Re: VMs: F66r

[Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi everyone,

I'm a little disappointed by the quality of this thread - ISTM that we 
should be more advanced in our reasoning on this matter.

(1) We have a document which appears to have been bound out of order. 
Evidence: the well-known plumbing mismatch in the balneo section, and from 
the Currier A/B bifolio mixups throughout the herbal section - and there 
are also indications that the balneo section is misordered in other ways.

(2) The crude "heavy painting" (ie not fine details, like the nymphs' 
mouths and cheeks) was done once the current binding was in place. 
Evidence: all the bleed-across between pages, the observation that we see 
bleed-across between Currier A bifolios and Currier B bifolios, and the 
fact that we only see bleed-across in places where we would expect from the 
current binding.

(3) The VMs' alphabet is strongly influenced by Tironian notae, and not 
influenced by Arabic numerals at all. Evidence: the word-initial and 
word-final EVA <y> seems a direct steal, and EVA <d>, <q>, <o> and <y> were 
plainly not conceived as numbers.

(4) The VMs' writing dates to before 1500 - if it's much later than 1500, 
it's someone trying to emulate pre-1500 writing. Evidence: its humanist 
hand, and its reliance on Tironian notae (largely forgotten by 1500, if we 
take Trithemius' "Armenian psalter" story at face value).

(5) The foliation is in a mid-Renaissance schooled hand, the Latinised 
quiration is in a hasty early Renaissance academic or monastic hand. 
Evidence: just look at them.

From this, we can construct a logical sequence for the construction of 
these main layers - but how we interpret that sequence is another matter...

(A) Pre-1500, a document is constructed. Only a little colour is used 
(though perhaps some colours faded, but might still be detectable by 
different scanning techniques?)

(B) The document is rebound

(C) The document is over-painted (perhaps beautified for re-sale?)

(D) Post-1500, the document has quire signatures added

(E) Post-1550 (say), the document has foliation added

There is no evidence here to suggest (for example) that the quiration or 
foliation was done by the original author: there is no evidence to suggest 
that it was constructed for any particular purpose. There is, however, 
evidence to suggest that the original author(s) left most of it uncoloured 
(a *real* ugly duckling!), and that most of the colouring/painting was done 
by someone later (and, I'd add, probably quite unconnected except through 
ownership).

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

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