29-11-2025, 02:05 AM
(This post was last modified: 29-11-2025, 02:08 AM by Bluetoes101.)
An interesting point on this topic is "paint instructions". This seems to be the general consensus on what they are so I'm just going with that.
These would imply whoever is doing the paint (where they are found) would not know the colour without them.
Why they would not know the colour without them seems interesting to me.
Surely the scribe and drawer sitting in front of a plant, or copying from a manuscript knew the colour?
Maybe they did the paint in a batch once the ink had dried and left reminders for later.. but only extremely few reminders, mostly at the start of the manuscript?
What changed in the process?
Either way, if the "paint instructions" theory is right, and the scribe did them (not sure if anyone tried proving this), surely the scribe intended to paint it soon, or someone else soon. If it was intended to be left, then why bother?
Unless the paint instructions are also much later?
Clarity on any of this might lead to better understanding I think.
These would imply whoever is doing the paint (where they are found) would not know the colour without them.
Why they would not know the colour without them seems interesting to me.
Surely the scribe and drawer sitting in front of a plant, or copying from a manuscript knew the colour?
Maybe they did the paint in a batch once the ink had dried and left reminders for later.. but only extremely few reminders, mostly at the start of the manuscript?
What changed in the process?
Either way, if the "paint instructions" theory is right, and the scribe did them (not sure if anyone tried proving this), surely the scribe intended to paint it soon, or someone else soon. If it was intended to be left, then why bother?
Unless the paint instructions are also much later?
Clarity on any of this might lead to better understanding I think.