Thanks to nablator for the two OCR files!
While reading through them, a few interesting passages caught my attention.
The Ars notaria describes five basic supplementary signs (titellae), which can be combined and arranged in different ways to create numerous additional forms. The position of a sign or an additional stroke can also change its meaning.
What I find particularly interesting is that different users could apparently assign their own meanings to the signs (vocabula pro libito voluntatis). So the system wasn't limited to a completely fixed set of signs with unchangeable meanings.
This made me think about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. again. Could the unusual signs there represent a practical application or further development of the rules described on the preceding pages? This would also be compatible with Marco's suggestion that the tables may have been written by the same hand.
And now i got one more thought about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (voynich):
The explanation that the same figure can have different values depending on its position reminded me of the four repetitions of the 17-symbol sequence in R2.
Could these four repetitions perhaps represent four different interpretative positions or states of the same basic figures?
I don't mean that it would necessarily work exactly like the five vertical positions (limites) in the Florentine Ars. But perhaps the repetition itself could play a role in determining the value of the signs.
Would you consider this a reasonable structural analogy, or am I taking the comparison too far?
While reading through them, a few interesting passages caught my attention.
The Ars notaria describes five basic supplementary signs (titellae), which can be combined and arranged in different ways to create numerous additional forms. The position of a sign or an additional stroke can also change its meaning.
What I find particularly interesting is that different users could apparently assign their own meanings to the signs (vocabula pro libito voluntatis). So the system wasn't limited to a completely fixed set of signs with unchangeable meanings.
This made me think about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. again. Could the unusual signs there represent a practical application or further development of the rules described on the preceding pages? This would also be compatible with Marco's suggestion that the tables may have been written by the same hand.
And now i got one more thought about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (voynich):
The explanation that the same figure can have different values depending on its position reminded me of the four repetitions of the 17-symbol sequence in R2.
Could these four repetitions perhaps represent four different interpretative positions or states of the same basic figures?
I don't mean that it would necessarily work exactly like the five vertical positions (limites) in the Florentine Ars. But perhaps the repetition itself could play a role in determining the value of the signs.
Would you consider this a reasonable structural analogy, or am I taking the comparison too far?