<![CDATA[The Voynich Ninja

<![CDATA[The Voynich Ninja - Marginalia]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/ Wed, 19 Aug 2026 06:11:31 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[Subsitution key on f1r]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-6027.html Mon, 17 Aug 2026 23:16:51 +0000 exlipsiae]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-6027.html Register or Login to view.

Going by the article, this might have been an early attempt at translation conducted by Johannes Marcus Marci. Now I know that this key cannot provide any actual translation of the manuscript. All the same I was curious as to why specifically this key was chosen. After all, someone (Marci according to the handwriting analysis) must have had a hunch that this was the way to go. They made sure to write it down on the very first folio. If they were just toying around why not scribble on some piece of paper instead of the actual vellum?

So I matched the table above to EVA transliteration and applied the key to the full "text" of the manuscript. The result can be seen in the attached file (split for file size). There are a couple of legit words that in there, but nothing that really stands out as a likely starting point for Marci's substitution attempt. If he believed an simple substitution was behind it (and not having the luxury of conducting computer powered brute force attempts), I would expect that he would pick some word standing by themselves or serving as a label to some image and go from there. "Rex" (latin for "king") shows up a couple of times, but usually in the middle of text blocks and not matching any part of the text you might expect to say "king".

Of course we do not know what Marci would have thought the original language of the manuscript to be.

Does anyone know a good method to double check if there are more meaningful words in this substitution in any appropriate language?

There is also a chance that his key did produce some legitimate plain text words, but only in the folios lost to us. This might be supported by the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.that do not appear anywhere else in the text.

Are there any theories as to their meaning?

Funny enough, there is one word that does appear quite clearly, showing up 17 times and perfectly describes my success rate so far: "bleak" Cry

EVA_marci_1.txt (Size: 124.55 KB / Downloads: 13)

.txt

EVA_marci_2.txt (Size: 186.25 KB / Downloads: 9) ]]> Register or Login to view.

Going by the article, this might have been an early attempt at translation conducted by Johannes Marcus Marci. Now I know that this key cannot provide any actual translation of the manuscript. All the same I was curious as to why specifically this key was chosen. After all, someone (Marci according to the handwriting analysis) must have had a hunch that this was the way to go. They made sure to write it down on the very first folio. If they were just toying around why not scribble on some piece of paper instead of the actual vellum?

So I matched the table above to EVA transliteration and applied the key to the full "text" of the manuscript. The result can be seen in the attached file (split for file size). There are a couple of legit words that in there, but nothing that really stands out as a likely starting point for Marci's substitution attempt. If he believed an simple substitution was behind it (and not having the luxury of conducting computer powered brute force attempts), I would expect that he would pick some word standing by themselves or serving as a label to some image and go from there. "Rex" (latin for "king") shows up a couple of times, but usually in the middle of text blocks and not matching any part of the text you might expect to say "king".

Of course we do not know what Marci would have thought the original language of the manuscript to be.

Does anyone know a good method to double check if there are more meaningful words in this substitution in any appropriate language?

Are there any theories as to their meaning?

Funny enough, there is one word that does appear quite clearly, showing up 17 times and perfectly describes my success rate so far: "bleak" Cry

EVA_marci_1.txt (Size: 124.55 KB / Downloads: 13)

.txt

EVA_marci_2.txt (Size: 186.25 KB / Downloads: 9) ]]> <![CDATA[Another good Swiss handwriting match to f116v]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-6011.html Sun, 09 Aug 2026 16:14:51 +0000 magnesium]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-6011.html
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]>
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]> <![CDATA[A new instance of poxleber]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5994.html Sun, 02 Aug 2026 16:49:18 +0000 JustAnotherTheory]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5994.html
Anyway, it is from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (early 1500s), Switzerland.

.png

azes.png (Size: 93.87 KB / Downloads: 140)

My reading: "... oder mit eynem guten Syrop / Sommer boxleber / es koste was es wolle / es sol uns kein gelt rewen".

Source: Augsburg, Staats- und Stadtbibliothek -- 4 Th H 1735

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]> <![CDATA[Summary of the "Big Wipe" theory for the f116v]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5993.html Sun, 02 Aug 2026 06:20:47 +0000 Jorge_Stolfi]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5993.html Register or Login to view. of the "Big Wipe" theory for the "michiton" text of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to the "Retracing" thread. There is also You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. at my university's site.

All the best, --stolfi]]> Register or Login to view. of the "Big Wipe" theory for the "michiton" text of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to the "Retracing" thread. There is also You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. at my university's site.

All the best, --stolfi]]> <![CDATA[Last line of f116v]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5972.html Mon, 27 Jul 2026 22:15:50 +0000 Carnby]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5972.html Register or Login to view. and at some of the German readings that have been proposed for it. A different possibility occurred to me. I would segment part of the line as:

[Voynichese "words"] valsch vůren [...] so nim Got(ſ) mich [plummeting stone]

The two forms that particularly interest me are therefore valsch vůren, with possible normalized modern equivalent falsch führen. In fact, initial v- for f- is well attested in Middle High German.

Finding exact parallels is not straightforward. Depending on scribal practice, the initial u/v shapes could be differentiated in different ways, and modern editors might transcribe or normalize a comparable form quite differently (v-, u-, uv-, uu-, w-, etc.). The semicircular superscript sign, possibly indicating Umlaut, introduces another variable, so searching electronically for one particular spelling could be misleading.

Instead, nim rather than modern nimm seems less remarkable to me, but it still deserves some caution as far as spelling normalization is concerned, as does the possible Got(ſ).

This leads me to two related questions:

Is the identification of the form I have tentatively written vůren with führen palaeographically and linguistically plausible for a 15th-century German text?
If so, are there contemporary attestations of falsch + führen (in whatever spelling), and what would the construction have meant at the time?

]]> Register or Login to view. and at some of the German readings that have been proposed for it. A different possibility occurred to me. I would segment part of the line as:

[Voynichese "words"] valsch vůren [...] so nim Got(ſ) mich [plummeting stone]

The two forms that particularly interest me are therefore valsch vůren, with possible normalized modern equivalent falsch führen. In fact, initial v- for f- is well attested in Middle High German.

Finding exact parallels is not straightforward. Depending on scribal practice, the initial u/v shapes could be differentiated in different ways, and modern editors might transcribe or normalize a comparable form quite differently (v-, u-, uv-, uu-, w-, etc.). The semicircular superscript sign, possibly indicating Umlaut, introduces another variable, so searching electronically for one particular spelling could be misleading.

Instead, nim rather than modern nimm seems less remarkable to me, but it still deserves some caution as far as spelling normalization is concerned, as does the possible Got(ſ).

This leads me to two related questions:

Is the identification of the form I have tentatively written vůren with führen palaeographically and linguistically plausible for a 15th-century German text?
If so, are there contemporary attestations of falsch + führen (in whatever spelling), and what would the construction have meant at the time?

]]> <![CDATA[[split] Big f116v spillover thread.]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5950.html Tue, 21 Jul 2026 10:03:59 +0000 ololololo]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5950.html [Edit KG: I'm hijacking this first post for some explanation. All too often, discussions on matters Voynichese end up on the same old You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. debates, like some weird version of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. When this happens and really takes threads off-topic, we will simply move those posts here. Feel free to keep discussing in this thread.]

(21-07-2026, 09:53 AM)J_Voy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I just find it hard to believe that handwriting analysis of the marginalia that almost perfectly lines up with the dates of the vellum being produced is actually a wiped off, then a scribe writing over it would just so happen to almost perfectly mimic that writing style, I see the possibility, and if further evidence appears for this, I will change my mind about this, but I just don't believe it is probable, and plus, on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. there appears to be a drawing of both a goat, and a nymph, the goat matches up with the first and last words, 'poxleber', and 'gaſmich' which are generally believed to translate to 'buck's liver' and 'goat's milk' respectively. In my opinion, that long s is almost certainly a long s, as the reading gaſmich, actually means something, what would 'gafmich' mean? Nothing, we don't even see a clear crossbar than an f would have, as well as the fact that first you're taking the liver of a goat, then the milk of a goat? It makes more sense. Anyway, the nymph could represent the two Voynichese words, (aror Sheey)why wouldn't these also be washed away?

The nymphs and the goat on the left do not seem to fit with the author's style (especially when compared to the nymphs from balneology). You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. can be either an attempt to reconstruct the text or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. I don't really believe that this is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., because in the end, it feels like stretching an owl on a globe.]]> [Edit KG: I'm hijacking this first post for some explanation. All too often, discussions on matters Voynichese end up on the same old You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. debates, like some weird version of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. When this happens and really takes threads off-topic, we will simply move those posts here. Feel free to keep discussing in this thread.]

(21-07-2026, 09:53 AM)J_Voy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I just find it hard to believe that handwriting analysis of the marginalia that almost perfectly lines up with the dates of the vellum being produced is actually a wiped off, then a scribe writing over it would just so happen to almost perfectly mimic that writing style, I see the possibility, and if further evidence appears for this, I will change my mind about this, but I just don't believe it is probable, and plus, on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. there appears to be a drawing of both a goat, and a nymph, the goat matches up with the first and last words, 'poxleber', and 'gaſmich' which are generally believed to translate to 'buck's liver' and 'goat's milk' respectively. In my opinion, that long s is almost certainly a long s, as the reading gaſmich, actually means something, what would 'gafmich' mean? Nothing, we don't even see a clear crossbar than an f would have, as well as the fact that first you're taking the liver of a goat, then the milk of a goat? It makes more sense. Anyway, the nymph could represent the two Voynichese words, (aror Sheey)why wouldn't these also be washed away?

The nymphs and the goat on the left do not seem to fit with the author's style (especially when compared to the nymphs from balneology). You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. can be either an attempt to reconstruct the text or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. I don't really believe that this is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., because in the end, it feels like stretching an owl on a globe.]]> <![CDATA[Is "porta8" on f116v a Latin abbreviated word?]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5931.html Fri, 17 Jul 2026 07:09:43 +0000 JustAnotherTheory]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5931.html Register or Login to view. is actually a Latin abbreviated word:

.png

6548a.png (Size: 20.9 KB / Downloads: 192)

The reason is that I found several examples of 14-15th century Latin manuscripts, with this exact word (ending in "8"):

.png

qwmn.png (Size: 570.43 KB / Downloads: 192)

Could someone who speaks good Latin translate what "porta8" could be in these cases? I suspect the "8" is an abbreviation.

If it is so common, in 14-15th century texts, could this mean that the VMS You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is also (partly) Latin?

____________________________________________________

BSB Clm 2660 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
BSB Clm 75 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
BSB Clm 23161 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
BSB Clm 14790 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
2 Inc.c.a. 320 a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
BSB Clm 2704 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]> Register or Login to view. is actually a Latin abbreviated word:

.png

6548a.png (Size: 20.9 KB / Downloads: 192)

The reason is that I found several examples of 14-15th century Latin manuscripts, with this exact word (ending in "8"):

.png

qwmn.png (Size: 570.43 KB / Downloads: 192)

Could someone who speaks good Latin translate what "porta8" could be in these cases? I suspect the "8" is an abbreviation.

If it is so common, in 14-15th century texts, could this mean that the VMS You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is also (partly) Latin?

____________________________________________________

BSB Clm 2660 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
BSB Clm 75 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
BSB Clm 23161 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
BSB Clm 14790 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
2 Inc.c.a. 320 a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
BSB Clm 2704 You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.]]> <![CDATA[A funny coincidence with the marginalia on f116v]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5912.html Sun, 12 Jul 2026 11:39:58 +0000 JustAnotherTheory]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5912.html

.png

987654.png (Size: 45.5 KB / Downloads: 269)

Source MS (from 1515 Germany): You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

It's on the bottom row of page 33.

Anyway, it's most probably nothing but I found it cool.]]> <![CDATA[f116v is a decryption attempt?]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5910.html Sun, 12 Jul 2026 07:38:20 +0000 ololololo]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5910.html What if You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is an attempt to translate a recipe? It's possible that the person thought they could translate the manuscript (or they could, but they weren't very good at it), so they decided to take a random recipe and translate it on the last page. He may not have been able to translate the letter d, as it appears in the words, and he may not have been able to translate aror (oror) sheey, and the only thing that made sense in his "translation" was "so nim gas mich". "marix morix vix" may be a repetition as "qokedy qokedy qokeedy"
I could not find the combination aror sheey or oror sheey in the manuscript. There are recipes where the word before sheey is similar to oror: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...ol rar sheey ylar...); You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...airal sheey...); You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...ar sheey...).

What do you think?]]> What if You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is an attempt to translate a recipe? It's possible that the person thought they could translate the manuscript (or they could, but they weren't very good at it), so they decided to take a random recipe and translate it on the last page. He may not have been able to translate the letter d, as it appears in the words, and he may not have been able to translate aror (oror) sheey, and the only thing that made sense in his "translation" was "so nim gas mich". "marix morix vix" may be a repetition as "qokedy qokedy qokeedy"
I could not find the combination aror sheey or oror sheey in the manuscript. There are recipes where the word before sheey is similar to oror: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...ol rar sheey ylar...); You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...airal sheey...); You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (...ar sheey...).

What do you think?]]> <![CDATA[Johannes von Gmünden]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5889.html Wed, 08 Jul 2026 18:12:44 +0000 JustAnotherTheory]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5889.html Johannes von Gmünden was the writer of the VMS marginalia.

Johannes von Gmünden (1380/1384 - 1442) was an astronomer in Austria (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). Of particular note is that he was the student of Heinrich von Langenstein, who worked personally with Nicolas Oresme in Paris (link to You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).

Not many writings of his own hand survive, unfortunately. One of them that does, is Augsburg, Universitätsbibl., Cod. III.1.4° 1 (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).

In this manuscript, we can see some startling things. Here are a few words that remind one of the VMS folio 17r:

.png

0000000000000000000000002.png (Size: 22.98 KB / Downloads: 260)

Others ressemble the VMS folio 116v:

.png

000000000001.png (Size: 97.35 KB / Downloads: 259)

.png

0000000000000004.png (Size: 38.89 KB / Downloads: 260)

.png

0000000000000000000000000000000003.png (Size: 42.97 KB / Downloads: 259)

We also have an MS from him where he draws some kind of star map with the sun and the moon having human faces:

.png

000000000005.png (Size: 535.23 KB / Downloads: 262) ]]> Johannes von Gmünden was the writer of the VMS marginalia.

Johannes von Gmünden (1380/1384 - 1442) was an astronomer in Austria (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). Of particular note is that he was the student of Heinrich von Langenstein, who worked personally with Nicolas Oresme in Paris (link to You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).

Not many writings of his own hand survive, unfortunately. One of them that does, is Augsburg, Universitätsbibl., Cod. III.1.4° 1 (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).

In this manuscript, we can see some startling things. Here are a few words that remind one of the VMS folio 17r:

.png

0000000000000000000000002.png (Size: 22.98 KB / Downloads: 260)

Others ressemble the VMS folio 116v:

.png

000000000001.png (Size: 97.35 KB / Downloads: 259)

.png

0000000000000004.png (Size: 38.89 KB / Downloads: 260)

.png

0000000000000000000000000000000003.png (Size: 42.97 KB / Downloads: 259)

We also have an MS from him where he draws some kind of star map with the sun and the moon having human faces:

.png

000000000005.png (Size: 535.23 KB / Downloads: 262) ]]> <![CDATA[Are marginalia clues?]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5880.html Sun, 05 Jul 2026 12:55:45 +0000 ololololo]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5880.html Register or Login to view. (specifically "der musdel"), and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. were added by someone who understood the manuscript.
The marginalia on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. at the end contain two words in Voynich: oteeeor (otcheor) aim, where oteeeor appears in f68r2 and otcheor appears in f70v2. If we do not attempt to interpret the meaning of this text, we can infer that the person understood the significance of these two words.
The part of "der musdel" on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. looks "fresh" in terms of ink color, compared to the inscriptions on the Voynichese and the drawing of the man. It is evident that the man was drawn by the same person who wrote the manuscript, and during the process of writing. It is also possible that the bowl and balls were drawn by the author of "der musdel", but I am not certain. In my opinion, this inscription seems meaningless in any other form, as it is supposed to clarify the drawing on the right.
As for f116v, I can only say that this marginalia contains aror sheey, and the handwriting is similar to that of "der musdel" (at least the "m" letters are identical).
Based on this, it would be possible to try to provide clues to the text in these marginalia. For example, der musdel could be a "continuation" of the text above (roughly speaking, otcheo daiin chty ykchscheg could mean "how to treat this person?" or "it is treated with flour", in which case "der musdel" would specify the type of flour). At the very least, we have reason to believe that the author of these marginalia knew the content of the text. Perhaps he can share his knowledge with us...

What do you think?]]> Register or Login to view. (specifically "der musdel"), and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. were added by someone who understood the manuscript.
The marginalia on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. at the end contain two words in Voynich: oteeeor (otcheor) aim, where oteeeor appears in f68r2 and otcheor appears in f70v2. If we do not attempt to interpret the meaning of this text, we can infer that the person understood the significance of these two words.
The part of "der musdel" on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. looks "fresh" in terms of ink color, compared to the inscriptions on the Voynichese and the drawing of the man. It is evident that the man was drawn by the same person who wrote the manuscript, and during the process of writing. It is also possible that the bowl and balls were drawn by the author of "der musdel", but I am not certain. In my opinion, this inscription seems meaningless in any other form, as it is supposed to clarify the drawing on the right.
As for f116v, I can only say that this marginalia contains aror sheey, and the handwriting is similar to that of "der musdel" (at least the "m" letters are identical).
Based on this, it would be possible to try to provide clues to the text in these marginalia. For example, der musdel could be a "continuation" of the text above (roughly speaking, otcheo daiin chty ykchscheg could mean "how to treat this person?" or "it is treated with flour", in which case "der musdel" would specify the type of flour). At the very least, we have reason to believe that the author of these marginalia knew the content of the text. Perhaps he can share his knowledge with us...

What do you think?]]> <![CDATA[How to read marginalia on f28v?]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5875.html Sat, 04 Jul 2026 10:53:55 +0000 ololololo]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5875.html
.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-07-04 134815.jpg (Size: 205.39 KB / Downloads: 128)
The first letter is n with an underscore. The second letter is similar to the red letters on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. in shape, there is something similar on f68r2:

.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-07-04 135028.jpg (Size: 36.48 KB / Downloads: 129)
I have not found any information about reading this letter combination. Most likely, this is a color designation, but what kind of color is it?]]> <![CDATA[Non-voynichese word on f68r2]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5854.html Sun, 28 Jun 2026 17:08:47 +0000 ololololo]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5854.html
.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-28 195049.jpg (Size: 4.64 KB / Downloads: 220)
It is in a circle with the Voynichese words. The first letter (which is clearly a Latin s) and the third letter (maybe an n) are what distinguish this word. The word is also highlighted by the fact that there are connections between the letters (marked in dark red in the image below), and the distance between them is quite small.
I tried to draw the letters that I could see here:

.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-28 195049 — копия.jpg (Size: 5.94 KB / Downloads: 220)
At least this word has 4 letters, the final one is not identified for sure. The word looks similar to the Bavarian "Suna" (the sun), which is consistent with the sun that is supposedly drawn nearby. However, it is unclear why u has a tail...
If it's a contraction, we won't be able to decipher it.

What do you think?]]> <![CDATA[What to make of the big stain on f116v]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5848.html Mon, 22 Jun 2026 19:11:54 +0000 Jorge_Stolfi]]> https://www.voynich.ninja/thread-5848.html

.jpg

075-report-f116v1-stain.jpg (Size: 181.68 KB / Downloads: 145)

Let "original text" mean text that was written on blank vellum. Do you think that
[1] the (A) line it is not the edge of a water spill.
[2] the (A) line is the edge of a water spill, but it does not matter because:
[2.1] it happened before any text was written on this page.
[2.2] it happened after some text was written on this page, and
[2.2.1] it did not affect the text, so what we see is exactly the original text.
[2.2.2] it erased some of the original text, but
[2.2.2.1] what was not erased by the spill is exactly what we see.
[2.2.2.2] the text we see is the result of a restoration attempt, and
[2.2.2.2.1] the whole original text was accurately restored.
[2.2.2.2.2] some original text was lost,
[2.2.2.2.2.1] but what survived was accurately restored.
[2.2.2.2.2.2] and the restorer made some errors.
[2.2.2.2.2.3] and the restoration is mostly wrong.
[9] Other.

All the best, --stolfi]]>

.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 231810.jpg (Size: 188.22 KB / Downloads: 195)
The word kchedykary is written in a handwriting style similar to the rest of the section, but the lines are thin and about the same width, which is unusual for pen writing but resembles fountain pen writing. You can also notice that it is written above the line, rather than starting the line.
The letter d is also highlighted - it is written without jerks and resembles an eight too much. On the same page, you can see the words between the pipe and the pond with the nymphs. They don't fit into the lines and are written in the same way as kchedykary (clearly not with a pen).

.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 234651.jpg (Size: 122.96 KB / Downloads: 193)
Another example can be found on f75v.

.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 234833.jpg (Size: 95.41 KB / Downloads: 189)
The top words on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are also slightly different from the main text.

.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 234929.jpg (Size: 147.34 KB / Downloads: 188)
Maybe You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 235108.jpg (Size: 97.25 KB / Downloads: 190)
and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 235153.jpg (Size: 190.51 KB / Downloads: 194)
And, finally, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 235346.jpg (Size: 102.69 KB / Downloads: 188)

Such "foreign signatures" are not regular, i.e., there are also signature words written with a pen in the section. However, these inscriptions have a special feature: as you can see, they are often written inside illustrations.
Maybe I'm wrong, and this is just a hallucination, but it seemed strange to me.

What do you think or know about it?]]>
.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 234651.jpg (Size: 122.96 KB / Downloads: 193)
Another example can be found on f75v.

.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 234929.jpg (Size: 147.34 KB / Downloads: 188)
Maybe You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 235108.jpg (Size: 97.25 KB / Downloads: 190)
and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
.jpg

Снимок экрана 2026-06-16 235153.jpg (Size: 190.51 KB / Downloads: 194)
And, finally, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
.jpg