'P' is the key

[Loose_Spell_9313]

After a closer analysis, it does appear there are more than 3 types of stars in the margins; a full red star, a star with a red dot, an empty star, a star with a yellow dot, and star with a yellow [brown?] dot

However there is no evidence that the colored paints are original, and some strong evidence that they were applied a century or more after the writing and drawing, when the book had changed owners.  So it is safer to disregard the red paint,

There is a light yellow paint that is different from the other colored paints, in that it is nearly transparent, and is used throughout the book on a very consistent manner.  In particular, it is used in the hair of most of the nymphs, and on most stars -- either as a filling or just as a round splotch in the middle.  That yellow paint may be original; the evidence above does not apply to it.  Given its uses, it was probably light yellow originally too (that is, it is not some organic dye that faded with time).  

So maybe those stars were originally just either yellow or unpainted.

The brown dots or circles at the center of some starts seems to be in the same ink as the outline, so they probably are original too.

However, in most of the Starred Parags section (quire 20), the stars simply alternate yellow and red.  If the red paint is not original, presumably those red ones were unpainted, so the alternation would be between painted and unpainted.  That is not what coded information should look like.

True, on some pages there are hiccups in the color pattern, and a few stars are left unpainted.  But on a few pages the Artist clearly missed some paragraphs and thus failed to provide stars for them.  In many cases the star is off by one line or more from the start of its parag.  On a couple of pages the Scribe apparently smashed half a dozen parags into one big parag, with a smattering stars randomly placed besides it.  To me, these anomalies say that the stars are mostly decoration, like the bullets on our powerpoint presentations.

Maybe there was supposed to be some meaning in the dots at the center and/or the number of rays (which varies from 6 to 9, once 10).  But, given the above observations, I rather doubt it.

All the best, --stolfi

Hey Stolfi, 

Thanks for the response. I think admittedly, the star concept was a bit pre-mature or maybe poorly described, however this was the guiding logic for me to believe that they indicate a system of ownership/penmanship for the manuscript among contributors.  

On this page 103, it seems as though the system is unrefined and no uniform system for star usage was present; lacking stars with the swish that would later become consistent (minus the final star on 103, that also doesn't conform to later usage). By page 104, the system seems to have become uniform with star usage remaining consistent throughout the rest of the manuscript. Once the system seems to have been solidified, easily identifiable differences in writing styles (seems to) become more easily apparent. Like the red stars always seem to have a mid-line arch or angulation on the right side of the text, yellow star seems to have better line consistency although there is some fluctuation, etc.. Being that some of the paints were applied retroactively, it does obviously throw a bit of uncertainty into the mix with the stars. 

In my interpretation, the the lack of variation of stars fillings between pages 108 and 116 would simply be a result of one or more of the contributors not being physically present to add additional information.

That said, this isn't an avenue I personally want to place heavy importance on, as I don't think much can be learned from them until the manuscript is decoded- other than broad analyses. It was mostly a fleeting thought at the time, just wanted to amend my statement to avoid making fallacious claims.