Do f58r/f58v show Currier languages evolving?

[pfeaster]

I'm therefore wondering whether f58 might turn out to be a key language page, kind of mid-point in the evolution between Currier A and Currier B.

Has anyone looked specifically at text oddities of f58?

For what it's worth, I'd pegged the whole bifolio f58+f65 as falling into a transitional category based on which glyphs most often follow [Sh], [d], and [e] -- a measure I was You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..  In the scheme shown below, "e+" means any quantity of [e].  

1. Sh>o / d>a / e>y: 1+8, 2+7, 9+16, 11+14, 13, 18+23, 25+32, 27+30, 35+38, 36+37, 42+47, 44+45
2. Sh>o / d>a / e>o tied with e>y: 10+15, 49+56
3. Sh>o / d>a / e>o: 3+6, 4+5, 17+24, 19+22, 20+21, 28+29, 51+54, 52+53, 93+96
4. Sh>e+ / d>a / e>o: 58+65, 87+90, 88+89, 100+101
5. Sh>e+ / d>y / e>o: 57+66, 99+102
6. Sh>e+ / d>y / e>d (standard “Currier B”): everything else

I hadn't (and still haven't) run these statistics for f58 by itself; partly I was hoping that by analyzing whole bifolios I'd cut down on the amount of statistical noise.  Still, this is yet another metric by which its bifolio (at least) seems to fall somewhere in between the two Currier languages, if we think of the one as potentially "evolving" into the other: Sh>e+ has overtaken the Sh>o characteristic of Currier A, but d>y hasn't yet overtaken d>a and e>d hasn't yet overtaken e>o as we ordinarily see with Currier B.