f20v - Did the scribe make a mistake?

[bunny]

It was Anne Nill who said that there are none, and she made it clear that this was from her own observation. She also made it clear that this was in comparison with other manuscripts, where corrections are easy to find.

I don't think that there are none, but the number is certainly small.

I have 12 at my web site (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), but I am not sure that all of them can really be considered corrections.
The one that is the topic of this thread is among them, and looks like one of the more convincing cases.

I don't think any of them are mistakes as such, though most look like ink blobs which is just messy writing. They certainly have non of the strikeouts and arrowing seen in medieval manuscripts, it's usually pretty clear where inserted letters or corrected text goes.  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. "correction" is just plain unreadable unfortunately.  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has an s above the a but no arrowing or indication where it is inserted or what it replaces suggesting it's not an error but something akin to suggested Rx on other folio, it seems unlikely one would forget how to spell a 3 letter word like dog and put og then add the d later.  Likewise the qo*?8 on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. does not appear to be an error but another rare insertion, the "correction"could refer to a deity named in the following word.

In spite of the few weird letters it look like it is a copied piece and the author had no idea what they were writing, but tried to copy the script (or of course follow the method of a fake constructed text) faithfully.  Given all the many, many titles in the astronomy, astrology, biology and herbal section are all pretty spot on does suggest it is not an original work at all unless constructed each word on the spot.

Bunny