28-01-2016, 02:40 AM
The hands are definitely different on some of the pages, but we don't know the sequence in which the pages were written or how many years it took to create this document (I'm sure it took years), it's hard to say how much the writer's familiarity with the Voynich text (or the writer's thinking about how the "code" should be written) changed over time. Probably everyone who's developed a new alphabet or cipher has come across instances where the code doesn't cover every situation and you have to punt to find a local solution.
Also, when you first start writing an invented alphabet, it would feel awkward, but would become more comfortable over time, less prone to errors and inconsistencies. Ideas about how something could or should be written probably evolve, as well. On the first page (which I suspect may also have been the first page written), there was obviously an intent to embellish some of the paragraphs. There's even a blank box on an inner page for adding an illuminated initial, but big-letter-style embellishments don't characterize the rest of the document.
There are pages where the text looks substantially different because the ink is of a wetter consistency and it smudged, but are the letters slightly different because it's a different hand, or did the movement of the pen have to change to accommodate the runny ink (e.g., writing faster and perhaps more sloppily so the ink doesn't puddle)?
The text on Folio 48r is substantially different from the text on some of the earlier plant pics. It has many inconsistencies and several weirdos but is this because someone else wrote it, or is it because the person writing it wasn't yet fluent in Voynichese shapes? Maybe this was an early page (we don't know in what order the text was added to the plants or to any of the pages, for that matter). I'm working on a chart to compare the handwriting on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to a couple of others. I'll post it when I can find a block of time, for those who are interested.
Also, when you first start writing an invented alphabet, it would feel awkward, but would become more comfortable over time, less prone to errors and inconsistencies. Ideas about how something could or should be written probably evolve, as well. On the first page (which I suspect may also have been the first page written), there was obviously an intent to embellish some of the paragraphs. There's even a blank box on an inner page for adding an illuminated initial, but big-letter-style embellishments don't characterize the rest of the document.
There are pages where the text looks substantially different because the ink is of a wetter consistency and it smudged, but are the letters slightly different because it's a different hand, or did the movement of the pen have to change to accommodate the runny ink (e.g., writing faster and perhaps more sloppily so the ink doesn't puddle)?
The text on Folio 48r is substantially different from the text on some of the earlier plant pics. It has many inconsistencies and several weirdos but is this because someone else wrote it, or is it because the person writing it wasn't yet fluent in Voynichese shapes? Maybe this was an early page (we don't know in what order the text was added to the plants or to any of the pages, for that matter). I'm working on a chart to compare the handwriting on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to a couple of others. I'll post it when I can find a block of time, for those who are interested.