Anton > 19-08-2017, 06:19 PM
Quote:Marci's 'l' basically *never* connects to the previous letter
Anton > 19-08-2017, 06:28 PM
Anton > 19-08-2017, 06:44 PM
Quote:Marci's 'l' basically *never* connects to the previous letter, and always starts at the top. Sometimes with a small loop.
The only case when it connects to the left seems to be when it is the second 'l' in a pair, e.g. 'illud'.
Kestrel > 19-08-2017, 08:47 PM
(19-08-2017, 06:12 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hmmm,
the difference of meaning between sch(a)edula and schaedata doesn't seem fundamental to me.
Barschius submitted *something* and it would have been something drawn or written on paper.
ReneZ > 20-08-2017, 05:48 AM
Helmut Winkler > 20-08-2017, 07:27 AM
Patrick Lockerby > 08-09-2017, 05:38 PM
Quote:The evidence is staring us in the face :-)[url=http://voynich.net/Arch/2004/08/msg00191.html][/url]
Marci sent a letter to Kircher in 1640 with the
question whether Kircher could interpret the attached
'schaedata' (which could mean drawings).
What if these were pages of the MS? Kircher would
have kept them, and whoever organised his
correspondence, could have later placed them back
together with the VMs. And what do we see?
There is evidence of the VMs being rebound between
1700 and 1900 (source: Yale catalogue entry).
There are odd stubs near f73 and near f94/95.
Quite possibly, the bits Baresch sent were sewn
back into the MS in the 18th C.
Speculating even further, there are a few pages
which have small 'a' 'b' 'c' in the corner, which
are written in pencil, much like used in the
index of Kircher's correspondence. This could be
further indication that these pages may have been
detached from the MS at some time during its stay
with the Jesuits after Kircher.
Cheers, Rene
source You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
-JKP- > 08-09-2017, 10:54 PM
ReneZ > 09-09-2017, 08:01 AM
Helmut Winkler > 09-09-2017, 09:22 AM