The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Undefined variable $can_link - Line: 6 - File: showthread.php(1658) : eval()'d code PHP 8.5.12 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 157 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1658) : eval()'d code 6 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1658 eval




About the binding(s?) and missing folios
#13
(10-12-2025, 10:08 PM)Jorge_Stolfi wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(10-12-2025, 07:20 PM)Cuagga wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.That comes from the fact some paint spots cross the binding gutter and reappear on the other side of the bifolio several pages later. The example Rene gives in this page is the continuity in painting between You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (main drawing) and details on the left side of f40r.

That is an important clue, indeed.

However, could it be that the binding gutter was displaced when the book was re-bound by the Jesuits?  I see what look like holes from the binding strings on page f40r, to the right of the current gutter; one of them at the level of line 3.  

Another possibility is that the Painter noticed that the drawing of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. extended into f40r, and thus opened the book on that page and painted those bits.  It seems that the paint on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. stops a hair before the gutter, and the paint on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. does not quite match:



But note that both images are somewhat distorted right next to the gutter, because of the curvature of the vellum.

All the best, --stolfi

I'll answer this point by point.
Re: the possible displacement of the binding gutter, I do see 3 aligned holes on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (roughly on the level of the 4 last lines of text, more visible on the scan You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), but they are still unmistakeably aligned with the painted section. And other spots on this page don't look to me regular enough to show old binding traces, and I am certain that people who saw the VMS firsthand would have noted those if they noticed them, and neither Rene nor LFD did, to my knowledge.

Re: the second paragraph, probably someone more skilled than me could do it, but I struggle to imagine that painting while the manuscript is bound would yield such clean result ; colour right up to the margin, while not covering neither the opposite page f34r, nor the binding string visible on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (first flower from the top). It also seems to me that the bottom part of the middle flower shows paint right into the gutter
[+] 1 user says Thank You to Cuagga for this post
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: About the binding(s?) and missing folios - by Cuagga - 10-12-2025, 10:29 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The missing folios 59-64 ReneZ 39 53,769 20-08-2019, 03:36 PM
Last Post: nickpelling

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)