29-12-2015, 10:03 PM
Let us look at a random page - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (and I promise this is a random example).
The outer ring, from the top, contains the same start sequence with different endings. It's an example of my evolving epizeuxis - the same prefix is repeated a number of times with distinct suffixes.
Now, that is clearly not a plaintext with the exception of medieval charms (or spells) which I have discussed in the past - repeating rhyming nonsense words designed to be spoken or chanted aloud.
Now, if we look at the word on the outer ring at 3 o'clock, we see the same gallows character is repeated no fewer than three times in the same word. Other words have repeated gallows. So it's unlikely the gallows character represents a concept. It appears too often.
Your You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. example looks to me like a hiccup, the scribe miscalculated the writing as he went along. We've all done it as we write.
So I still vote for a glyph - letter correlation.
But as you say - why are gallows so common in labels, yet less common and more fixed within paragraphs? This just doesn't correspond to any natural text, as I discussed recently on my blog.
It is unlikely that the gallows mark a change in the encryption method in the labels - they are just too common. But then again, I can't see any evidence of an encryption process in the text, and nor could the great codebreakers of the XX century
So, off the top of my head:
- It's not a natural language.
- Gallows aren't indicative of a change in a hypothetical encryption method.
- Gallows don't represent a "concept" but correlate to a "letter".
- Ergo, glyphs correlate to letters in an alphabet.
- So there is a base alphabet writing letters combined into words (which are not natural language).
- So it's either encrypted into a very strange code which forces glyphs to appear at certain locations within words (but no-one has ever found a pattern) or it's.... nonsense?
The outer ring, from the top, contains the same start sequence with different endings. It's an example of my evolving epizeuxis - the same prefix is repeated a number of times with distinct suffixes.
Now, that is clearly not a plaintext with the exception of medieval charms (or spells) which I have discussed in the past - repeating rhyming nonsense words designed to be spoken or chanted aloud.
Now, if we look at the word on the outer ring at 3 o'clock, we see the same gallows character is repeated no fewer than three times in the same word. Other words have repeated gallows. So it's unlikely the gallows character represents a concept. It appears too often.
Your You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. example looks to me like a hiccup, the scribe miscalculated the writing as he went along. We've all done it as we write.
So I still vote for a glyph - letter correlation.
But as you say - why are gallows so common in labels, yet less common and more fixed within paragraphs? This just doesn't correspond to any natural text, as I discussed recently on my blog.
It is unlikely that the gallows mark a change in the encryption method in the labels - they are just too common. But then again, I can't see any evidence of an encryption process in the text, and nor could the great codebreakers of the XX century
So, off the top of my head:
- It's not a natural language.
- Gallows aren't indicative of a change in a hypothetical encryption method.
- Gallows don't represent a "concept" but correlate to a "letter".
- Ergo, glyphs correlate to letters in an alphabet.
- So there is a base alphabet writing letters combined into words (which are not natural language).
- So it's either encrypted into a very strange code which forces glyphs to appear at certain locations within words (but no-one has ever found a pattern) or it's.... nonsense?