[LUTE] Re: Foliation in van Eyck's books - somewhat off topic

Am Sonntag, 22. April 2018 17:44 CEST, David van Ooijen schrieb: >What I understood from the discussion is that recto and verso can be >ambiguous, as in scripts that read right to left the order is reversed >and scrolls open up yet another can of worms.

[LUTE] Re: Foliation in van Eyck's books - somewhat off topic

What I understood from the discussion is that recto and verso can be ambiguous, as in scripts that read right to left the order is reversed and scrolls open up yet another can of worms. So some scholars opt for a and b instead. The use of a and b in Van Baak Grifiioen is clear when

[LUTE] Re: Foliation in van Eyck's books - somewhat off topic

Addendum: John Robinson (who didn't know this, either) thinks (as I did) "a" means recto and "b" means verso. Hence the folio numbers for pieces by van Eyck in the LS supplements are incorrect. Rainer On 22.04.2018 16:05, David van Ooijen wrote: I have both the Van Eyck facsimile (Saul

[LUTE] Re: Foliation in van Eyck's books - somewhat off topic

Apparently it's quite a discussion, mainly to do with mss that are written in scripts that don't read from left to right. I'm sure Arthur Ness has more to say on this. David On Sun, 22 Apr 2018 at 17:24, Rainer <[1]rads.bera_g...@t-online.de> wrote: On 22.04.2018 16:05,

[LUTE] Re: Foliation in van Eyck's books - somewhat off topic

On 22.04.2018 16:05, David van Ooijen wrote: I have both the Van Eyck facsimile (Saul Groen) and Van Baak Griffioen in front of me. Van Baak Griffioen does not use recto and verso, but a and b, a being the left side of the open pages, b the right side. But you figured that out

[LUTE] Re: Foliation in van Eyck's books - somewhat off topic

I have both the Van Eyck facsimile (Saul Groen) and Van Baak Griffioen in front of me. Van Baak Griffioen does not use recto and verso, but a and b, a being the left side of the open pages, b the right side. But you figured that out already. There are academic wars raging on the