15-07-2021, 01:42 PM
Ironically enough, it is this type of mid-stream editing (l did not see the first version) that may well explain the Currier “languages” and the possible transitional forms in between. It is also a possible reason why the text can’t be solved as any kind of decryption/translation (trying to be non-provocative here) requires some level of consistency.
So imagine the text of the first post, followed by the text of the “corrected” version (but a different plain text, of course) and try to solve what was said for the entire plain text. The process of “correction” may bring the later versions to what was the original “intent” of the author but the shifting basis undermines the ability to get sense from the whole thing.
Unfortunately, it is easy to imagine an author at the time of the carbon dating, to be ignorant of the ultimate non-communicative effect of a constantly shifting “encoding” pattern.
So imagine the text of the first post, followed by the text of the “corrected” version (but a different plain text, of course) and try to solve what was said for the entire plain text. The process of “correction” may bring the later versions to what was the original “intent” of the author but the shifting basis undermines the ability to get sense from the whole thing.
Unfortunately, it is easy to imagine an author at the time of the carbon dating, to be ignorant of the ultimate non-communicative effect of a constantly shifting “encoding” pattern.