Battier to Fagel: a court divided

TASK: take a partial decipherment further: Battier to Fagel: a court divided
This page: https://dbourdeau.github.io/cyphersolver/further/battier1686.html

You are helping a public research project finish reading historical cipher letters. This one is read in part:
the key works, but some pieces are still open. Your job is to close one or more of the open gaps below.

THE READING
  Write-up:   https://dbourdeau.github.io/cyphersolver/battier1686.html (read it first: how the text was read, the key, the reading)
  Date:       1686–1688
  Outcome:    known key applied · partial
  Read now:   78.0% of the deciphered cipher tokens give sense (pieces below may be untouched)
  Files:      https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver/tree/main/targets/battier1686 (NOTES.md, key, transcription, reading, scripts)

OPEN GAPS (from NOTES.md, "## Remaining gaps")
  1. [no-key-material: needs a new source] 24 April 1687: surplus 8=e; partly covered 5:623 gra[tie]; gehelyk, sedert dat and soo als hy; Gastanaga's exact departure condition - blocker: no-key-material; the 230/235 sense screen excludes these five positions; see codex_review/review_1687-04-24.md
  2. [no-key-material: needs a new source] Separate decipherment sheets near 4 December 1687 and 12 February 1688 - blocker: no-key-material; checked 22 Oct 2026 (b17): scans 90-94 and 98-102 hold none
  3. [no-key-material: needs a new source] Focus-letter unresolved groups and sense: 12:6?0; getwist versus inferred Turck(en) (settled 22 Oct 2026: 12:908 Turcken); Novelli/Hofmeester, gesoubconneert gouverneren and Sex.; name repairs, 81 and other emendations in semantic_adjustments.tsv - blocker: no-key-material; key lookup alone does not settle the meaning or mark choices
  4. [no-key-material: needs a new source] Located passages, r2n (23 Oct 2026): read 2 Jan 1687 35R/36L, 13 Mar 1687 54R and 55R, July 1687 69L, 11 Sept 1687 78R, 18 Dec 1687 93R/94L, 1 Jan 1688 95R, 11 Mar 1688 103R; groups still open in them (35R 361 448 and the end of the 35R run, 703 against the clerk's 'een'; 54R 886; 55R 2:888 blank key row; 78R the first run 260 117 779 60; 93R/94L 888 178 883 212 256; 95R 11:861) - blocker: no-key-material; each looked up on the key scans with the mark as read (and in other blocks where the mark was unclear), no row gives sense in place (readings/r2n/r2n_log.md)
  5. [no-key-material: needs a new source] June 1687 67L (the letter run t-e-s-m-o-g-n-e-r-e-n) and Aug 1687 73R (backslash mark on 90, stray g): decoded, not read, one sentence each - blocker: no-key-material; every group decoded and looked up, the remaining run and mark have no key value that fits
  6. [no-key-material: needs a new source] 25 Sept 1687 80R (894, 432, 422, 379, 756), 18 Dec 1687 94R after l. 5 (406, 706, 238, 116, 653, 724, 312, 830) and Jan 1688 99L third run (886, 688, 878, 214, 154, 980): decoded, not read - blocker: no-key-material; looked up on the key scans with the marks as read, no row gives sense; 80R 9x9 is smudged (illegible)
  7. [illegible: needs a new source] 26 Feb 1688 102L (420, 335, 499, 114, 603, 800, 505): decoded, not read - blocker: illegible; the key rows give no sense and the interlinear decipherment of the time that would settle them is too faint on the NA scan to read
  8. [needs-physical-access: needs a new source] States General parallel set NA 1.01.02 inv. 12588.120–125 - blocker: needs-physical-access; not digitised
  9. [no-key-material: needs a new source] 4 Dec 1687 (92L) and 12 Feb 1688 (100R) cipher blocks: closed 22-23 Oct 2026 (b17), both letters read; groups still without sense (92L 889 and a-u-t-o-r-i-s-g; 91R 11:466, 14:6ø, ø94; 99R 431 374 137 512, 604; 100L 867 826 296 765; 100R the struck groups after Madrid and after gesoubconneert, 59ø ø39) - blocker: no-key-material; each looked up on the key scans, no sense in place (readings/*_corrections.tsv)

ALREADY TRIED (from NOTES.md, "## Escalation")
  [x] siblings: all 109 scans inventoried; unread letters listed in inv/orch_letters.tsv are not yet transcribed; workable with the same key
  [x] siblings: (23 Oct 2026, r2j): every letter listed not read re-checked on full-size scans: seven have no cipher (closed), thirteen passages located with their size; 69L piloted with key lookups; the rest not transcribed
  [x] clear-pages: 28R, 32R and 42R–43R compared to three validation letters; 58L–60R checked with no decipherment found for 24 April 1687; scans 107–109 visually checked with no decipherment list; 101R has an interlinear check
  [x] known-keys: Battier's named inv. 1209 key applied; DECODE R2794 shelfmark discrepancy recorded
  [x] print: De Leeuw (2000), DECODE, Tomokiyo, editions and NA digitised series searched; no Battier edition found; see evidence/prior_art.md
  [x] key-rebuild: dictionary transcription and correction overrides preserved; Codex identifies remaining variants and alphabetical reversals
  [x] retry: (23 Oct 2026, r2n): the thirteen located passages read group by group on the NA scans, every code looked up on the key scans, 35R/36L aligned with its interlinear; eight read, six decoded, not read with the blocker named (readings/r2n/r2n_log.md)
  [x] retry: 22-23 Oct 2026 (b17) 92L, 91R, 99R, 100R re-read on the NA scans group by group and every doubtful group checked on the key scans; two untranscribed cipher runs added; 4 Dec 1687 and 12 Feb 1688 read (readings/1687-12-04_1688-02-12_reread_log.md). Earlier: five focus letters re-decoded and screened for sense; unresolved readings recorded in semantic_adjustments.tsv and review_1687-04-24.md; unread letters not yet transcribed; workable with the same key

STEPS
0. Set up. If you can run a shell, fork and clone the repository and work inside it:
     git clone https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver.git
   Then read, in this order: CONTRIBUTING.md (how a contribution is sent and credited); README.md, sections
   "Repository layout" and "Conventions" (how readings are measured and named); targets/battier1686/NOTES.md in full, and the
   key, transcription and reading files it names; lang/README.md (shared language models).
   Work in targets/battier1686/. Add your findings to NOTES.md under a dated heading without rewriting what is there, and
   update the "## Remaining gaps" line of every gap you close. Keep WORKLOG.md there: one dated line per step
   (hypothesis, value tried, solver run, crib, control), failures included. Do not edit docs/ (the site is generated).
   If you cannot run a shell, fetch the files from the links above and keep your work in files you send with the issue.
1. Pick a gap. Start with the ones marked "doable now" (open-codes, not-attempted, left-open): the images and the key
   are online, so they need only work. A gap marked "needs a new source" (no-key-material, too-short, illegible,
   needs-physical-access) can be closed only by something new: a key
   or a deciphered sibling found elsewhere, a better image, a printed edition or calendar, a photograph from the archive.
   For those, search for that material first, and say where you looked even when you find nothing.
2. Start from the existing key and transcription in the folder. Do not rebuild the key from scratch, and do not
   re-read parts that are already read unless you find an error in them.
3. For a code group or sign value: list every place the group occurs, show how each reads with the value you propose,
   and say what still does not fit. For a passage: re-read it at the image and give the folio and line. For a missing
   letter or leaf: say where it is held and how it can be reached.
4. Measure again. Apply the key to the whole text, write the reading file, and count the share of cipher tokens that
   give sense (not an estimate). The reading is "complete" only when (1) at least 95% of its cipher tokens give sense;
   (2) no gap is left untried; (3) every letter in it is covered; (4) what stays open is scattered code groups or names,
   or pieces blocked from outside. Otherwise it stays "partial": say which gaps are still open and why.
5. Be honest. Mark every uncertain word with [?], leave unread groups as their numbers or signs, and never fill a gap
   with a plausible guess. A gap retried and still open, with what was ruled out, is worth reporting.

REPORT BACK
With a clone: open a pull request with your changes to targets/battier1686/. Say in the description which gaps you worked on,
  the share read before and after, and how you want to be credited (name, initials or handle, and a link).
Without one: open an issue: https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver/issues/new?template=further-reading.yml&title=Further+reading%3A+battier1686&page=battier1686.html
  Give the write-up, the gap you worked on (its line in Remaining gaps, or the code group, folio and line), what you
  propose, the evidence (every occurrence, the images or sources), the share read before and after, your step log,
  and the tools and AI model you used.
If you cannot open issues or pull requests, write this report for your human to send. Credit goes to the person who sends it.