geoffreycaveney's Judaeo-Greek theory

[Linda]

text:
[ odain  sh2ky  qorain  chckhey  qokey  lkechy  okeey  otal  chedkaly ]

Too bad it's okal, not otal.

I will reply to Rene's objections and the other comments, but to begin with I can refute this objection:

It is [otal], not [okal]. Before I even begin to interpret a line, I carefully study each letter of the line on Beinecke's high-resolution photo images. I do not simply rely on the automatic letter identifications on voynichese.com or other sites, because sometimes they are wrong. This is such a case.

Here is the high-resolution photo image of the two words [okeey otal] for comparison. Pay partiöcular attention to the [k] and the [t]:



Notice the angle at which the [k] in [okeey] goes up and down on the top left part of the letter. It is not a loop.

Now look at the same top left part of the letter [t] in [otal]. It is clearly different. The scribe made a loop there. Yes, it is a small loop, but it is a loop. The letter is a [t].

Again, I made this letter identification before I even began to interpret the line in Judaeo-Greek at all. I determine all the letter identifications before I begin to interpret each line.

Geoffrey

I think you made a good call. I too think it is prudent to go by the actual text rather than relying on the trascriptions, i have come across a couple myself, just in passing.

---

I've created 4 transcripts, so I have looked at every character in the VMS many times.

I'm not convinced it's otal. I think it might be a blobby okal, not a loop. In cases like this, I record it in the transcript with both alternatives and I step away from choosing one or the other.

I could see that getting very bulky, but i appreciate it as an extension of your open mind philosophy.