -``language'' involved. These findings also make it seem much -less likely that the manuscript itself is meaningless. -.SH -Two Hands and two ``Languages'' in the Herbal Section. -.PP -When I first looked at the manuscript, I was principally -considering the initial (roughly) fifty folios, -constituting the herbal section. The first twenty-five -folios in the herbal section are obviously in one hand and -one ``language,'' which I called ``A.'' (It could have been -called anything at all; it was just the first one I came -to.) The second twenty-five or so folios are in two hands, -very obviously the work of at least two different men. In -addition to this fact, the text of this second portion of -the herbal section (that is, the next twenty-five of thirty -folios) is in two ``languages,'' and each ``language'' is in its -own hand. This means that, there being two authors of the -second part of the herbal section, each one wrote in his own -``language.'' Now, I'm stretching a point a bit, I'm aware; -my use of the word language is convenient, but it does not -have the same connotations as it would have in normal use. -Still, it is a convenient word, and I see no reason not to -continue using it. -.SH -``Languages'' A and B Statistically Distinct. -.PP -Now with this information available, I went through the -rest of the manuscript \(em some two hundred and ten pages \(em -and in four other places I discovered the same phenomena I -had associated with ``language'' B. Before I go on, the -characteristics of ``languages'' A and B are obviously -statistical. (I can't show you what they are here, as I -don't have slides prepared. We can go into this matter in -much greater detail in the discussions this afternoon.) -Suffice it to say, the differences are obvious and -statistically significant. There are two different series of -agglomerations of symbols or letters, so that there are in -fact two statistically distinguishable ``languages.'' -.SH -Hands and ``Languages'' Elsewhere in the Manuscript. -.PP -Now to go briefly through the manuscript: in the -.I "astrological section, -there seemed to be no real differences -that I could detect. The -.I "biological section" * -.FS -*i.e., those -folios featuring female figures. -Ed. -.FE -is all in one -``language'' (B) and one hand. The next section in which I -noted a difference was the -.I "pharmaceutical section. -Right in -the middle of it, with ten folios on one side and ten on the -other, there are six pages (two folios, folded so that there -are three pages on each) which show a very obvious -difference in hand: cramped, slanted, having quite a -different character, very obvious even to the untrained eye. -The frequency counts on this material bore out pretty much -the same sort of findings that I had gotten in the herbal -section. So we now have, in the pharmaceutical section, two -``languages'' and two hands. The -.I "recipe section -at the end of -the manuscript is somewhat of a mixture and didn't show the -differences so neatly. It contains only one folio on which -the writing differs noticeably to the eye from that on the -other folios; the statistical evidence gives some support to -a ``language'' difference as well. -.SH -How Many Scribes Were There All Together? -.PP -Summarizing, we have, in the herbal section, two -``languages'' which I call ``Herbal A and B,'' and in the -pharmaceutical section, two large samples, one in one -``language'' and one in the other, but in new and different -hands. Now the fact of different ``languages'' and different -hands should encourage us to go on and try to discover -whether there were in fact -.I only -two different hands, or -whether there may have been more. A closer examination of -many sections of the manuscript revealed to me that there -were not only two different hands; there were, in fact, only -two ``languages,'' but perhaps as many as eight or a dozen -different identifiable -.I hands. -Some of these distinctions -may be illusory, but in the majority of cases I feel that -they are valid. Particularly in the pharmaceutical section, -where the first ten folios are in a hand different from the -middle six pages, I cannot say with any degree of confidence -that the last ten pages are in fact in the same hand as the -first ten. -.PP -Taken all together, it looks to me as if there were an -absolute minimum of four different hands in the -pharmaceutical section. I don't know whether they are -different than those two which I previously mentioned as -being in the herbal section, but they are certainly -different from each other. So there are either -.I four -or -.I six -hands altogether at this point. The final section of -the manuscript contains only one folio which is obviously -in a different hand than all the rest, and a count of the -material in that one folio supports this; it -.I is -different, -markedly different. I'm also positive it's different from -anything I had seen before. So now we have a total of -something like five or six to seven or eight different -identifiable hands in the manuscript. This gives us a total -of two ``languages'' and six to eight scribes (copyists, -encipherers, call them what you will). -.SH -A New Slant on the Problem. -.PP -These findings put an entirely different complexion on this -problem than any that I think I have noted before in any -other discussions or solutions. It's curious to me that a -calligraphic or paleographic expert in one of the writings I -have seen* -.FS -* ``Some Impressions of the Voynich Manuscript,'' -unpublished notes by Prof. A. H. Carter (Former technical -historian, Army Security Agency), 1946, p. 1. -Ed. -.FE -says -that the writing is consistent throughout, and is obviously -the work of one man. Well, it obviously -.I isn't , -and I don't -see how anyone who had any training could make any such -statement, but there it is! -.SH -The Line Is a Functional Entity. -.PP -In addition to my findings about ``languages'' and hands, -there are two other points that I'd like to touch on very -briefly. Neither of these has, I think, been discussed by -anyone else before. The first point is that the line is a -functional entity in the manuscript on all those pages -where the text is presented linearly. There are three things -about the lines that make me believe the line itself is a -functional unit. The frequency counts of the beginnings and -endings of lines are markedly different from the counts of -the same characters internally. There are, for instance, -some characters that may not occur initially in a line. -There are others whose occurrence as the initial syllable of -the first ``word'' of a line is about one hundredth of the -expected. This by the way, is based on large samples (the -biggest sample is 15,000 ``words''), so that I consider the -sample to be big enough so that these statistics are -significant. -.PP -The ends of the lines contain what seem to be, in many -cases, meaningless symbols: little groups of letters which -don't occur anywhere else, and just look as if they were -added to fill out the line to the margin. Although this isn't always true, -it frequently happens. There is, for -instance, one symbol that, while it does occur elsewhere, -occurs at the end of the last ``words'' of lines 85% of the -time. One more fact: I have three computer runs of the -herbal material and of the biological material. In all of -that, which is almost 25,000 ``words,'' there is -.I -not one single case -.R -of a repeat going over the end of a line to the -beginning of the next; not one. This is a large sample, too. -These three findings have convinced me that the line is a -functional entity, (what its function is, I don't know), and -that the occurrence of certain symbols is governed by the -position of a ``word'' in a line. For instance, there is a -particular symbol which almost never occurs as the first -letter of a ``word'' in a line except when it is followed by -the letter that looks like ``o.'' -.SH -Effect of ``Word''-Final Symbols on the Initial Symbol of the -Following ``Word.'' -.PP -The final point I will make concerns restrictions I -noticed, especially in the Biological section, on symbols -that can end one ``word'' and symbols that begin the next -``word.'' This occurs in other sections of the manuscript, -especially in ``language'' B, but not as definitely as in -``Biological B.''* -.FS -* See Appendix A for details. -Ed. -.FE -.SH -These Findings Should be Considered by Anyone Who Studies -the Manuscript. -.PP -These findings are definite enough, I think, to warrant -much further study by anyone who is going to be involved in -seriously attacking the text of the Voynich manuscript. I -have no interpretations of them, by the way; I have no -solutions. All I know is that they are significant \(em and -.I damn -significant. Anyone who attempts to work on the text -without considering these, ignores them at his own peril. -They are -.I there , -and they are very definite. No matter -which one of the forms that Mary [D'Imperio] originally -mentioned** [earlier on during the seminar] the material is -considered to be, all of these other facts must be taken -into consideration before anyone continues. The validity of -text produced by any method at all must, I think, be judged -against this statistical background, -.PP -That, I think, is all that I am prepared to say now, but -this afternoon any of you who do come can review the points -and ask me any questions you choose. I have a fairly large -collection of statistical charts which will bear out most of -the points that I have made. These have been reproduced, and -with them my very brief notes on the four points I have -made this morning.** -.FS -**See pp. 7-8 [of the original ``Proceedings''] above. -Ed -.FE -Some of you now have copies of them. I -think that the discussions this afternoon can be, indeed, -quite fruitful if those of you who do have copies of my -material would undertake to go through it and make up in -your own minds any questions or discussions that you'd like -to go into this afternoon. Thanks very much. -.bp -.de Q -.LP -.sp -.B -\\$1 -.R -.. -.TL -Further Details of New Statistical Findings. -.NH 0 -The Nature of the Symbols. -.PP -I've looked at most of these letters under a magnifying -glass, so I think I know how they were all actually made. -These letters: , <8>, <9>, <2> all seem to start with a -``c''-curve, which was made first, in this direction: -[counter-clockwise], so we have: = [ written first, -counter-clockwise, next its mirror-image, clockwise], <8> = -[ first, then horizontal line starting from its top, -going right, looping up and counter-clockwise, continued -with a down flourish ending below the line, to the left], -<9> = [first , then flourish at top of c, going down, -ending below the line], <2> = [first , then flourish at -top of c, going up and counter-clockwise]. The forms all -have counterparts starting with : <7>, , , etc. We -also have = +. All the letters containing an -initial ``c''-curve are also the only letters that can be -preceded in the same word by the little letter that looks -like ``c,'' e.g. , . On the other hand, the -letters and (which have very high frequencies) can -.I never -be preceded by , -.I ever ; -they are instead -preceded by . -.PP -The final letters (that is, the ones I call finals, although -they can also occur elsewhere) are in two series, one -preceded by and the other by , giving a series of -sixteen: -.KS -.TS -tab(;) center; -c c c c. -;;;<3> -;();();(<1>) -;;();(<0>) -;;();(<5>) -.TE -.KE -The ones in parentheses are very low-frequency; the others -all occur with respectable frequency. In addition, these -combinations of symbols which appear as finals may occur -separately \(em ``unattached finals,'' as I call them. A large -number of unattached finals is a characteristic of -``Language'' B, and -.I not -``Language'' A, by the way. -.PP -All this indicates to me that considerable thought was put -into how this mess was made up. We have the fact that you -can make up almost any of the other letters out of these two -symbols and ; it doesn't -.I mean -anything, but it's -interesting. -.NH -Origin of the Symbols. -.PP -This symbol <9> is a common Latin abbreviation for CON, -CUM, or -US, so that it can come at both the beginnings and -ends of words. For example, ``continuus'' might be written ``9tinu9.'' -Now <9> is one of the few symbols in the -manuscript that does in fact occur at beginnings and endings -of frequent words, especially in combination with the
, - series. It looks as if whoever designed the alphabet -used <9> because this symbol resembled the one used -throughout medieval Latin for CON, -US, a frequent initial -and final. I think that's the source of that particular -letter. -.PP -As for <8>, it is a frequent letter in Etruscan, in Lydian, -and in the Lemnos alphabet, but there that letter always had -the value ``F,'' never ``S.'' In medieval Latin on occasion it -did represent ``S.'' This symbol could have been taken from -these other alphabets. -.PP -You can pick out resemblances between Latin abbreviations -and other alphabets for most symbols except for the series -
, , , . The symbol looks very much -like a medieval Latin abbreviation for ``tinus.'' The last two -look as if they are simply variations of the first two, with -the second vertical stroke pushed back. They (, ) -appear 90-95% of the time in the first lines of paragraphs, -in some 400 occurrences in one section of the manuscript. -.PP -One might conclude that , are an elaborate form of -
, , with the same value. This is often the case in -medieval manuscripts, especially in illuminated ones; -certain letters have magnified, aberrant, beautified forms. -But, not true! These two letters , are -.I not -the -same as those two
~~, , as the statistics show. The -letters~~
, are followed anywhere in a ``word'' by our -little friend about half the time (say 750 out of a -total of 1500), including initially. These two, , , -are -.I -never, ever, anywhere -.R -in the manuscript, followed -by . These latter symbols are much less frequent than -the first two, but their occurrence followed by is -.I zero . -I don't have to calculate sigmages on that! -Therefore, , are -.I not -aberrant or variant forms of -
, , but separate letters in their own right. This -holds true through the whole manuscript. That is one of the -peculiar things about the manuscript: we have two -``languages'' \(em they are definite, no doubt about it at all -\(em but there are features like this that follow through from -one ``language'' to another. That's just an item of incidental -intelligence; there it is, for what it's worth. -.Q "Question (D'Imperio): -I wonder about the cases where the two -loops of
and are separated from each other, and -one end comes down in the middle of another word, often on -top of that little letter like a table, ? -.Q Currier: -That may be a way of abbreviating two of those -looped letters. It doesn't happen frequently enough to -bother me. (Example: ) -.ig -write in the 2 shoed Qs by hand! -.. -.NH -Different Frequencies of Symbols at Beginnings, Middles, -and Ends of Lines. -.PP -At beginnings and ends of lines, we have skewed frequencies. -For example, let's take these two letters and . -(This letter , by the way, is in fact made like this: ) -Here are statistics from ``Herbal A'' material, -about 6500 words, 1000 lines, averaging seven words per -line: -.KS -.TS -tab(;) center; -c| c| c| c -c| c| c| c -c| n| n| n. -;total frequency;expected in;actual, in -``word''-initial symbols;as ``word''-initial;any ``word'';first ``word'' -_ -;118;20;3 -;212;38;26 -;24;4,5;0 -;45;10;10 -.TE -.KE -If its occurrence as an initial were random, we would -expect it to occur one seventh of the time in each word -position of a line. Actually, it is a very infrequent word -initial at the beginning of a line, except when there is an -intercalated . This applies only to ``Language'' A, by the -way; words with this initial group are low in ``Language'' B -(, for example, occurs only 5 times in Herbal B, but -212 times in Herbal A). -.NH -The Nature of the Symbols , , , . -.PP -My next point concerns the so-called ``ligatures'' based, -apparently, on the series
, , , . They are -made like this, by the way: , with
, etc., -written on top of it. In Herbal A material, in fact in all A -material, this series is initially high; in B, it is very -low \(em another way of identifying the two ``languages.'' In -Herbal A, the word-initial occurrences are as follows: -.KS -.TS -tab(;) center; -c| c| c -c| c| c -c| n| n. -;all ``word'';first ``word'' -symbol;initials;of line -_ -;326;3 -;67;1 -;82;0 -;14;0 -.TE -.KE -.PP -These ``ligatures'' seem to behave almost, but not quite, like -~~, . In contrast, whether or not followed by <9>, -,~~ ~~~~, or ~~, the series~~~~~~
, , , are -.I very -high in both ``languages,'' and frequently as paragraph -and line initials. The ``ligatures'' can -.I never -occur as -paragraph initial, and almost never line initial. -.PP -Therefore, , , and the like are symbols in their -own right, and are -.I not -equal to or , etc. -These statistical considerations are the reason why I made -up my alphabet the way I did; I restricted it as much as -possible to letters in their own right, not ligatures. -.NH -Effects of the Ending of One ``Word'' on the Beginning of -the Next ``Word.'' -.PP -You remember I mentioned that some ``word''-finals have an -obvious and statistically-significant effect on the initial -symbol of a following ``word.'' This is almost exclusively to -be found in ``Language'' B, and especially in ``Biological B'' -material. For example, we have: -.KS -.TS -tab(;) center; -c| c s s -c| c| c| c -c| n| n| n. -``words'' ending in:;Next ``word'' begins with: -;<4O>; or ; or -_ - series;13;7;91 - series;10;2;68 - series;23;0;275 -<9> series;592;184;168 -.TE -.KE -.DS C -(The above figures are condensed from Table 5A, Appendix A.) -.DE -.PP -``Words'' ending in the <9> sort of symbol, which is very -frequent, are followed about four times as often by ``words'' -beginning with <4O>. That is a fact, and it holds true -throughout the entire twenty pages of ``Biological B.'' It's -something that has to be considered by anyone who does any -work on the manuscript. These phenomena are -.I -consistent, -statistically significant, -.R -and hold true throughout those -areas of text where they are found. I can think of no -linguistic explanation for this sort of phenomenon, not if -we are dealing with words or phrases, or the syntax of a -language where suffixes are present. In no language I know -of does the suffix of a word have anything to do with the -beginning of the next word. -.DS C -\l'2i-' -.DE -.PP -(At this point, Captain Currier's presentation was -concluded, and questions were raised by listeners. The -lengthy and interesting discussion that followed, -transcribed in its entirety from our tape record, comprises -the next section of these notes. \(em Ed.) -.SH -Questions and Discussion -.Q Question -(Speaker not identified): How do you account for -the full-word repeats? -.Q Currier: -That's just the point \(em they're -.I -not words! -.Q Child: -I don't think you can say that doesn't happen. Now, -it may not happen with the languages in a more or less -consistent, normative writing system. But it does when a -scribe is noting rapid speech, with all its slurs and -elisions, rather than the facts of grammar. The sounds at -the end of one word can influence those at the beginning of -the next. -.Q Currier: -Not this much. -.Q D'Imperio: -Could I suggest that it may be related to the -constraints on groups in a system like a code or synthetic -language, when words from certain pages or parts of the code -combine preferentially with words from certain other parts -of the code? -.Q Currier: -Precisely, precisely; yes, right. -.Q Valaki: -What about sounds at the beginning of one word being -changed by neighboring sounds, at the end of the previous -word? This happens in some languages (examples from Greek -which are not audible on the tape. \(emEd.) -.Q Currier: -I don't think it would happen to this extent... Has -anyone seen my computer run on ``Biological B?'' -.Q D'Imperio: -I haven't seen that \(em I'd certainly like to get -a copy! -.Q Currier: -``Biological B'' is by far the most interesting; -.I -very constrained, -.R -very interesting from a statistical -point of view. (Some examples, not clear on tape \(emEd.) I -have a whole notebook of statistical charts at home: things -I want to look into, and took various samples of limited -areas of text. But I think anyone who's really interested -ought to do their own. These are the best kind of evidence -for valid conclusions. If you want to make an assumption of -a value for some particular symbol, with an index you can -try it out and see what happens. Certain things will also -arise from taking these statistics which will provide -evidence for a new theory. If you view all these statistics -as basic background evidence on which to base theories, you -can come up with a hypothesis which can be tested, rather -than -.I starting -with a hypothesis and then looking for -evidence to back it up. This statistical background is the -sort of evidence anyone who is going to work on this -document should be aware of. It gives you something against -which you can compare the material and test your hypotheses. -.Q Question -(Speaker unidentified): Have there been any studies -on the lengths of words? -.Q Currier: -Not specifically. I've got it all at home... but it -hasn't suggested anything to me. -.Q D'Imperio: -I made a partial study of word lengths on a small -scale (15,000 characters); few words were longer than seven -or eight symbols or shorter than two. -.Q Currier: -But there -.I are -a lot that are exactly two long. -(Examples from ``Herbal A'' and ``Herbal B,'' not audible on -tape \(emEd.) Certain groups \(em a different one in A than in B -material \(em are repeated four times in a row; they would -.I have -to be numbers, I can't think of anything else. If the -one were ``zero'' in ``Herbal A,'' the other might be ``zero'' in -``Herbal B,'' and this would be what you'd look up in your -artificial language system. I don't believe that, by the -way. -.PP -This statistical data of mine is available \(em my notes and -observations. I've come to no real conclusions, except that -this can't be, as far as I can see, a straightforward simple -encipherment of any linguistic data; there has to be an -intermediate step somewhere as far as I can see. -.Q Question -(Speaker unidentified): You said that each line was -a separate sentence unto itself... -.Q Currier: -An annoying little circumstance: words beginning -with almost never seem to occur first in a line. I -thought perhaps I might try numerals one to ten for the -letters that come before in line-initial position, but -I can't make it work. But this kind of thing makes it look -as if the line is a functional entity; that is what bothers -me. I can't interpret the data! -.Q Question -(Speaker unidentified): Is that true all the way -through the manuscript? -.Q Currier: -Yes, it is basically true, but especially in -``Biological B.'' -.Q D'Imperio: -There seem to be very strong constraints in -combinations of symbols; only a very limited number of -letters occur with each other letter in certain positions of -a ``word.'' -.Q Currier: -Yes... (Examples, not clear on tape. \(emEd.) By the -way, if anyone does transcribe any more text, I wish they -would use my alphabet; then we can put all the data and -results together. -.Q D'Imperio: -I have a copy of Captain Currier's alphabet and -sorting sequence. -.Q Currier: -You don't need to bother about the sorting -sequence. I had a particular reason for it back when I did -the earlier work but you don't need it now. I'd like to see -someone do more with the problem, in the ``Recipe'' section -for example. You should be careful when you transcribe, -though; you have to make some judgements of what a letter -is, and it takes practice to get the hang of it. -.Q Miller: -I'd like to bring up something related to Mary's -introduction this morning, where she associated my name with -the theory that the manuscript was meaningless. I would -object to the phrase ``meaningless doodles,'' because I think -this is -.I -purposeful but inarticulate -.R -writing; doodles are -simply to pass the time away... -.Q D'Imperio: -But the point I was emphasizing was that this -theory considered the manuscript meaningless within our -context of -.I -trying to decipher it... -.Q Miller: -The meaning is irrecoverable. If there is such a -school of thought, [of people who believe that the meaning -of the manuscript is inherently and essentially -irrecoverable \(emEd.], who else is in it besides me? -.Q D'Imperio: -There are some people who come pretty close: Dr. -MacClintock, for example, thinks it's almost entirely -irrecoverable, I believe... -.Q Miller: -Has this been argued on the basis of a careful -analysis of the text, or merely because it isn't readable? I -don't think the thing is a hoax. But no details have been -given of the theories (that the meaning is irrecoverable) -and I would like to read more about it. -.Q D'Imperio: -I think it's primarily exasperation on the part -of people that have been frustrated time and again in -attempting to decipher it, and they just end up saying ``Oh, -fooey! How can the thing mean anything, with all these weird -repeats and such...?'' -.Q Miller: -But with all these statistics that Captain Currier, -Brigadier Tiltman, and Mr. Friedman have given \(em hasn't -anyone... -.Q D'Imperio: -The trouble is, how -.I -can you prove -.R -that -something is meaningless, or that its meaning is -irrecoverable? That is just what is left after you've -disproven all the specific positive decipherment theories -you or anyone else has thought of so far. But another good -one might still always come along. (Editorial comment: If we -were to prove scientifically that a text's meaning is -irrecoverable, we would require either (1) a theory that -provided for certain observable criteria or characteristics -that strings having recoverable meanings must have, and a -proof that this particular text -.I -does not -.R -exhibit those -criteria; or (2) a theory providing for certain observable -criteria which strings having irrecoverable meanings must -have, and a proof that this particular string before us -.I does -exhibit those criteria. This would constitute a sort -of ``uncomputability'' or ``undecidability'' theory for the -.I semantics -.R -of textual strings. Is this possible? At our -present state of knowledge, I sincerely doubt it. Still, it -raises some highly interesting philosophical questions that -deserve further attention from someone qualified to explore -them. There are, of course, tests for ``psychological random'' -characteristics of various sorts, which would provide some -strong support for a hypothesis that the text had been -.I fabricated , -independently of any semantic or linguistic -structure having a recoverable meaning; these tests and -hypotheses ought certainly to be applied to the Voynich -text.) -.Q Valaki: -Some time ago I saw a screen for sale at a -furniture store. It was a four-panel screen; on one panel -there was writing in Greek, which I read and found to be one -of Aesop's fables. When I tried to read the second panel, I -couldn't make any sense out of it \(em nothing went with -anything else. I finally realized that they were just -individual Greek words copied off at random. The third panel -was just Greek letters, and the fourth panel was imitation -Greek letters! -.Q D'Imperio: -I wish you had bought it \(em what a beautiful test -case! We could have made some frequency counts on it and... -.Q Valaki: -Maybe that's like the Voynich \(em it could turn out -to be a good straight copying job. -.Q D'Imperio: -But still, back to Doris' point, how can we -demonstrate that? You see, the way you realized that about -the screen \(em the fact that the other panels were -meaningless \(em was because you knew Greek and you read the -fable on the first panel. Then, when you looked at the -others, you saw the degradation... -.Q Valaki: -I really thought my Greek had gone! Nothing was -matching anything else; words didn't go together. I sort of -went backwards to attack it. -.Q D'Imperio: -Well, with the Voynich, we are in the position of -having something we can't read any part of, to any degree, -and that doesn't look like anything we've ever seen before. -How can we show, demonstrate, that it is meaningless? -.Q Miller: -You don't have to demonstrate... -.Q Currier: -Nobody has tried, not that I know of. -.Q D'Imperio: -No, not that I've ever seen. -.Q Currier: -Evidence that it can't be ``doodles'' is the minimum -of six people involved in their production. I can prove four -beyond a shadow of a doubt. I'm not a paleographer; I -wouldn't stand up in court and try to defend this against -a paleographer. But I'm positive, particularly in the Herbal -Section. I imagine it to have happened something like this: -some sixty-five folios were prepared ahead of time with -drawings on them. They were placed on a a table -.I so . -The -first twenty-five folios were taken, one at a time, off the -top and filled in with writing by one individual. At the end -of those twenty-five, he got very tired and he called for -help. Another man sat down opposite him at the same table. -And they took them off, one at a time: one man took one off -and did his thing, in his own ``language,'' while the other -man did -.I his -thing with another in -.I his -``language.'' And -they went through the second stack and interleaved them; one -man did it one way and the other did it the other way. When -they were done, they had the Herbal Section! -.Q Question -(Speaker unidentified): Are you convinced that the -page numbering is correct? -.Q Currier: -Yes. I am sure the page numbering is that of the -original... -.Q Question -(Speaker unidentified): What about the fact that -there were no erasures? That makes it look like a copying -job. -.Q Currier: -It must be a copying job. But how do two people -copying from a single source produce material in two -different ``languages'' simultaneously? I can just see them -sitting there! I'm absolutely positive this is the way it -was done. The folios were prepared in advance by someone -else with the drawings on them. Sometimes the writing -overlaps the drawings somewhat. The pictures of the Herbal -Section look as if they were drawn by a single individual, -but this I couldn't prove. The writing on folios 1 to 25 was -done by one man. On folios 25 to 65, it was done by two men, -one who worked a little faster (the man who did the first -batch did more of the second batch; he was more -experienced). -.Q Buck: -It was noted that some pages are missing, and the -cover is missing. Do you have any ideas about the reason? -.Q Currier: -No, I have no theories. -.Q Miller: -Somebody stripped off the beautiful pictures! -.Q Currier: -Then he left a lot of beautiful pictures behind! -.Q D'Imperio: -One of the missing folios was for the zodiac -signs of Capricorn and Aquarius; maybe that was somebody's -horoscope? -.Q Question -(Speaker unidentified): When a new hand takes over, -do you see variations in the mode of writing the symbols? -.Q Currier: -Yes, but it's the overall impression of the -writing. In general, for example, in ``Herbal A,'' the writing -is upright, rounded, lines are well-spaced, it looks clean, -clear, with no extraneous material. ``Herbal B,'' in contrast, -is uphill, slanted cramped writing. It's obvious to me. The -first thing I noted looking at the manuscript as a whole was -this difference in the writing in the Herbal Section, before -I had taken a single count. I separated the pages by sight -first, then took a ten-page sample in each of the two -separate writings, and made separate counts. It stared me in -the face \(em there it was: all my selections were correct. It -was a sufficiently controlled procedure to make me think -these conclusions are valid. Anyone can see it \(em just lay -the pages out and look. I can't prove the pages are in the right -order, but I just -.I feel -that they are. In the Astrological -Section, the signs of the zodiac are in the right order. -.Q D'Imperio: -There is some evidence in the folio gathering \(em -the numbers in the bottom corners of some pages, about every -eight folios. They agree well with the folio numbering at -the beginning of the manuscript, at least. They also show -some relatively early forms of the numerals. This gives us a -bit more evidence that some of the pages at least are in the -right order. -.Q Buck: -I would like to speculate about where the missing -pages are... -.Q D'Imperio: -Maybe they'll show up some day, among somebody's -papers! -.bp -.TL -APPENDIX A - -The VOYNICH MANUSCRIPT -Some Notes and Observations -October 1976 -.NH 0 -The matter of `hands' -.LP -It was noted early in the study of the Herbal Section (pp -1-112) that the handwriting characteristics of several pairs -of adjacent folios varied perceptibly, even to an untrained -eye. A few elementary frequency counts showed that the -statistical profiles of the textual material on these folios -also differed significantly. Further investigation of all -the folios in the section revealed that there were two -different `hands' in use throughout the entire section, each -writing in its own `language,' hereinafter called Languages -A and B. -.LP -With this evidence at hand a check of the remaining sections -of the Manuscript turned up the following: -.PP -(a) In the -.I "Astrological Section -(pp 113-146) there seemed to -be no significant difference in the writing on any of the -folios except that there appeared to be a `foreign' element -evident in the inclusion of a few symbols which occur -nowhere else in the Manuscript. The `language' throughout is -mostly A but without some of the more pronounced `A' -features found in Herbal A. -.PP -(b) The -.I "Biological Section -(pp 147-166) appears to be the -work of a single scribe, all in language B, with strong, -sharply delineated statistical characteristics. The language -of this section is more restricted, perhaps even more -`regular' than the language `B' in other sections of the -Manuscript. This could conceivably be the result of this -section being the product of only one person. -.PP -(c) In the -.I "Pharmaceutical Section -(pp 167-211), pp 167-173 -and two folios (pp 193-198) in the mid-portion of the -section are in Language `B'; the remaining folios are in -Language `A.' An interesting point here is the fact that -there seemed to be more than the expected two `hands,' one -for each `language' as in the Herbal Section. The difference -between the `B' writing of the mid-portion (pp 193-198) and -the `A' writing of the surrounding folios (pp 179-192; pp -199-211) is obvious and easily discernible and was noted on -the first quick pass through the Manuscript. But it is not -at all clear that the initial Language `B'-folios (pp -167-173) are in the same hand as pp 193-198 nor can it be -said with certainty that the Language `A'-folios (pp 179-192 -and pp 199-211) are all the work of a single individual. -Additionally, p 174 is in Language `A' and in a hand -different from any other in the Pharmaceutical Section. -.PP -The Newbold foliation indicates that the Biological Section -extends through ff 85-86 and it would appear from the -illustrations that the Pharmaceutical Section does not begin -until f 87. However, frequency counts before and after the -break at f 84/f 85 indicate a change from Biological -material to something else. For example, the final `,' -which does not occur in the Biol. B text, shows up in -ff 85-86 with quite a respectable frequency and matches the -frequency of this final in the Pharmaceutical `B' text on ff -94-95. I am reasonably certain that the handwriting on ff -85-86 is not the same as that on ff 95-96 but I cannot be -sure that it differs from the Biol. B hand. In sum, I -would venture a guess that there are at least three and -perhaps as many as five or six different hands in evidence -in this section. On the other `hand' it may all be an -illusion. -.PP -(d) The -.I "Recipe Section -(pp 212-234) contains only one folio -on which the writing differs noticeably from that on the -other folios. This difference is supported to a degree by -statistical evidence. The `language' throughout the Section -is `modified B' (i.e., contains certain `A' characteristics). -It might be worth noting, however, that there seem to be -some less discernible handwriting variations on many other -folios in the Recipe Section. I cannot be sure that these -are valid differences but the frequency counts of the -material on the folios in question are just slightly -supportive. -.NH -The matter of `language' -.LP -I should be noted before going on that the word `language' -is quite loosely used here and throughout these notes. It -connotes only a marked statistical difference between two -sets of text. It in no way implies the existence of any -underlying language. Being convenient however, it will -continue to be used. -.LP -As previously stated in para. 1 above, the Herbal -Section contains both Language `A' and `B.' The principal -differences between the two `languages' in this Section -are: -.PP -(a) Final `<89>' is very high in Language `B'; almost -non-existent in Language `A.' -.PP -(b) The symbol groups `' and `' are very high in `A' -and often occur repeated; low in `B'. -.PP -(c) The symbol groups `' and `' rarely occur in -`B'; medium frequency in `A.' -.PP -(d) Initial `' high in `A'; rare in `B.' -.PP -(e) Initial `' very high in `A'; very low in `B.' -.PP -(f) `Unattached' finals scattered throughout Language `B' -texts in considerable profusion; generally -.I much -less -noticeable in Language `A.' -.PP -These features are to be found generally in the other -Sections of the manuscript although there are always local -variations; which of course could imply a `subject-matter' -effect. -.PP -The discovery of the two `languages' in the Herbal Section -was the principal reason for transcribing and indexing this -material. It was hoped that by application of comparative -techniques to the Herbal A and B texts, ostensibly dealing -with identical subject matter, some clue to the nature of -the two `systems of writing' might be forthcoming. The -results were completely negative; there was no sign of -parallel constructions or any other evidence that was useful -in this regard. It was impossible not to conclude that (a) -we were not dealing with a `linguistic' recording of data -and (b) the illustrations had little to do with the -accompanying text. Study of other sections of the Manuscript -where `A' and `B' texts are found has produced nothing to -alter this conclusion. Further, it has so far proved -impossible to categorize or to classify grammatically any -series of `words' or to discern any use patterns that that -would suggest any recognizable syntactic arrangement of the -underlying text. Perhaps even more important, I have been -unable to identify `words' or individual symbols in either -`language' to which I could assign even tentative numerical -values. It seems quite incredible to me that any systems of -writing (or a simple substitution thereof) would not betray -one or both of the above features. -.NH -The effect of word-final symbols on the initial symbol of -the following `word' -.LP -This `word-final effect' first became evident in a study of -the Biol. B index wherein it was noted that the final -symbol of `words' preceding `words' with an initial `<4O>' was -restricted pretty largely to `<9>'; and that initial ` / ' -was preceded much more frequently than expected by -finals of the `' series and the `' series. Additionally, -`words' with initial ` / ' occur in line-initial -position far -.I less -frequently than expected, which perhaps -might be construed as being preceded by an `initial nil.' -.PP -This phenomenon occurs in other sections of the Manuscript, -especially in those `written' in Language B, but in no case -with quite the same definity as in Biological B. Language A -texts are fairly close to expected in this respect. -.PP -I can think of no interpretation of this phenomenon, -linguistic or otherwise. Inflexional endings would certainly -not have this effect nor would any other grammatical feature -that I know of if we assume that we are dealing with -.I words . -If, however, these word-appearing elements are -something else, syllables, letters, even digits, -restrictions of this sort might well occur. -.NH -The line as functional entity -.LP -As mentioned in para. 3 above, `words' with initial ` / ' -are unexpectedly low in line initial position (on -average about .1 of expected); other `words' occur in -this position far more frequently than expected, particularly -`words' with initial `<8S>,' `<9S>' etc., which have the -appearance of `'-initial `words' suitably modified for -line-initial use. Symbol groups at the ends of lines are -frequently of a character unlike those appearing in the body -of the text sometimes having the appearance of fillers. -Further, in only one instance so far noted has a repeated -sequence (of `words') extended beyond the end of one line -into the beginning of the next. -.PP -All in all it is difficult not to assume that the line, on -those pages on which the text has a linear arrangement, is a -self-contained unit with a function yet to be discovered. -.NH -Appended Tables -.IP "\fBTable A.\fP" 8 -Voynich Manuscript foliation-pagination concordance with -an indication of `language' and `hand' where known. -.IP "\fB Table 1.\fP" -Frequency of initials with mesial `
' and `' for -all sections showing both total and line-initial frequencies. -.IP "\fB Table 2.\fP" -Frequency of finals following ` ~~/ ' for all sections -of the Manuscrip[t. -.IP "\fB Table 3.\fP" -Frequency of finals following medial `~~
' and `' for -Herb. A, Herb. B and Biol. B. -.IP "\fB Table 4.\fP" -Frequency of `'-medials (`' preceded by a single -symbol) showing total and line-initial frequencies. -.IP "\fB Table 5.\fP" -Biol. B line-initial frequencies (all `words') plus -frequencies of finals preceding the listed initials. -.IP "\fB Table 6.\fP" -Biol. B\(emEffect of final on initial of following `word.' //GO.SYSIN DD p.ms echo NVoynich.ps 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >NVoynich.ps <<'//GO.SYSIN DD NVoynich.ps' -%!PS - -/Voyobj save def - -/upfish { - -150 -220 rmoveto % upfish - 750 880 - -450 880 - 300 0 rcurveto -} def -/nine { - circ - 331 165 moveto %nine - 0 -276 - 0 -276 - -206 -552 rcurveto -} def -% - -/tall { - 225 0 rmoveto %tall - 0 750 rlineto - 0 -100 rmoveto -} def - -/tall4 { - 225 0 rmoveto %tall4 - 0 750 rlineto - -100 -100 rlineto - 100 0 rlineto -} def - -/tinycurl{ - 150 0 rlineto %tinycurl - 250 0 - 0 300 - 0 -50 - rcurveto -} def - -/curldown{ - tinycurl - 0 -600 rlineto %curldown -} def - -/curlleft{ - tinycurl - 0 -100 % was -175 %curlleft - 0 -100 % was -150 - -200 -100 - rcurveto - -150 0 rlineto -} def - -/cstart { 138 316 moveto } def -/sbase { cstart cmake 510 0 rlineto cmake } def -/sbase2 { cstart cmake 655 0 rlineto cmake } def -/cmake { - -206 68 - -206 -482 - 68 -316 rcurveto - -68 316 rmoveto -} def - -/curl { 55 0 rlineto 828 0 -276 828 331 -414 rcurveto } def % for J -/hibow { 414 414 138 690 -276 276 rcurveto } def % for R -/lowbow { 344 0 96 690 -206 690 rcurveto } def % for D -/zbow { 414 414 276 552 -138 138 rcurveto } def % for Z - -/lastiota { - dup % now fl fl - gsave - 51 setlinewidth - - 0 414 rmoveto - 165 -414 - 165 -414 - 234 -414 - rcurveto - 0 rlineto % now fl - stroke - grestore - 234 add 0 rmoveto -} def -/iota { - gsave % stroke width - 0 414 rmoveto - 165 -414 rlineto - 61 setlinewidth stroke - grestore - 165 0 rmoveto -} def -/upthin { - gsave - 1 setlinewidth - 40 414 rlineto - stroke - grestore - 40 0 rmoveto -} def -/upiota { - upthin - iota -} def - -/topiota { -165 414 rmoveto } def -/midiota { -110 276 rmoveto } def - -/circ { - 165 331 rmoveto - - -206 -82 -165 -414 40 -331 rcurveto - 206 82 165 414 -40 331 rcurveto -} def -/box { - newpath - 123 40 moveto - 123 924 lineto - 1006 924 lineto - 1006 40 lineto - closepath - 3 setlinewidth -} def - -10 dict dup begin - -/FontType 3 def -/FontMatrix[.001 0 0 .001 0 0]def -/FontBBox[-500 -500 1000 1000]def -/Encoding 256 array def -0 1 255{Encoding exch /.notdef put} for -Encoding -dup (-) 0 get /fdash put -dup ( ) 0 get /fdash put % tab -dup (/) 0 get /fslash put -dup ( ) 0 get /fslash put % space -dup (#) 0 get /fhash put -dup (*) 0 get /fstar put -dup (0) 0 get /f0 put dup (1) 0 get /f1 put dup (2) 0 get /f2 put -dup (3) 0 get /f3 put dup (4) 0 get /f4 put dup (5) 0 get /f5 put -dup (6) 0 get /f6 put dup (7) 0 get /f7 put dup (8) 0 get /f8 put -dup (9) 0 get /f9 put dup (A) 0 get /fA put dup (B) 0 get /fB put -dup (C) 0 get /fC put dup (D) 0 get /fD put dup (E) 0 get /fE put -dup (F) 0 get /fF put dup (G) 0 get /fG put dup (H) 0 get /fH put -dup (I) 0 get /fI put dup (J) 0 get /fJ put dup (K) 0 get /fK put -dup (L) 0 get /fL put dup (M) 0 get /fM put dup (N) 0 get /fN put -dup (O) 0 get /fO put dup (P) 0 get /fP put dup (Q) 0 get /fQ put -dup (R) 0 get /fR put dup (S) 0 get /fS put dup (T) 0 get /fT put -dup (U) 0 get /fU put dup (V) 0 get /fV put dup (W) 0 get /fW put -dup (X) 0 get /fX put dup (Y) 0 get /fY put -(Z) 0 get /fZ put - -/Metrics 41 dict def -Metrics begin -/.notdef 750 def -/fstar 750 def % unreadable Voy letter -/fdash 750 def % extra word break -/fslash 500 def % regular word break -/fhash 0 def % paragraph sign -/f0 966 def /f1 1048 def /f2 612 def /f3 1214 def /f4 703 def /f5 1200 def -/f6 579 def /f7 480 def /f8 552 def /f9 480 def /fA 441 def /fB 690 def -/fC 386 def /fD 690 def /fE 496 def /fF 552 def /fG 717 def /fH 924 def -/fI 303 def /fJ 592 def /fK 786 def /fL 951 def /fM 1006 def /fN 896 def -/fO 552 def /fP 600 def /fQ 1020 def /fR 620 def /fS 840 def /fT 600 def -/fU 720 def /fV 675 def /fW 1020 def /fX 1020 def /fY 1020 def /fZ 840 def -end - -/BBox 41 dict def -BBox begin -/.notdef [-500 -500 1000 1000] def -/fstar [-500 -500 1000 1000] def -/fslash [0 0 0 0]def -/fdash [0 0 0 0]def -/fhash [0 0 0 0]def - -%these need fixing & checking! - -/f0 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /f1 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /f2 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def -/f3 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /f4 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /f5 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def - -/f6 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /f7 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /f8 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def -/f9 [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fA [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fB [-500 -500 1000 1000] def - -/fC [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fD [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fE [-500 -500 1000 1000] def -/fF [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fG [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fH [-500 -500 1000 1000] def - -/fI [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fJ [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fK [-500 -500 1000 1000] def -/fL [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fM [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fN [-500 -500 1000 1000] def - -/fO [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fP [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fQ [-500 -500 1000 1000] def -/fR [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fS [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fT [-500 -500 1000 1000] def - -/fU [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fV [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fW [-500 -500 1000 1000] def -/fX [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fY [-500 -500 1000 1000] def /fZ [-500 -500 1000 1000] def - -end - -/CharacterDefs 60 dict def -CharacterDefs begin -/fhash { } def -/fslash { } def -/fdash { } def -/.notdef { box } def -/fstar { box 90 30 moveto 730 670 lineto 90 670 moveto 730 30 lineto } def - -% C users - -/fS { sbase } def -/fZ { sbase 276 434 moveto zbow } def -/f2 { cstart 103 0 rmoveto cmake hibow } def -/fC { cstart cmake } def - - -/f4 { - 690 0 rmoveto - -552 0 rlineto - 344 344 rlineto - 0 -690 rlineto -} def - -/fO { circ } def -/f8 { circ -40 0 rmoveto circ } def - -% -% 9: tail need fine tuning -% -/f9 { nine } def - -/fA { cstart cmake 0 -344 rmoveto iota } def - -% -% the ampersands: curl needs fine tunig -% -/f6 { - 138 316 moveto - -295 -7 -206 -482 68 -316 rcurveto - -68 316 rmoveto - 96 0 49 -15 157 10 rcurveto - 410 168 -214 372 0 0 rcurveto - 165 -276 272 -471 60 -662 rcurveto -} def - - -/f7 { -iota topiota - 96 0 49 -15 157 10 rcurveto - 410 168 -214 372 0 0 rcurveto - 110 -178 165 -276 13 -414 rcurveto -% 165 -276 272 -471 60 -662 rcurveto -} def - -% -% the tall ones -% - -/fB {27 0 rmoveto tall4 curlleft } def -/fF { -138 0 rmoveto tall curldown } def -/fV {68 0 rmoveto tall curlleft } def -/fP {-110 0 rmoveto tall4 curldown } def - -/fW {165 0 rmoveto tall4 curlleft sbase2 } def -/fX { 90 0 rmoveto tall curldown sbase2 } def -/fY {165 0 rmoveto tall curlleft sbase2 } def -/fQ { 90 0 rmoveto tall4 curldown sbase2 } def - -% the iota series - -/fI {iota } def - -% J sub-series - -/fJ { iota midiota curl } def -/fK { iota upthin iota midiota curl } def -/fL { iota upthin iota upthin iota midiota curl } def -/f5 { iota upthin iota upthin iota upthin iota midiota curl } def - -% D sub-series - -/fD { 0 lastiota lowbow } def -/fN { iota upthin 0 lastiota lowbow } def -/fM { iota upthin iota upthin 0 lastiota lowbow } def -/f3 { iota upthin iota upthin iota upthin 0 lastiota lowbow } def - -% hibow subseries - -/fR {220 0 rmoveto - iota midiota hibow } def -/fT {iota upthin iota midiota hibow } def -/fU {iota upthin iota upthin iota midiota hibow } def -/f0 {iota upthin iota upthin iota upthin iota midiota hibow } def - -% upfish subseries - -/fE {241 0 rmoveto upfish } def -/fG { 186 lastiota upfish } def -/fH {iota upthin 186 lastiota upfish } def -/f1 {iota upthin iota upthin 186 lastiota upfish } def - -end - -/BuildChar -{ - 0 - begin - /char exch def - /fontdict exch def - /charname fontdict /Encoding get char get def - fontdict begin - Metrics charname get 0 - BBox charname get aload pop - setcachedevice - newpath 23 setlinewidth 0 0 moveto % reeds - CharacterDefs charname get exec - stroke % reeds - end - end -} def -/BuildChar load 0 3 dict put -/UniqueID 665507 def -end - -/Voynich exch definefont pop //GO.SYSIN DD NVoynich.ps echo V 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >V <<'//GO.SYSIN DD V' -name V -fontname Voynich -spacewidth 50 -charset -# 0 0 35 -* 75 2 42 -- 75 0 32 -/ 50 0 47 -0 97 2 48 -1 105 1 49 -2 61 2 50 -3 121 2 51 -4 70 1 52 -5 120 0 53 -6 58 3 54 -7 48 0 55 -8 55 0 56 -9 48 1 57 -A 44 0 65 -B 69 2 66 -C 39 0 67 -D 69 2 68 -E 50 0 69 -F 55 2 70 -G 72 1 71 -H 92 1 72 -I 30 0 73 -J 59 0 74 -K 79 0 75 -L 95 0 76 -M 101 2 77 -N 90 2 78 -O 55 0 79 -P 60 2 80 -Q 102 2 81 -R 62 2 82 -S 84 0 83 -T 60 2 84 -U 72 2 85 -V 68 2 86 -W 102 2 87 -X 102 2 88 -Y 102 2 89 -Z 84 2 90 - - //GO.SYSIN DD V echo tmac.voy 1>&2 sed 's/.//' >tmac.voy <<'//GO.SYSIN DD tmac.voy' -.fp 7 V /usr/reeds/psi/V //GO.SYSIN DD tmac.voy