Re: VMs: Possible explanation for Quire 20...

[Rene Zandbergen <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Yet Quire 20 doesn't apparently fit this pattern:-
> (1) the quire signature is in the wrong place
> (2) the quire signature is on the wrong page

Agreed on both counts!

> (3) the quire signature's handwriting is different
> from the majority of  quire signatures

Are you sure? This is the first time that this has
been suggested. Which particular features give
this impression to you?

> (4) the quire signature's handwriting is apparently
> a mid-Renaissance hand, 

As above

> (5) the quire signature's handwriting is different
> from the foliation hand

Common to all. 

> (6) (also) the quire's central bifolio (f109/f110)
> is missing.

Also not a unique feature.
 
> What could have happened to give these symptoms?
 
> So: here's what I think happened to quire 20 (in
> sequence):-
> 	quire 20 was constructed (Voynichese hand)
> 	quire 20 had a quire signature added (first quire
> hand)
> 	quire 20 was rebound inside out (ie, with the fold
> direction reversed)
> 	quire 20 had foliation added (folio hand)
> 	quire 20 lost its middle bifolio (originally its
> outer bifolio)
> 	quires 19 and 20 had a new quire signature added
> (second quire hand)

This fails to explain the _very_ thing that you
find surprising: the location of the quire signature.
It is still in the wrong place.

Cheers, Rene



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list