@ Koen, you're probably right.
And thank you for the sentence: Latin paleography is not just a guessing game. As always, very kind.
The question for me was whether it was a 3 at the end or a three-shaped line. That means ‘is’.
But the macron indicates a forgotten letter, and since ‘is’ is already ‘is’ with an ‘i’, it doesn't need a macron. That suggests that it is a 3, which could also be called an “m” and that the ‘e’ was omitted. But i know lucem actually be abbreviated to lucē. That led me astray with the above abbreviation.
And from the context, sorry, both variants are grammatically possible – as I understand it.
So it's not that simple...
But as for the luc3 from f17v, the macron is missing. If it is german, than the 3 is possibly a "z", if it is latin, then, without makron, it has to be lucis or semthing else.
And thank you for the sentence: Latin paleography is not just a guessing game. As always, very kind.
The question for me was whether it was a 3 at the end or a three-shaped line. That means ‘is’.
But the macron indicates a forgotten letter, and since ‘is’ is already ‘is’ with an ‘i’, it doesn't need a macron. That suggests that it is a 3, which could also be called an “m” and that the ‘e’ was omitted. But i know lucem actually be abbreviated to lucē. That led me astray with the above abbreviation.
And from the context, sorry, both variants are grammatically possible – as I understand it.
So it's not that simple...
But as for the luc3 from f17v, the macron is missing. If it is german, than the 3 is possibly a "z", if it is latin, then, without makron, it has to be lucis or semthing else.