Which other manuscript contain the most Voynichese glyphs?

[-JKP-]

I don't remember if this one was shared already, an explosion of loops:



11th century German Imperial script

Thank you, Koen. The document is transcribed  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Full image You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

The fragment reads:

... ad presentis vitę tranquillitatem quam futurę beatitudinem promerendam profuturum non dubitamus. Quapropter omnium Christi ....

... industria, qualiter fidelis noster Wicrammus abbas venerabilis Fabariensis monasterii, quod est constructum ...

the line and loops on "abbas" indicate abbreviations (usually these loops represent "abbatis" and are drawn in many different ways and sometimes resemble benched gallows),

The word does not read "abbatis" but "abbas" hence the looping Bs are purely decorative Litterae Oblongatae, not abbreviations. I think it is important that readers and writers remember that most of us are amateurs, with no relevant formal training: we cannot reliably read ancient scripts and most of the things we write are wild guess. We are bound to make trivial mistakes (I often do). All statements that are not accompanied by unambiguous supporting evidence should always be taken as highly dubious at best.

Personally, I am happy to know I am ignorant: I think this gives me an opportunity to learn and research with an open mind.

Marco, I was trying to make a general statement. I know most of my statements were specific to this example, but when I said USUALLY these loops represent "abbatis" (when one sees them with abba or abb) I was talking about how I had seen a similar word as a common abbreviation in other manuscripts. I have many examples. I mentioned it because this group of words (abat, abatu, abbato, abbatuo, abbatabus) is often drawn with a long horizontal line through the ascenders so that it resembles gallows.

I am sorry if I worded it badly and gave the impression I was specifically referring to this one, and I realize now that I shouldn't mix specific statements with general statements, that I should separate them into two groups, but when I said "usually" I was referring to other manuscripts.


I am quite aware that I am ignorant of many things and very willing to admit my ignorance and also to admit my mistakes, but I am NOT making wild guesses. I can support every one of the interpretations I made above.

In fact, your translation confirms each of my statements above that was specific to this sample, so let's work together or at least get along with each other. Conflict won't do either of us (or the forum) any good.

Here is a visual representation of my statements above: