f8r: possible renumbering

It has been said, for example on Zandbergen’s site, that f67r had been renumbered at some point, with a faint erased number to the right of the 67, perhaps a 62:

It seems to me that the same could be said of f8r, with the erased number being quite possibly a 1 (written as i):

If correct, that is puzzling: indeed, recall that f1 and f8 form the same bifolio.

Could this mean that whoever numbered them,  first found the VM as some set of loose bifolios, and initially thought that  each formed one large page, only to realise that it wasn’t the case after having numbered the first one?

For comparison, here is how the number 1 looks on f1r (an i):


2 Responses to f8r: possible renumbering

  1. nickpelling says:

    Actually, if you contrast-enhance the f8r folio number, I think what emerges is something that looks a lot like a ‘7’, so it could very plausibly be nothing more complex than an accidental misnumbering by the foliator being quickly fixed up. I’d like to see a better scan to make sure, though… 🙂

    • Thomas Sauvaget says:

      I had thought about it, but really the seven on f7r (as seen here) is much more acute, while on f8r the erased bit is really straight. The difference between 7’s and 1’s is very clear on the famous f17r for instance (as seen here).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: