Could anyone say why it is that You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. needs to have '$H=@' in the transliteration page header?
This seems to me to be wrong.
Pages You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. are on the same side of the parchment sheet. You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. is on the left side, You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. is on the right side. Now, if you look closely at You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. you will see that the writing is in a colour that is darker than normal for quire 20. Also the top lines in f115r are similarly dark. Moreover because there is good evidence that the manuscript was written sheet-by-sheet and not in book page order it is likely that You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and the top lines in f115r were written in one sitting by the same person.
Would this not be sufficient reason for making hand 3 the writer of f115r?
Some of you will notice that You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. which faces You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. also has its top lines dark. However I still believe sheet-by-sheet to be the most likely conjecture.
IIRC the top 12 lines of f115 r were, according to LFD, written by Scribe2
The the rest was writtenby Scribe 3. the change is marked in RF1b-er.
<f115r.1,@P0> <@H=2>fshhdar.qopchol.qochedain.otedy.cheopol.teeedy.oroiir.oechedy.oteedy.qotchedy
<f115r.13,+P0> <@H=3>tchedy.qoolkeedy.qokchedy.qotchd.lpchedy.qotcho.lar.airor,lchy.
Edit : Ah found it
LFD Wrote:In folio 115 recto,
where Scribe 2 writes the first twelve lines before Scribe 3 takes over.
Davis, Lisa Fagin () "How Many Glyphs and How Many Scribes? Digital Paleography and the Voynich
Manuscript," Manuscript Studies: Vol. 5 : Iss. 1 , Article 6.
Available at: You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
(20-11-2025, 02:10 PM)RobGea Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.the top 12 lines of f115
Twelve lines? That is unlikely to be a big enough sample to be able to make a conclusive statistical analysis that the writer is someone different.
But also I can see similarity in the writing of the words pre- and post-12.
In particular, line 11 ( supposedly hand 2 ) has
[
attachment=12522]
Lines 13 to 15 ( supposedly hand 3 ) have
[
attachment=12523]
The way that strings
chedy are written are very similar. Both hands like to write a final
y with a long tail that swings down and back, which surely is not a requirement of the alphabet but a personal style and whimsy of the writer. Characters
d all lean to the right. Characters
h all look identical.
It is also so on page f104v. It still does look to me that You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. is a continuation of f104v.
[
attachment=12524]
Normally I would be happy to acknowledge the opinions of the professionals in such matters but here I have a doubt. I really cannot see any difference in the handwriting in f115r.
(20-11-2025, 04:10 PM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Twelve lines? That is unlikely to be a big enough sample to be able to make a conclusive statistical analysis that the writer is someone different.
Without addressing the other points, LFD's argument is not statistical in nature and doesn't fall down there. She is arguing for qualitive differences to identify the hands by, and this is very normal methodology accepted by her peers. Essentially, if key markers shift for a passage, you can ascribe a different hand to it. It is certainly possible to disagree with her judgements---for my part I find her identifications
extremely subtle at best, though I lack any training here---but a statistical test is not at issue.
I am not trying to debunk the 5 hands proposal. Just to suggest that this page was written by one and the same person, and is a continuation of f104v.
It also feels a bit illogical that "Scribe 2 writes the first twelve lines before Scribe 3 takes over". Under the sheet-by-sheet hypothesis You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. would already have been written and hand 3 could have continued without needing any interruption from hand 2.
Also I am a bit puzzled by the number twelve. Why twelve? The dark ink continues for a further five lines. If there was a take-over point then surely the dark ink stop would be the most logical point for it.
She herself has described the distribution of the hands as "utterly atypical" and admits to having no firm answers. I have long wondered if the final judgement after more research will be there are only two hands (or at least fewer than 5) after all. My point is merely that there is no statistical problem with it being 12 lines.
I agree with you that the manuscript was likely written in stacked, rather than nested, bifolia, which would indeed mean that folio 104v was consecutive as well as conjoint with 115r. That doesn't change my assessment that Scribe 2 picked up the writing at the top of 115r before handing things back to Scribe 3. I can't explain why that would have happened, only that that's what I see.
If you've watched my most recent lecture, you'll see that I am indeed arguing that the manuscript was originally a stack of loose bifolia rather than its current nested structure:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH28ltqYIyo][/url]
I will have much more to say about this idea in a forthcoming article (hopefully coming out in 2026) and book (2027).
(20-11-2025, 12:38 PM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Could anyone say why it is that You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. needs to have '$H=@' in the transliteration page header?
This seems to me to be wrong.
Pages You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are on the same side of the parchment sheet. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is on the left side, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is on the right side. Now, if you look closely at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. you will see that the writing is in a colour that is darker than normal for quire 20. Also the top lines in f115r are similarly dark. Moreover because there is good evidence that the manuscript was written sheet-by-sheet and not in book page order it is likely that You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the top lines in f115r were written in one sitting by the same person.
Would this not be sufficient reason for making hand 3 the writer of f115r?
Some of you will notice that You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. which faces You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. also has its top lines dark. However I still believe sheet-by-sheet to be the most likely conjecture.
Quote:That doesn't change my assessment that Scribe 2 picked up the writing at the top of 115r before handing things back to Scribe 3. I can't explain why that would have happened, only that that's what I see.
Can you highlight which sections you think were written by Scribe 2 and Scribe 3?
(20-11-2025, 02:10 PM)RobGea Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view."How Many Glyphs and How Many Scribes? Digital Paleography and the Voynich Manuscript"
(20-11-2025, 06:54 PM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why twelve? The dark ink continues for a further five lines.
I think I can explain your number twelve, and I think I can see a mistake in the paper.
The paper has "and on folio 115 recto, where Scribe 2 writes the first twelve lines before Scribe 3 takes over".
But You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. definitely has 17 lines in the dark ink. It is You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. that has 12 lines of dark ink. It seems that perhaps you were mistaking You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. for f105r.
Does that then mean that it is in fact You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. that has the top lines in a different hand?
That would make more sense because You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. seems possibly to have been the first page for quire 20. It is the only page within the quire that has a top margin, and also a strange starting doodle. The star is above the text not alongside. It might have been a more logical place for hand 2 to give hand 3 some starting council.
