A Numeric Solution

[oshfdk]

I'm aware of the Latin VMS numerals doubling as letters in Latin scripts.  Reasoning against this is my main point.   I would add that if these Latin number glyphs were intended as doubling for letters, there is already an "a" symbol EVA-a.  If EVA-v was meant as an "a" and not a 7, why still have EVA-a?  While possible, to have some numeric symbols represent abbreviations and others not represent abbreviations seems more unlikely in any cypher or substitution/abbreviation language scheme.

I don't think one can build any argument about the script using EVA-v. I think it appears only once in the whole MS if we don't count f57v. And I don't think we can treat f57v rings as a generic sample of the writing, since they show a large number of unique glyphs that look quite unlike any other Voynichese glyphs.

Also, design-wise, EVA-a and EVA-v could be just the same symbol. a is absent from the 4x17 ring, and the first appearance of a d-like symbol in this ring is of rare j form, so it's not very far fetched to assume that v is just a rare form of a.

I mean the amount of information Baresch had versus what we have at our fingertips today.  Yesterday I scrubbed over a 200 page manuscript to examine the few pages containing illustrations in a few minutes.  He would have had to travel and know what he was looking for to begin to cross reference such information. 

This is not obvious to me. Baresch could have had access to a large number of 100-200 hundred year old manuscripts contemporary to the Voynich manuscript ('s vellum), those that have been completely lost since then. I would say that if anything Baresch likely had more information than we do. In any case, this is just about hunches and intuition, either way.