Hello Robert,
Now that you have analyzed the margins of f1r in great detail, can you
summarize your findings and interpretations? Do you feel that the author of
the VMS also penned the border entries or that they are contributions from
a postanalyst? Thank you for your thoughts.
Regards,
Dana Scott
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 10:42
PM
Subject: Re: VMs: Research Note: "1708"
Update
> I can (just about) see the "1708" Robert's talking about:
I'd also add
that
> the "7" appears to have a horizontal bar struck
through it (ie, it's
> appears to be a "continental 7"). Though (because
it's inverted) written
in
> white?
I thought that maybe they
used a sharp object on the vellum, rather than
a pen (assuming it's
real).
> I'd also caution that this is right at (or possibly just
beyond) the
limits
> of perception. At this resolution (1089 x 1349),
there really aren't that
> many dots making up these numerals, and the
danger of this being (say)
some
> kind of JPEG artefact is quite
high.
I agree, but I'm hoping not. I did some more searching of that
area of the
folio, but found nothing else. As I said, I put the "o" in the
alphabet
table
next to the "0" and found they were very close to the
same size, if not
exactly.
> My guesses are (a) that a lot of the
claimed detail would disappear in a
> higher resolution (and
non-compressed) scan; and (b) that there is
actually
> some kind of
subtle design on the top right corner of f1r which we can
only
>
barely make out ATM (ie, can you see the three parallel diagonal
lines?)
> which might help explain this kind of detail.
The part
of the design where the number is looks like a flamingo's head
to
me.
Robert
______________________________________________________________________
To
unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body
saying:
unsubscribe vms-list
|
