Category: Uncategorized

1. We follow the original spelling of the manuscript, including cases in which there are evident scribal errors such as repeated or missing letters or syllables.
2. In all other instances, we have carefully considered the features of this scribe’s specific habits, which include traits that can lead to some ambiguity in meaning.
3. We modernize the following scribal uses: we change long s to short s (for example, santo, fol. 1r); u to v when applicable  (for example, valore fol. 1r); and j to i at the beginning or end of a word (for example cittadinj, fol. 1v). Line breaks are indicated with one hard return.
4. We follow the manuscript’s capitalization even in cases of a proper name (eg philarco, deiphira).
5. We include original punctuation where relevant, but regularize one punctus followed by a lower case letter as a comma [,] one punctus followed by a capital letter as a full stop [.], and two vertical puncti followed by a lower-case letter as a semi-colon [;],  two vertical puncti followed by a capital letter as a full stop [.]. We chose to reproduce the manuscript’s line fillers, found at the end of a line of writing with a deleted vertical bar. We also reproduce the “virgula” (a vertical bar between words) with a forward slash [/]. We chose not to introduce any diacritics, such as modern accent marks, apostrophes or hyphens in cases of elision.
6. We reproduce word segmentation as found in the manuscript. We settled on this choice to avoid having to introduce punctuation and diacritics to signal linguistic phenomena marking words that are otherwise merged into scribal units in the manuscript; In some instances, we have included separation when it seemed possible, though it remained a matter of interpretation. 
7. Illegible text is also indicated by placing the unclear word(s) in square brackets with a question mark.
8. Interlinear additions are indicated by placing the added word(s) above the written line by using the html  tag.
9. Deleted words are marked with the <del></del> tag.
10. We indicate scribal corrections with the <ins></ins> tag. 
11. We transcribe the marginal rubrics following the guidelines stated above. Each marginal rubric is placed next to the lines in which it appears in the manuscript and is marked by the label [marginalia:].
12. We provide a brief description of the images appearing in the text. Each description is placed at the bottom of the page between brackets and is marked by [Image:]. We have expanded all abbreviations and marked them as such using italics (a macron, over an “i” for example, is rendered as “I<i>n</i>’). We based our choices on existing expanded forms found in the manuscript.
13. Please refer to the footnotes for issues not addressed in this statement.

1. We follow the original spelling of the manuscript, including cases in which there are evident scribal errors such as repeated or missing letters or syllables.
2. In all other instances, we have carefully considered the features of this scribe’s specific habits, which include traits that can lead to some ambiguity in meaning.
3. We modernize the following scribal uses: we change long s to short s (for example, santo, fol. 1r); u to v when applicable  (for example, valore fol. 1r); and j to i at the beginning or end of a word (for example cittadinj, fol. 1v). Line breaks are indicated with one hard return.
4. We follow the manuscript’s capitalization even in cases of a proper name (eg philarco, deiphira).
5. We include original punctuation where relevant, but regularize one punctus followed by a lower case letter as a comma [,] one punctus followed by a capital letter as a full stop [.], and two vertical puncti followed by a lower-case letter as a semi-colon [;],  two vertical puncti followed by a capital letter as a full stop [.]. We chose to reproduce the manuscript’s line fillers, found at the end of a line of writing with a deleted vertical bar. We also reproduce the “virgula” (a vertical bar between words) with a forward slash [/]. We chose not to introduce any diacritics, such as modern accent marks, apostrophes or hyphens in cases of elision.
6. We reproduce word segmentation as found in the manuscript. We settled on this choice to avoid having to introduce punctuation and diacritics to signal linguistic phenomena marking words that are otherwise merged into scribal units in the manuscript; In some instances, we have included separation when it seemed possible, though it remained a matter of interpretation. 
7. Illegible text is also indicated by placing the unclear word(s) in square brackets with a question mark.
8. Interlinear additions are indicated by placing the added word(s) above the written line by using the html  tag.
9. Deleted words are marked with the <del></del> tag.
10. We indicate scribal corrections with the <ins></ins> tag. 
11. We transcribe the marginal rubrics following the guidelines stated above. Each marginal rubric is placed next to the lines in which it appears in the manuscript and is marked by the label [marginalia:].
12. We provide a brief description of the images appearing in the text. Each description is placed at the bottom of the page between brackets and is marked by [Image:]. We have expanded all abbreviations and marked them as such using italics (a macron, over an “i” for example, is rendered as “I<i>n</i>’). We based our choices on existing expanded forms found in the manuscript.
13. Please refer to the footnotes for issues not addressed in this statement.

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!