Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399
#20
Marco, I mostly agree with your last post. My post was mainly motivated by an attempt to explain D'Imperio's categorical rejection of "gynecological or sexual interpretations of the text". She says that "many students" were exploring such avenues, so I can imagine her frustration if especially "sexual" interpretations of the entire manuscript were developed from those few instances which might reference sex acts / ejaculation and a few wombs. I can also imagine one would prefer a more general "biology" interpretation rather than a strictly gynecological one, since the body parts people think to recognize include intestines and collar bones.

I agree that these are all subjective interpretations with their pros and cons.

One thing I'd like to stress as well is that the most "biological" folio is only one, 77. Mostly the verso side, though I guess there's a biologically looking thing on the recto as well. This happens to be a folio which I can't explain in terms of constellations, although the parallel with Andromeda has been noted by others before me. I wouldn't be surprised if the other figures deal with another theme though. My first hypothesis would be meteorology, though I haven't studied this yet. Constellation folios I'm relatively confident about are 76, 79 and 80 all on both sides. Folio 82 seems to mark a transition into meteorology and 83 as well.

(Obviously I subscribe to the idea that Q13 is out of order and may have originally been two or even three sections).
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by MarcoP - 23-04-2017, 12:18 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by -JKP- - 23-04-2017, 06:41 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by MarcoP - 24-04-2017, 05:46 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by ReneZ - 25-04-2017, 08:23 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by MarcoP - 25-04-2017, 09:46 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by -JKP- - 25-04-2017, 09:22 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by bi3mw - 24-04-2017, 07:44 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by MarcoP - 25-04-2017, 09:16 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by bi3mw - 25-04-2017, 05:05 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by ReneZ - 25-04-2017, 10:05 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by Diane - 25-04-2017, 03:08 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by Diane - 25-04-2017, 06:01 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by Koen G - 25-04-2017, 10:10 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by -JKP- - 25-04-2017, 11:03 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by MarcoP - 04-05-2017, 09:04 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Asmhole 399 - by MarcoP - 26-04-2017, 11:13 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by Koen G - 26-04-2017, 12:01 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by Koen G - 28-06-2017, 10:06 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by MarcoP - 29-06-2017, 08:37 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by Koen G - 04-07-2018, 10:10 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by MarcoP - 05-07-2018, 11:07 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by -JKP- - 05-07-2018, 11:26 AM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by Koen G - 05-07-2018, 10:32 PM
RE: Comparison with BL ms Ashmole 399 - by -JKP- - 06-07-2018, 12:29 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)