20-02-2021, 06:22 AM
I feel there could be many possibilities, so I would personally not draw any conclusion about what this must mean.
I think there are actually two separate anomalies here, although they do seem to merge together. Ignoring the string of dots, it's unique in the manuscript to find nine "o" glyphs repeated together, (or nine of any glyph) so this is curious on its own. Since glyphs throughout the manuscript seem to be deliberately chosen and deliberately put in a certain order, it seems likely it would be the same here.
The placement of the string of glyphs among the dots is another (possibly separate?) anomaly, though the repetition of both dots and o's make them look visually similar. I think it's less likely that the number of dots is significant, since there are so many of them compared to the o's.
It does very much resemble a decorative border with the dots and o's, and it is interesting to see those examples. Dots in the manuscript are always part of the imagery and/or decorative, whereas o's are always part of the text but can occasionally be part of the imagery too (such as the center of some stars). So a combination of dots and o's might be simply decorative, but then there are those extra glyphs following the string of o's, so I don't know.
Another thought is that maybe the dots on either side indicate that something is continuing on or moving around the perimeter.
I think there are actually two separate anomalies here, although they do seem to merge together. Ignoring the string of dots, it's unique in the manuscript to find nine "o" glyphs repeated together, (or nine of any glyph) so this is curious on its own. Since glyphs throughout the manuscript seem to be deliberately chosen and deliberately put in a certain order, it seems likely it would be the same here.
The placement of the string of glyphs among the dots is another (possibly separate?) anomaly, though the repetition of both dots and o's make them look visually similar. I think it's less likely that the number of dots is significant, since there are so many of them compared to the o's.
It does very much resemble a decorative border with the dots and o's, and it is interesting to see those examples. Dots in the manuscript are always part of the imagery and/or decorative, whereas o's are always part of the text but can occasionally be part of the imagery too (such as the center of some stars). So a combination of dots and o's might be simply decorative, but then there are those extra glyphs following the string of o's, so I don't know.
Another thought is that maybe the dots on either side indicate that something is continuing on or moving around the perimeter.