The Voynich Ninja

Emma: I will see if I find somewhere to upload some images. I agree things will be clearer visually.

The majority of EVA-q are triangles. Not all of them. Some of them are so rounded they almost look like "q".

But... the loop might not be important. If the important part of the shape is the "cross" shape that underlies it, then it's possible that the loop is simply there to hide the cross-shape or it's a quick way to write it.

The majority of EVA-t have rounded loops, but many of them are triangular, they do look similar to an up-shifted 4 and I have often wondered if there might be a relationship between them. I'm pretty sure I've posted examples in blogs.


There is also a less common form of EVA-q that has an extended upper stem so that it no longer looks like a 4. I've definitely posted examples of those. Here is one that I posted in a blog that demonstrates that there MIGHT be a relationship between q and the left loop of  t:

JKP: I would be much more emphatic in saying there must be a relationship i.e. in both cases we have a "4". I think when it comes to the extension on the top of the 4 I think it is most likely that is just a drawing error. Similarly if you draw enough "4"s then some of them will look like "q"s due to drawing error, so I doubt that any of them are "q"s, but from what I have seen the vast majority look clearly like "4"s. My point was that I think this question is amenable to objective analysis. Obviously this point applies to all gallows characters with a left hand top loop.

I think if you are not expecting the top left hand loop of gallows characters to be a "4" you wouldn't notice it, but from my perspective on the Voynich it is quite natural and almost certainly the case. I think there really ought to be a widespread consensus on this point, but I imagine that that is too much to hope for.

(13-05-2019, 07:23 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I am completely convinced that the top left hand loop of the gallows characters is a "4" rather than a "q", but I am intrigued as to how much disagreement there is in this.

Mark, I am as confused as Emma, if not more, about what you are trying to say.

Where is the "q" that you mention coming from?

Also, if you are already completely convinced, the entire discussion is rather likely to be fruitless, or even pointless.

ReneZ: I can see that I will have to knock together some pictures sometime tomorrow to make things clearer.

This discussion is analogous to trying to determine the  sex of Xenopus in !st Year Biology.
Males are red, females are yellow, if I recall.
But all mine were a shade of orange

Could it be that, when you write "is", you mean: "looks like"?

We've discussed that somewhere.

I regard p as q plus tail modifier, while q itself as a vertical plus a "prolonged c". This is best seen in the pic that JKP posted above. It makes sense to find that discussion for more details, this might have been in the "decomposition" thread or in the thread about gallows.

I don't see much point in discussing whether q is q or 4, most probably it is neither.

Quite possibly.