![]() |
|
[Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Printable Version +- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja) +-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html) +--- Forum: Marginalia (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-45.html) +--- Thread: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. (/thread-6148.html) Pages:
1
2
|
[Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Koen G - 02-10-2026 Several months ago, I was browsing a random manuscript, and suddenly something struck me: the numbers looked a lot like those used for the VM folio numbers. (That is, the ones written top right on every recto, NOT the quire numbers). I didn't do anything with this yet, since I have no idea how it compares to other manuscripts. Probably this style of writing numbers is extremely common. But how common exactly? Are some features rare or typical for a certain time/region? Now I just had an idea: why not make a friendly competition out of it? Everyone can recognize numerals in manuscripts, so it doesn't require special skills, just some patience and investigation. My own submission is far from perfect and can be beaten. (I told Marco about it when I found it, so there is a witness to my having selected a manuscript ;)) I prepared a reference image of the VM foliation, taking into account variations for each number. Notice especially the two types of "3", one of which has a remarkable spike on top and a flatter top stroke. I also prepared a spreadsheet, you could use your own copy of it to compare the VM foliation to other numbers you find. See here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Rules
Of course, the goal of this is to collectively learn more about the context of these numerals. Feel free to discuss everything in this thread:
RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - R. Sale - 02-10-2026 Well, one thing is certainly clear. The medieval forms for the numerals '4' and '7', as seen in Typus Arithmetica, have been replaced. RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Aga Tentakulus - 03-10-2026 (02-10-2026, 09:00 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Everyone can recognize numerals in manuscripts, so it doesn't require special skills, Until you’re sure you’ve got them all? RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Koen G - 03-10-2026 Not sure what you're asking, but if you find some really good numerals but a few are missing, that's also fine. Some basic thoughts about the number shapes, not sure how useful any of these are:
Zero is a circle. Leaderboard so far:
RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - ololololo - 03-10-2026 (03-10-2026, 11:46 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Leaderboard so far:It looks funny
RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Koen G - 03-10-2026 Just to gauge interest - is anyone actually planning to have a go at this? RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Aga Tentakulus - 03-10-2026 (03-10-2026, 11:46 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Not sure what you're asking, The example is taken from the VM. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. f103 bottom left RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Koen G - 04-10-2026 That's a quire mark, those are in a different (earlier) hand. RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Aga Tentakulus - 04-10-2026 I see. Without having to look it up, is that the only name for a quire? RE: [Competition] Best folio number parallels. - Koen G - 04-10-2026 Organizer's log, day 3/30 No submissions so far, but this is expected: you can't rush perfection. These people set high standards for themselves and aren't content just submitting any old number they come across. I do hope some will come along eventually - it would be a serious blow to our professional reputation if we had to award first prize to our own half-baked entry. There was one visit from a confused local man waving a sign with some faded numbers on it. His request to include quire marks among the folio numbers was unanimously rejected. |