Finding parallels for Month Names handwriting (Work in Progress)

[Koen G]

I have a quick question about chronology. Do you assume that the names of the months were written by the authors of the Voynich Manuscript? Or do you believe that the names of the months were written with the same broad pen by the person who, after rebinding the manuscript, also wrote the page numbers in the upper right corners?

This is my pet theory: that the month names and the folio numbers were both written by the person who 'misbound' the manuscript. The most likely part of that hypothesis is that the month names were added to aid binding in the correct order, since this is the only section of the MS with an inherent sequence. I.e. the only place where the misbinder could make sure to get it right.

I'm probably way off on the folio numbers though: Lisa says the MS was bound in the 1400's, and that the folio numbers were added in the early 1600's (Prague). (It would not be uncommon at all for foliation to be done long after a MS was bound). So if that is true, I would guess this is the order:

1) The bifolios are written, including You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. marginalia
2a) Either the MS is bound for the first time, or if we go with Lisa's proposal, the bifolios are left unbound.
2b) The month names are added and the MS is misbound.
3) Later, the MS is foliated.

If we are able to deepen our understanding of the month names script, we could make more informed statements about this instead of hypothesizing... but I find it hard to find good samples.

Some time, I would also like to find good parallels for the foliation numbers.