05-05-2017, 08:00 AM
Thanks for the various responses.
The main point was whether the entire MS is in one hand or not, and I believe that this is reasonably certain.
It means the MS was created as a single composition of several books, at one place and one time.
With respect to the strokes above the text, there is indeed no doubt that they represents the dots on the i's.
Since this is also done consistently throughout the MS, this would support the 'single hand', but if they are a later addition, this is no longer a valid argument.
To me, it is not clear that we can be certain either way, though the fact that they are done in the same inks as the text itself, suggests to me that they are part of the original composition.
The link to the MS in 15th century 'textura' was helpful and I do now remember having seen similar examples. However, this is quite a different script than what is used in the Cambridge MS.
The main point was whether the entire MS is in one hand or not, and I believe that this is reasonably certain.
It means the MS was created as a single composition of several books, at one place and one time.
With respect to the strokes above the text, there is indeed no doubt that they represents the dots on the i's.
Since this is also done consistently throughout the MS, this would support the 'single hand', but if they are a later addition, this is no longer a valid argument.
To me, it is not clear that we can be certain either way, though the fact that they are done in the same inks as the text itself, suggests to me that they are part of the original composition.
The link to the MS in 15th century 'textura' was helpful and I do now remember having seen similar examples. However, this is quite a different script than what is used in the Cambridge MS.