- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Warning the number 5
- Warning the number 5
-
Warning the number 5
Mark Knowles > 19-02-2025, 12:09 PM
I am in Milan now and researching, but I want to mention a recurrent mistake that I have seen prior to coming to Milan and which I continue to see in Milan.
The number 5 is often misread as the number 4.
I noted that this has often resulted in the incorrect dating of quite a few documents.
So a document dated to 1450 might be mistakenly dated to 1440. Or a document dated to 1540 might be mistakenly dated to 1440.
In the 15th century the arabic numeral 5 was not written the way it is today. It was written as though rotated 90 degrees anticlockwise. This is often misread as the numeral 4 by modern people unfamiliar with how the numeral was represented.
Misdating documents can be very problematic, so this is why I wanted to issue this warning. -
RE: Warning the number 5
Koen G > 19-02-2025, 12:37 PM
At what scale does this happen? Do you have any examples? Wouldn't it be weird for someone to see the "45" in 1450 and decided that these two different symbols are both 4? -
RE: Warning the number 5
ReneZ > 19-02-2025, 12:58 PM
It is certainly correct that the way in which the 5 would be written, could be mistaken to be a 4, if one is not aware...
Below is a a chart I could find after a quick search, and I am sure that better examples can be found.
-
RE: Warning the number 5
Mark Knowles > 19-02-2025, 05:48 PM
The attached image shows a page from the Codex Urbinate Cipher Ledger in the Vatican Library. This was dated by Luigi Pasini who wrote about ciphers to 1440. However the cipher is actually dated to 1450. The third digit of the year at the top of the page looks similar to a "4" but is in fact a "5". Paolo Bonavoglia, Pasini's grandson agrees with me that Pasini misread this year. I only realised this when I researched the correspondent Napoleone Orsini and realised that it was not possible that the key corresponded to 1440.
This is one example of a number of examples. And this mistake is made by specialists and archivists.
The cases that I have noticed are partly because I know the dating that some modern person has given a document in an inventory or elsewhere does not fit with facts known to me and so is wrong.
I am, of course, not claiming every document is wrongly dated, but rather that this mistake is far too common for my liking and if I hadn't learnt to spot it would have caused me lots of confusion. -
RE: Warning the number 5
Mark Knowles > 19-02-2025, 08:36 PM
(19-02-2025, 12:37 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.At what scale does this happen?
I have encountered enough examples to find it concerning. I am not saying that every document is incorrectly dated. I haven't done an assessment of how often this mistake has been made, but it is common enough for me to think it necessary to warn people of it.
(19-02-2025, 12:37 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Do you have any examples?
Of course.
(19-02-2025, 12:37 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Wouldn't it be weird for someone to see the "45" in 1450 and decided that these two different symbols are both 4?
It might seem weird, but clearly of the people including Nick Pelling who read Pasini's book nobody else spotted this mistake. His grandson Paolo Bonavoglia who also writes and does presentations on ciphers didn't notice the mistake. It is an easy mistake to make as the "5" doesn't look like a modern 5 and so one can imagine it being a poorly drawn 4. -
RE: Warning the number 5
Mark Knowles > 19-02-2025, 08:45 PM
Dating of documents is really important to me. If a documents actually dates from the 1500s and not the 1400s that can make a big difference to how interested I am in that document. Even if there is only a 10 year difference in dating that can be quite significant to me. -
RE: Warning the number 5
R. Sale > 19-02-2025, 10:23 PM
Depending on the type of document - calendars, astronomical tables, etc. numerals can be quite... numerous.
In the document in question, the first thing that should be clear is that the two numerals are different. -
RE: Warning the number 5
eggyk > 19-02-2025, 11:45 PM
It's definitely worth keeping in mind. I noticed this when looking at this manuscript: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Even after realising that the symbol is a 5, and drilling it into my mind that it is a 5, it's really really easy to fall back into reading these as 1441, 1442 etc.
I can imagine a tired or overworked expert making the same mistake, although I don't know how widespread mis-dating due to that really is. -
RE: Warning the number 5
Aga Tentakulus > 20-02-2025, 12:23 AM
@eggyk
nice example. You can even count through it on the next page. 12,13,14,15,16 .....
-
RE: Warning the number 5
ReneZ > 20-02-2025, 12:31 AM
(19-02-2025, 05:48 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This was dated by Luigi Pasini who wrote about ciphers to 1440. However the cipher is actually dated to 1450. The third digit of the year at the top of the page looks similar to a "4" but is in fact a "5".
This is a baffling mistake indeed, because, as Koen implied, the 4 and the 5 are standing next to each other (here a modern 4) and the difference is obvious.