10-12-2025, 09:02 PM
(10-12-2025, 07:10 PM)Cuagga wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And her preliminary results seem to indicate that at least for q20, the intended reading order should have been to unbind all bifoliae and read one completely, front (both halves) and back, before starting another one. If the whole manuscript follows this formula (and it looks like it does), then binding is a mistake that someone understanding the text wouldn't have done
I’ve watched Prof Davis’s presentation too, and this is my take away point as well. The VMs was composed and published as a series of pamphlets. Evidence that the manuscript’s creators ever intended for their creation to become a codex is wanting. On the other hand, evidence is ample that if the original creators did foresee their creation becoming a codex, they wouldn’t have chosen to arrange the leaves the way either of the binders we have evidence of did.