Which other manuscript contain the most Voynichese glyphs?

[-JKP-]

The diplomatic ciphers do not have any positional characteristics. They are substitution codes, so they follow natural-language patterns.


The VMS glyphs do have positional characteristics and they are strongly similar to where these  shapes are found in Latin scribal conventions. In Latin EVA-y and EVA-m are frequently at the ends of words (as they are in the VMS), and EVA-y is sometimes at the beginnings of words (as in the VMS).

In Latin, the cr/ct/er/ee/cc ligature is more flexible and can move around within a word, it isn't primarily at the end (or the beginning), and this is also true of the bench chars (EVA-ch/EVA-sh) in the VMS.

In Latin, EVA-s and EVA-r can be syllables but they can also be words and thus can stand alone. This is also true in the VMS.


The VMS glyphs are not just morphologically similar to Latin scribal conventions, they are positionally similar. This is why I've been insisting that they are based on Latin. Shapes can be coincidentally similar, but it's not a coincidence when those shapes fall in the same positions within tokens as one would expect to find them in languages using Latin conventions (which is most western languages).