22-11-2025, 12:52 AM
(This post was last modified: 22-11-2025, 12:54 AM by Bluetoes101.)
Something that would interest me and, I think, be more convincing is if specific cases could be zoomed in on.
For example. I don't know for certain, but the eyes of the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. crown nymph, I don't think these eyes are seen again in the manuscript. I might be wrong, I haven't looked. But, that feels like a pretty strong claim for not being of any of the original scribes, or drawers, or the scribe/drawer, whatever your stance on that is. If it turns out to be right.
I'm also not sure the eyes of the nymph to the right are seen again, the curve with the pupil. It's not something I have looked into, but I think things like that, proving they are complete odd ball cases + darker ink, could be more convincing and maybe not so easy to refute "they just went over it" or "they used new ink" or whatever way, it has more meat on the bones.
For example. I don't know for certain, but the eyes of the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. crown nymph, I don't think these eyes are seen again in the manuscript. I might be wrong, I haven't looked. But, that feels like a pretty strong claim for not being of any of the original scribes, or drawers, or the scribe/drawer, whatever your stance on that is. If it turns out to be right.
I'm also not sure the eyes of the nymph to the right are seen again, the curve with the pupil. It's not something I have looked into, but I think things like that, proving they are complete odd ball cases + darker ink, could be more convincing and maybe not so easy to refute "they just went over it" or "they used new ink" or whatever way, it has more meat on the bones.


![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)