19-02-2016, 06:22 AM
I'm glad that the 'mellified man' is a myth.
About 'mummia' (sometimes as mumia in the texts), it is interesting that until surprisingly late, traders didn't distinguish between bitumen and mummy-derived material.
I think 'mumia-mining' could be a reference in f.86v, though I'm chiefly basing that on the general theme of the manuscript's parts (i.e trade routes and goods), and the shape given the pyramid. That's the vaguely human-shaped thing which some have thought might be volcano, though it is placed in Egypt, a bit back from the harbour.
About 'mummia' (sometimes as mumia in the texts), it is interesting that until surprisingly late, traders didn't distinguish between bitumen and mummy-derived material.
I think 'mumia-mining' could be a reference in f.86v, though I'm chiefly basing that on the general theme of the manuscript's parts (i.e trade routes and goods), and the shape given the pyramid. That's the vaguely human-shaped thing which some have thought might be volcano, though it is placed in Egypt, a bit back from the harbour.