Frequency charts can sometimes hint at patterns, but they’re only one tool in a very small box. If the script is alphabetic, you might see a high‑frequency letter akin to an “e” or a “t.” Yet many ancient writings use logograms or syllabaries where every symbol carries its own weight and no single sign dominates. A chart might reveal a handful of common signs, but that doesn’t guarantee they’re phonetic or even related. The real trick is to look for repeated sequences, context, and any signs that seem to align with known linguistic families. In short, a frequency list can be a starting point, but it’s unlikely to expose the whole structure on its own.

Indeed, the chart is merely a snapshot, a first pivot, not the final map. If the script bends away from a neat alphabet, the real work lies in spotting recurring motifs, pairing them with context, and testing the patterns against what little we know of similar systems. In short, let the numbers guide you, but let your eyes and intuition do the heavy lifting.

I’ll keep the ledger open, noting each motif and cross‑checking it with the known signs. The spreadsheet will be my quick sanity check. Data is the map, intuition is the compass.

I'll keep the spreadsheet neat, separate the snack drawer from the data, and let the anomalies shout when they need my attention.

I’ll treat the snack‑drawer entries like mythical beasts—tame them in a separate tab and keep the main ledger pure. That way the numbers won’t be distracted by crumbs.