an ain aiin as numbers...?

[Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi everyone,

I've been thinking about the implications of the VMS' having separate code 
author (a commissioned intelligencer), content author (Dioscorides? et al), 
and user (say, a gynaecologist), especially if the VMS was intended as a 
working document (like physicians' folding calendars).

If a key part of the VMS is pharmacological, then a crucial element would 
have to be numbers - lengths, quantities, durations, volumes, etc. So: I 
don't think that it's pushing the boat out too far to suggest that - 
whatever the underlying language, and whatever the code - there will be 
numbers in there somewhere.

But - crucially - if the VMS was made to be *used*, my proposition here is 
that these numbers *must* be coded in clear sight, and in a contemporarily 
useful form - all the text can be abbreviated and/or obfuscated, but 
numbers *must* be clearly readable.

If (as I believe) the VMS is an encoded form of a contemporarily active 
language - say, Latin, Italian, Langue d'oc, etc - then it would be far 
more likely for the numbering in the VMS to be an encoded form of 
contemporary numbers, than (say) gematria or other ancient letter-based 
number-encoding systems (elegant though they are).

My observation of the day is: as no-one has yet satisfactorily explained 
the presence of "an", "ain", and "aiin" in an otherwise very restricted 
character set, could these simply be ways of hiding "I", "II", and "III" in 
plain sight? ie, stego Latin numerals?

EVA "d" might then be a code for "V" (or perhaps "U" as well) - and "daiin" 
could be VIII (ie 8). "dain dain" could be "6 6" - ie, 66 or perhaps 6x6.

Indeed, the many ways of encoding numbers could be a particular 
characteristic of the two Currier languages.

As I said in a previous post, cracking the number system could well be our 
most achievable first step. Comments?

Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....