|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | The MS M.383 was almost certainly longer when it was first written; its text makes various references to sections on ax, dagger, and grappling which are not present in the book's current state (though they may never have been completed), and the section on a certain play of the sword in one hand which is likewise missing from that section (see 18v-c). Furthermore, the manuscript is composed of individual cut leaves rather than quires of bifolia, which means that there is no indicator of the original order of the surviving pages. The following speculative reconstruction is based on the manuscript contents and the organization of the other surviving copies; given that no fragment of the final three sections remains on which to base a reconstruction, none will be attempted. | + | The MS M.383 was almost certainly longer when it was first written; its text makes various references to sections on ax, dagger, and grappling which are not present in the book's current state (though they may never have been completed), as well as a certain play of the sword in one hand which is likewise missing from that section (see 18v-c). Furthermore, the manuscript is composed of individual cut leaves rather than quires of bifolia, which means that there is no indicator of the original order of the surviving pages. The following speculative reconstruction is based on the manuscript contents and the organization of the other surviving copies; given that no fragment of the final three sections remains on which to base a reconstruction, none will be attempted. |
| | | | |
| | {{image|MS M.383 1r.png|Folio 1r}} | | {{image|MS M.383 1r.png|Folio 1r}} |
Revision as of 23:10, 16 October 2020
The MS M.383 was almost certainly longer when it was first written; its text makes various references to sections on ax, dagger, and grappling which are not present in the book's current state (though they may never have been completed), as well as a certain play of the sword in one hand which is likewise missing from that section (see 18v-c). Furthermore, the manuscript is composed of individual cut leaves rather than quires of bifolia, which means that there is no indicator of the original order of the surviving pages. The following speculative reconstruction is based on the manuscript contents and the organization of the other surviving copies; given that no fragment of the final three sections remains on which to base a reconstruction, none will be attempted.
