And the Winner is…

Austrian TV has just published a summary of the scientific analysis performed on the VM in the frame of its upcoming programme.

Unfortunately, the tone of this scoop is sensational and there is a dearth of actual information, aside of a compilation of the VM’s history from Wikipedia.

The only lines regarding the actual results of the dating tests are:

Alle bisherigen Theorien sind falsch. Denn das Buch ist viel älter als gedacht!

All theories developed hitherto are wrong. The book is much older than previously thought!

So, apparently there is no winner at all. Though “much older than previously thought” would place the VM in ancient Greece, considering that initially 13th-century Roger Bacon was considered to be involved.

I dare say the Austrian show will not be the final word on the VM. Especially not if it carries on in this tone.

Information kindly provided by Rich SantaColoma.


8 thoughts on “And the Winner is…

  1. Isn’t that interesting? If this is correct… and it looks like it is all the real thing… then it seems my microscope/NA theories are wrong. So be it. The truth is all that matters.

    But as for “All theories… wrong…”, this does not make sense to me… aren’t there theories dating to the 11th century? Unless the dating is before then… or Roger Bacon, as you point out… then some theories may still be in the proper time frame. We will see… it is all very exciting… Rich.

  2. Pingback: 1404 to 1438 « The Voynich-New Atlantis Theory

  3. Dear all,

    yesterday evening I posted a short message at the cipher mysteries blog, which hasn’t appeared so far, but it still may.

    Let me repeat the essentials here.

    The press conference was attended by journalists who were not experts in the Voynich MS, and their reports (probably there could be more today) were also not primarily targeted at the 50-100 experts that I think are actively following up on the MS.

    Please allow me a summary:

    – for C-14 dating the MS was sampled in four distinct locations
    – all samples were dated separately
    – all four dates coincided within one standard deviation
    – as a result, the samples could be treated as being independent samples of the same quantity
    – the resulting curve gives a date of creation of the parchment between 1404 and 1438 with 95% probability
    – it was mentioned that it would have been very unusual to have this amount of parchment stocked away and then used as ‘en bloc’
    – the regional information is solely based on the probably smaller regional distribution at this early date, of the swallow-tail or ghiblline crenellations

  4. Ah yes, I forgot:
    the inks and pigments were tested by McCrone. They did not contain any suspicous or out-of-this-time range materials at all.

  5. Was the theory that the Vms was written by two different hands taken into consideration? were tests made from both? Just wondering, because one hand could have been prior to the second.

  6. I don’t know the details (I really wish there was a scholarly paper on the topic out there rather than the sensationalist yellow press blah…), but since at least from the vellum four samples were taken, it appears that they included both hands.

    From what I gather, the results were consistent with the VM being produced in one “batch”.

  7. The still incomplete information has made it into the English wikipedia page already. The source for the information is probably also not the most appropriate. Hopefully this will all be corrected in the near future, when more specific details are available.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s