Re: VMs: Re: ...and f73v-?-?-f75r

[Rene Zandbergen <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Ken W <ken@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I simply MUST complete my thoughts before I send...
> 
> A question to all you quiremasters...
> What do these possible additions mean to the folio
> numbers?
> The odd thing to me is if there are truly two
> missing folios between 
> f73v and f75r, that means f74 was removed after the
> folio numbers, yet 
> one folio was missing before the folio numbers were
> written.

Yes, it doesn't quite make sense, and this is
one reason why I had the short discussion with
Jim Reeds that I wrote about a day or two ago.
No conclusion just yet, but note that the 
Beinecke writes that the VMs was (re)bound 
with thread from the time the VMs was already
in the hands of the Jesuits in Rome.

If someone cut out f74, so close to the binding
that f73 had come loose, the rebinding could have 
been done in various different ways.
I am not trying to make a case that this is what
happened, but just that 'things' happened and
we can't quite decide what it was.

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