No text, but a visual code

[Antonio García Jiménez]

Whoever defends that the script represents a language, whether natural or encrypted, must explain why there are so many glyphs in the codex. Not only the most repeated ones that serve to construct the so-called main text but the very numerous ones that only appear once or only a few times. This is something that is not usually paid attention to and I consider it to be key to understanding the nature of the script.

The clearest example is folio F57v, where the four sequences of glyphs follow the same pattern.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

What are those strange and unique glyphs that we see mixed with others so repeated throughout the book? Why, if the script represents a language, does it not make extensive use of those rare glyphs? This is a question waiting for an answer.