Colorization - what was it's purpose?

[Jorge_Stolfi]

With the red one, the case is clear.
At the same time or shortly after he had the red one.

Could you please specify the page you took that clip from?  

It seems to be a Herbal page. Is that "red" paint the same as the "red" ink of f67r2?  They are probably the same pigment, but that does not mean much because in both cases it seems to have been the cheapest "red" available, namely hematite.  

The question for Lisa was whether the red and brown handwriting were from the same person.

That unmentionable explanation would explain also why it seems so.  But there are some peculiarities in the red writing that are not seen elsewhere, like these:
   

I would even go so far as to claim that the yellow was there before the red. That’s just how it looks.

 

And, as I wrote, I find that likely too.  But only the very light transparent slightly brownish yellow.  Which could be just a very diluted version of the same brown ink used in the text.

what evidence are you referring to? I don’t know of anything that really proves it was much later. These are just theoretical assumptions.

Did I just post it on another thread?  Anyway, it is the green paint over the folio number on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the mismatched blue paint on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f40r. The are not proof, granted, but are evidence for "after the binding" hence "much later".  

So it is not "just theoretical assumptions".  The opposite claim is...

The sequence: yellow, red, blue.

Agreed (at least on the clip you posted).  But the intervals may have been minutes or centuries...

All the best, --stolfi