+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Analysis of the text (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-41.html)
+--- Thread: How to square handwriting variation? (/thread-5005.html)
RE: How to square handwriting variation? - Jorge_Stolfi - 27-11-2025
(27-11-2025, 01:19 PM)rikforto Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Is there a good paleographic write-up of how the script was formed?
Here is my view: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
All the best, --stolfi
RE: How to square handwriting variation? - Bluetoes101 - 27-11-2025
That image might be a good example of why I think d has potential to be trickier than transcriptions make it seem
The top two are like you say and the bottom is more like s with the swish of m
I get "it's very small!" but the key component to me is the large i part, like the following a on the top examples, but it carries on up, they have clearly been done differently to the bottom example.
The issue is obviously trying to show how that might be, or if it is just normal variation in writing and there is no difference
.. anyway, for the most part I think el is close to how they were done in lots of places
RE: How to square handwriting variation? - rikforto - 27-11-2025
My inclination, and I could certainly be talked into the view that there are truly two ds in the script, is that there is the physical el ligature and then there is a cursive form where the l is written as a single stroke ending with the minim. I think most (all?) of the apparent figure-8 cases are down to the lifting of the pen being successfully hidden in the first stroke, but I am not a good judge of European calligraphy
RE: How to square handwriting variation? - Bluetoes101 - 27-11-2025
There is also j which I have a feeling might just have merged into the "8 shape" in places, the same way r and s are hard (or impossible) to tell often
I think the el one is easiest. There's a really clear example near the start of the manuscript, I found when I was trying to understand the shapes some of the start pages were often best as things seem a bit more unsure. I don't have a list of them but from memory You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is very good. You can see some are clearly multiple strokes (like your other examples) and some are not so clear..
The highlighted ones could be stuck in the "el tub" (the bottom ones a bit iffy..), the rest get a bit more ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ if we wanted to say they are the same, in varying degrees of ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
RE: How to square handwriting variation? - rikforto - 27-11-2025
I'm admittedly all in on the basic premise of the CLS, but I cannot imagine j is anything but systemic:
Certainly, there's "scribal variation", but the scribe obviously cared about the bases!
RE: How to square handwriting variation? - Bluetoes101 - 27-11-2025
The problem is the ones in between, to the right of the flower on the image I posted, I would maybe call that j, but I wouldn't be confident its not a slightly more upright d. However other people would say its definitely not X/Y, and it's hard to say how you decide who is right unless you have examples like yours in one basket and all the "unsure" in another.
These are from the posted example with that d / j, is it built like the s or r?
It's just hard to say who's right on a bunch of them imo
RE: How to square handwriting variation? - Bluetoes101 - 27-11-2025
Maybe this is a better example, I'm not sure I'd be confident on the bottom one