05-06-2025, 10:00 PM
(05-06-2025, 07:04 PM)Jorge_Stolfi wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(04-06-2025, 02:49 PM)Aga Tentakulus wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It would certainly be an argument for the colour of the ink.
I'll stick to the simple one first.
1. closed inkwell. Over time, light-coloured ink and watery. Sinking of the particles.
2. open inkwell. Ink becomes thick and sticky. Evaporation and thickening. Seen in this light, the ink does not flow cleanly.
One problem with this explanation is that the darker ink is seen only in some pages, and then only some details. On the Zodiac pages, for instance, there are of course many "original" variations in stroke darkness and width that are apparently done in the standard yellowish-brown ink, and therefore can be attributed to ink-flow variations and immediate self-corrections by the Scribe. But there are scattered "new" strokes in a distinctive dark brown-black ink that was used only in the labels of two pages and applied to a bizarre selection of figure details.
What is certain is that the font was not finished with the old ink. This only came later with the new, darker ink. Whether the ink was new, or just stirred or thickened, I leave open.
What is certain is that the words were finished afterwards. I assume that the other corrections were also made at the same time.
The same ink can also be found on other pages in the text.
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)
