Methodology

Meta-Analysis

This research will begin by examining the most popular research in the aforementioned subtopics of each mystery (e.g., the inclusion of statistics within the Voynich Manuscript decipherment attempts, and so on). Doing so will provide a basis from which to understand the trends in methodology between the individual studies. To further draw conclusions based on this step, comparative work will then be conducted. This work will take the category of individual subfields (like statistics) and see how they were emulated in research over time — from the beginning of each mystery’s significance within the field to the modern day. Comparative analysis is where most of the conclusions within this project will likely originate; this step will show the change over time that is integral to the research topic at hand. The final course of action within this project is drawing similarities across all of the mysteries. Although this may not yield many parallels, it will aid in displaying how some methodologies can be significant to the field of linguistics as a whole.

An Indus Script tablet, with an animal inscription on the bottom and symbols in a line on the top.

Why Three Mysteries?

Having others, like Rongorongo and the Indus Script, helps strengthen the findings of each methodological inquiry and can therefore provide parallels between different mysteries — as opposed to merely internally with one mystery. It is often understood that the more supporting work, the more accurate the findings will be. While this cannot yet be proven in the case of this particular study, it is certainly important to adhere to this guideline. Additionally, Rongorongo and the Indus Script are distinct from the Voynich Manuscript in their own right. Even though they are still not as globally significant as the latter, they are still extremely important to the field of linguistics.

Figure 7: Inscriptions of the Indus Script and illustrations.

Page updated

Report abuse