[
attachment=10183]
First and foremost, the leaf sequence is important. Doodling is not important here. See the foliation.
Thus drawing 78v and 81r (sheet 4) are actually opposite each other on the same sheet. (A whole picture).
Normally all connections are drawn from top to bottom. (sequence).
Only here is there a cross-connection.
Both pipe sections are at the same height.
Where does the bath filling come from, and that just with 2 pipes and that on the same sheet directly opposite.
This sheet certainly represents a centre, but not from this quire, because otherwise it interrupts the flow of the story.
But yes, nothing is certain. But maybe Lisa will cut open the binding so that we can see if the connection between the pipes is real.
In the name of science.
(19-03-2025, 07:20 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.First and foremost, the leaf sequence is important. Doodling is not important here. See the foliation.
Well certainly any doodling would have been done while the sheet (bifolio) was first written and drawn, and not yet bound into the book.
[
attachment=10184]
As I see it from a procedural point of view, without even looking at the page sequence.
According to the picture.
Above, two basic substances where they are brought together in a bath. Whether the basic substances are the result of an earlier process is unimportant.
We have a mixture. A reaction takes place. It can be seen that 3 nymphs are lying down and are in the next bath.
A simple combination is milk with rennet = cheese.
Or olive oil and baking soda, flocculation = curd soap.
Such a discovery would explain the encryption.
It can't be curd soap. It comes from the East and was already being produced on a large scale in France from 1250.
But something like this.
The change of scribes is also interesting. (Orange lines). It can be seen everywhere. It seems to be a co-operation unlike the plants. Because they are written alternately. This is where Lisa would come in.
All assumptions aside, I think the case for the connecting pipes is much stronger since the single view makes sense: basins connected by pipes. In the case of the nymph's hand, there is no reason why it wouldn't be a badly aligned fold. Nothing in the image suggests that this was intended as a cohesive whole.
I definitely agree with Koen - it's certainly
possible that the hand crossing the fold implies that the leaves are both conjoint and consecutive, but it's a harder case to make than with 78v/81r.
I'm currently working on the question of the original sequence of ALL of the bifolia in the manuscript, in collaboration with others and using several different methodologies:
Codicological evidence: As in the present thread and in my blog: You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
Topic modeling: Does this kind of linguistic analytics result in a stronger association of, for example, 81r with 78v rather than 80v?
Image analytics: Using AI analytics to model how the waterstain at the beginning of the manuscript should flow through those first quires, potentially allowing for the establishment of the correct quire structure in the herbal section.
More MSI: using UV imaging to look for offsets that aren't necessarily visible to the naked eye - one example is demonstrated in my recent blogpost <You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.>).
These are complex and lengthy investigations that have required the development of several new computational and investigative models. I hope to have some results to share in the coming months.
How many writers are there in Quire 13?
According to the story.
Bring me some fruit and I'll make juice out of it.
Bring me juice and I will make wine from it.
Bring me wine and I'll make it into brandy.
And she says:
Bring me brandy and I'll make it into a party and take away all the money you've earned so far.
So everyone in the story is a specialist.
