For the "r" being different after certain (round) letters, we have a separate column (r-rotunda). It might be worthwhile to not only see if they use r-rotunda, but also if they use the right type. But the version in the month names is too unclear to rely on in my opinion.
Regarding your two ideas:
1) I am not sure if it would make sense to use this exact method on Voynichese. What is EVA-d? 8, d or s? Is EVA-a really "a" in something like [aiin]? Look at it - [a] is integrated into the set of minims, which affects the ductus. [aiin] is four parallel, slanted minims with a starting and ending flourish. And is [a] in [aiin] the same as [a] in other contexts, where it may resemble the Latin letter more?
It's been tried before though. See You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
2) It is likely that one of the scribes did the marginalia, but I haven't been able to make a connection to a specific one. It's possible that the VM scribes weren't thinking of "a" when they wrote EVA-a, and thus formed something that can be read as "a" but in a different shape than their regular "a". I suspect that writing Voynichese was a different kind of activity to them than writing Latin script.
It should also be noted that the marginalia script is small compared to the Voynichese script - this is especially clear on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. .
Regarding your two ideas:
1) I am not sure if it would make sense to use this exact method on Voynichese. What is EVA-d? 8, d or s? Is EVA-a really "a" in something like [aiin]? Look at it - [a] is integrated into the set of minims, which affects the ductus. [aiin] is four parallel, slanted minims with a starting and ending flourish. And is [a] in [aiin] the same as [a] in other contexts, where it may resemble the Latin letter more?
It's been tried before though. See You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
2) It is likely that one of the scribes did the marginalia, but I haven't been able to make a connection to a specific one. It's possible that the VM scribes weren't thinking of "a" when they wrote EVA-a, and thus formed something that can be read as "a" but in a different shape than their regular "a". I suspect that writing Voynichese was a different kind of activity to them than writing Latin script.
It should also be noted that the marginalia script is small compared to the Voynichese script - this is especially clear on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. .