[Imagery] Human figures, their number and clothing.

[Koen G]

I will present a set of statements here about the human figures in the manuscript, their number and state of undress.

1) There are [over five hundred] human figures in the manuscript.
I'm not sure of the number, but I seem to remember Rene once said something like this. Does anyone know more or have a source?

2) Additionally, a number of faces are found in the roots of some plants and on representations of heavenly bodies.
Plants with faces are:
- f33r: two faces
- f89r1 bottom middle: five faces
- f101v2 bottom: one face

3) Most human figures are completely naked (ignoring headgear). 

4) Fifty human figures are clothed with at least one piece of clothing (ignoring headgear).

5) A large majority of human figures are female.

6) Some human figures have androgynous features.

Number (4) is based on a count I did just now. I ignored everything worn on the head, but included all other clothes worn, including a couple of ambiguous cases. The count might be repeated by somebody else to see if I didn't make any big mistakes.

[ThomasCoon]

I agree with all four statements.

[Koen G]

Hehe, I played it very safe with my first statement. Could someone (Rene?) confirm the thing about the total number of human figures? Then this thread can be moved to the polling stage.

[ReneZ]

At the time I did a quick count by hand. The safe way could be to put the numbers in an Excel file, one line for each  page that has human figures.
This would also allow someone else to cross-check.

[david]

Number one should be a definitive statement. It would be good to hold that data in the library.

Which plants depict human faces?

Most implies the majority, is this your meaning?

One additional item... Signifies that the nymph is wearing am item plus another. Is this correct? Likewise, the number should be definitive.

I would also urge a distinction between headgear and clothing. If a nymph is naked except for headgear, then that gear is likely to have symbolic importance.

[Koen G]

David - 

• Yes, we need a definite nymph count. I'll check this when I have some more time.
  

• The plants depicting human faces are these three: 
  

f33r: two faces
f89r1 bottom middle: five faces
f101v2 bottom: one face

• Yes, a very definite majority
  
• I see that my last statement is unclear. I meant that, ignoring headgear, they wear at least one item of clothing. So I had the same in mind as you do: headgear is a separate category. Additionally, it is often very ambiguous if a nymph is wearing something on het head and what it is.
  

Statements adjusted. Is it better like this?

Someone should at least double check the count of clothed nymphs since this is far from obvious sometimes.

[MarcoP]

What about mentioning that women are much more represented than men?

[Koen G]

That is definitely worth its own statement, I'll add it as (5).

I considered counting the men, but soon realized that this is very hard. Would a statement along the lines of "Several human figures have androgynous features" pass?

[Koen G]

Should I add a poll here already or wait until the total number of figures is counted?