Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Tratt‍ato della sch‍erma (MS M.383)/Reconstruction"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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.

Folio 1r
MS M.383 1r.png
Folio 1v
MS M.383 1v.png
Folio 2r
MS M.383 2r.png
Folio 2v
MS M.383 2v.png
Folio 3r
MS M.383 3r.png
Folio 3v
MS M.383 3v.png
Folio 4r
MS M.383 4r.png
Folio 4v
MS M.383 4v.png
Folio 5r
MS M.383 5r.png
Folio 5v
MS M.383 5v.png
Folio 6r
MS M.383 6r.png
Folio 6v
MS M.383 6v.png
Folio 7r
MS M.383 7r.png
Folio 7v
MS M.383 7v.png
Folio 8r
MS M.383 8r.png
Folio 8v
MS M.383 8v.png
Folio 9r
MS M.383 9r.png
Folio 9v
MS M.383 9v.png
Folio 10r
MS M.383 10r.png
Folio 10v
MS M.383 10v.png
Folio 11r
MS M.383 11r.png
Folio 11v
MS M.383 11v.png
Folio 12r
MS M.383 12r.png
Folio 12v
MS M.383 12v.png
Folio 13r
MS M.383 13r.png
Folio 13v
MS M.383 13v.png
Folio 14r
MS M.383 14r.png
Folio 14v
MS M.383 14v.png
Missing?
Pisani-Dossi MS 21a.jpg
Missing?
Pisani-Dossi MS 21b.jpg
Folio 16r
MS M.383 16r.png
Folio 16v
MS M.383 16v.png
Folio 15r
MS M.383 15r.png
Folio 15v
MS M.383 15v.png
Folio 18r
MS M.383 18r.png
Folio 18v
MS M.383 18v.png
Folio 17r
MS M.383 17r.png
Folio 17v
MS M.383 17v.png
Missing?
Pisani-Dossi MS 14a.jpg
Missing?
Pisani-Dossi MS 14b.jpg
Folio 19r
MS M.383 19r.png
Folio 19v
MS M.383 19v.png
Folio 20r
MS M.383 20r.png
Folio 20v
MS M.383 20v.png