25-10-2016, 07:42 PM
R.Sale - what do you mean with Stolfi's markers? I haven't been around yet for that long.
And isn't this folio one of those that may have been altered by a later owner? The paint looks sloppy and obscures details of the drawing.
If anything I believe this folio might indicate what happened to the manuscript a while after it was finished, but not the intentions of a supposed author or truthful copyist. That's just my impression of the folio based on what I've read from others.
Because colors have been added, it gives a bit more of a heraldic first sight impression, but I just don't see any convincing concrete evidence for that.
By coincidence, I recently read this 1999 quote by Stolfi through a comment from Nick Pelling:
And also:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
And isn't this folio one of those that may have been altered by a later owner? The paint looks sloppy and obscures details of the drawing.
If anything I believe this folio might indicate what happened to the manuscript a while after it was finished, but not the intentions of a supposed author or truthful copyist. That's just my impression of the folio based on what I've read from others.
Because colors have been added, it gives a bit more of a heraldic first sight impression, but I just don't see any convincing concrete evidence for that.
By coincidence, I recently read this 1999 quote by Stolfi through a comment from Nick Pelling:
Quote:The new Beinecke images left me more convinced that ever that most of the VMs colors are apocryphal and bogus.
And also:
Quote:The Painter too did not understand the book, but apparently did not have much regard for it, and did some very stupid things on occasion.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.