Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [GTh] Manuscript Notes: Page 32

Expand Messages
  • Michael Grondin
    Hi John, Like you, I ve entertained the thought that there might be something ultra-significant about the 8 lines at the top of page 47 (not 34 - that s a typo
    Message 1 of 40 , Feb 7, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi John,

      Like you, I've entertained the thought that there might be something
      ultra-significant about the 8 lines at the top of page 47 (not 34 -
      that's a typo in Rick's note). My reason for thinking so was that
      line 47:8 (AKA line 510) contains the only occurrence of LOGOS in
      the text. Rick is right, though. The Scribe B lines incorporate
      not just a single saying, but parts of two sayings. The only other
      possibility I can think of is that 47:1-7 (lines 503-509) were spaced
      out so that P-LOGOS would occur at the left-hand margin of line 510.
      I admit it's not likely, but it should be noted that the difference between
      the number of letters in 47:1-8 and the average number of letters
      in 8 lines elsewhere in the text (at about 24.5 letters per line) is
      approximately equal to a full (normal) line, so that it's possible that
      the 8 lines atop page 47 would have taken up 7 lines in the normal
      script. Which means that it's just barely possible that the same scriptor
      that wrote the rest could have shifted gears at that point and started
      lettering more ornately and leaving more space between letters so that
      8 lines could be made out of 7. (Or alternately, to compensate for a
      removed line without overly disturbing the overall line numbering.)
      The justification for such an unlikely scenario is that the scenario
      wherein a second scribe was brought in for eight lines, then summarily
      let go, is also unlikely. Yes, the eight lines are written differently, but
      the supposition of a second scribe is based on the assumption that
      a single scribe would never have had any reason to write significantly
      differently than his/her norm. Perhaps that assumption is false in this
      case.

      Mike
    • Michael Grondin
      ... As I said earlier, Bob, regardless of this and other definitions deriving from non-ancient binding and publishing processes, James Robinson didn t use the
      Message 40 of 40 , Feb 10, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        > In the Middle Ages, ['quire'] had a number of specific meanings, with
        > specific names. In modern times, it refers to 1/20th of a ream, IIRC.
        > See the Wikipedia.

        As I said earlier, Bob, regardless of this and other definitions deriving
        from non-ancient binding and publishing processes, James Robinson
        didn't use the word that way in his Intro to the Facsimile edition. In his
        usage, a quire is an indefinite number of leaves folded together:

        "A *codex* is made up of one or more *gatherings", usually referred
        to as *quires*. For although this term is derived from *quaterniones*,
        which is the designation for gatherings of four sheets (which came
        to predominate), it has taken on the broader meaning of gatherings
        of any number of *sheets* or *bifolios*." (p.32)

        Mike
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.