01-12-2025, 01:03 PM
(01-12-2025, 09:16 AM)Koen G wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(01-12-2025, 09:06 AM)dashstofsk wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(30-11-2025, 12:35 PM)qoltedy wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If someone wrote the Manuscript in bursts, over the course of decades, that could also plausibly explain the variations in topics ("languages") and handwriting style.
I am also of that opinion.
Again, this is possible. But why would this explanation be preferred over the usual assumption in manuscript descriptions that different hands = different people?
When talking about 2-5 hands, I think there is a false parsimony in saying that one hand = one scribe is a simpler explanation. When the handwriting is very close, handwriting change over time is at least as good as, and arguably even better than, positing more scribes. By contrast, I find reducing Currier's observations below two different people to require positing a radical shift in handwriting, not just some modest changes in the ductus in a few places. Like a great many Voynich things, it is certainly possible, but not in the same way that 2 people/5 hands is.

