No text, but a visual code

[-JKP-]

Some people who have thoroughly investigated the VMS, like Stolfi or the professor at Yale University Robert Brumbaugh, believed that the glyphs of the script were numbers or had numeric values. I don't think so but it's worth taking their observations into account.
   
  Above all there is a clear fact that can't be ignored: the glyphs 8 (Eva-d) and the old Arabic shape of number 4 (Eva-l) they both look like numbers as we see in countless manuscripts of the time.
  
If we star thinking otherwise, maybe we'll get somewhere

I honestly don't think the shape of the glyphs matter (other than the fact that they are mostly Latin shapes, which means the person who designed the script using a lot of Latin letters, abbreviations, and numbers, and positioned many of them as such, was probably very FAMILIAR with Latin conventions).

What is a stronger argument for numbers is the way they are organized. When trying to decipher unknown glyphs, structure should always take precedence over shape. There isn't even any way to know (yet) if EVA-d is patterned after a letter or a number. The letters "d" and "s" were also written this way in medieval script.


What worries me about your idea, Antonio, is not that you think they are numbers, but that you think (because some of them look like numbers) that they are a specific kind of number related to stars. But numbers can be a lot of things... calendars, moon tables, easter calculations, and a whole lot more.

Before forming a theory that they are astrological/labe coordinates, why not look at how they are structured and where they appear throughout the text, and THEN decide what kind of numbers they might be.