f116v is a decryption attempt?

[ololololo]

So very many assumptions....

I agree
As for the decryption theory, it's more or less clear. The author somehow received a set of letters and tried to make sense of it. However, it was a challenging task. Nevertheless, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. can be compared to f104r.
And then we can only guess...
For example, if ar = m, then according to the correspondence with Roman numerals, ar = ain = eiin = XIII - 13, although the 13th letter is N (thanks to @nablator for noticing this).
The decrypter may have had a similar logic. This does not mean that it is correct.
But nevertheless, this can give us a little clue. For example, I imagine a scenario like this: the author (meaning the person who came up with the idea of writing this book. Sort of like a head of scribes) decided to check if it was possible to decipher a recipe from the last section after writing the entire book. He ordered one of the scribes to do so. With a trembling hand due to excitement and fear of making a mistake, the scribe attempted to use the cipher alphabet to restore the recipe, but failed. poxleber and gasmich were an attempt to prove to the scribe that he knew what the recipe was about
What am I getting at? Well, the handwriting of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is generally similar to VMS, and if the author was one of the scribes, it could mean that the VMS text is undecipherable or that the text is poorly encrypted, turning it into "anhitonic" spells.