23-06-2026, 09:53 PM
A) What is the meaning of those markings? (We could pretend they do not exist of course.)
B) The placement is way off:
1.It was writed as a single word by mistake, is latter separated: Oddly for a sequence with beforehand known items.
2.Is a single word where the + has a second function:
I)Like enhancing the word with a cross. (It started writing "Ma" then decided to make a cross above and then returned to continue writing the rest of the word after respecting the identation space below it, maybe a surpesticious trigger: "i have to protect this before finishing the charm" or something.)
II)A code of some kind: a cipher, re-allocation, sequence break...
3.It is two words hinted by the space separation: A little bit incoherent that the consitency of the + was not mantained (We could add some form of dislexia to support this idea, but the rest does not seems that dislexic.)
C) The Size of the Gliph: WHY? If there were two words, why not just put a very small + between them as a correction? if it is just a plus after all. The Size of the + is very consistent, almost like religiously consistent.
It is in the last page of the manuscript. I imagine (no bases for this) Charms usually are put at the last page of the manuscript.
The marginalia scriba had a lot of space to write, there was no need to make it clusterish like.(If it is like a recipy or similar it could have been tired or lazy or both; or it is like a charm with second gueses?)
-
This is how i see it, does this fits with the recipy- prescription format?