Re: VMs: Theory? What theory?: index?

["matt welnicki" <welnicki@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 04:26:42 +0100, "Jeff" wrote:

> The VMS is
> sorted either partially  fully in an alphabetically
> order. That is my
> belief. Take it or leave . And no I have no proof to
> supply YET. 

Jeff,

At one point early on I considered whether some of the
pages were indexes - like 49v albeit not at the end of
the Manuscript or a specific section.  Even recently
I've thought about whether the pages were organized or
once organized in an order.  I forget the reference but
I had done some research and a couple of authorities
said that indexing was inconsistent througout the
1400-1600 range with different methods used.  One
source said the herbals were commonly indexed in the
mid-1500s.  I understand that indexing might not be as
important if it is a work in progress for the use of
one physician.  Specifically, I tried, briefly, to see
any obvious or hidden page numbers/indicators that
could correspond to an index, it might warrant some
follow-up.

If organized alphabetically, would it be alphabetically
in the plain-text language/alphabet or the cipher-text
language/alphabet.

Matt
______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx
with
> a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list

_________________________________________________
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list