No text, but a visual code

[ololololo]

Why do you call him "Orem"? Is that how his name is rendered in Russian? (Like "Magalhães" is "Magellan" in English?)

I apologize for the misunderstanding. In Russian, Oresme is Orem; it was simply more convenient for me to call it that

Yes, unfortunately I think that this conclusion is unavoidable when one has tried to transcribe a significant part the manuscript, or considers the large number of single-use "weirdo" glyphs and words. I discussed the possible sources of those errors in the proper threads. A large fraction of errors makes decipherment harder, but not impossible.

I also don’t rule out the possibility of spelling errors, but for some reason it doesn’t seem to me that they are really a significant problem.

Only the text of f116v, and perhaps the top line of f17r. And it was Latin script, yes, but the language was a mix of German and Latin, and half the words that he guessed were not valid in any language. That has its thread, too.

Well, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is even more controversial than f116v. It’s generally unclear what this text was and what it was intended for. Someone says that this is the artist’s name.

There is a diagram with 12 "moons" with faces several pages earlier

Are these the phases of the Moon? Or something else related to the Moon? And why couldn’t the author simply depict the planets as spheres?

And they're doing it in my thread—not in their own threads.

Stolfi objects, I respond. It all started with the fact that I was having a conversation with you, but Stolphi intervened. Someone is very interested in the Oresme map

I only ask for fair play.

No problems