No text, but a visual code

[Jorge_Stolfi]

There is exact 1 clearly christian symbol (79v) and another one being the work of "the retracer", so maybe without any relation to the original manuscript.

And even the cross on the NW corner of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. may not be original.  I believe that practically everything on that page (and in many others) was carefully retraced once in a "professional" restoration job (Rt1). Then later other Restorers (Rt2, Rt3), less careful and skilled, retouched here and there.

I believe that, when the first restoration was done, the whole page looked like the cheek and chin of the  nymph with the ring (which may be a later addition too).  Or worse: that face presumably was not retraced because it still looked "good enough" at the time.

I admit that I don't have good evidence on this page for that extensive first round Rt1 of restoration.  But evidence for the later rounds is obvious, in the form of thick dark strokes that do not follow the earlier lighter ones and make a mess of the nymphs' outlines.  Like the right thigh of the nymph with the cross.

The way she is (not)holding the cross is more consistent with a later addition than with an original arrangement.  I bet that the nymph was simply pointing generically into the air, like the third nymph in the top row of f80r.  (By the way, nymph #2 in that group has two armpit lines; I would guess that one is original, the other is Rt1...)

All the best, --stolfi