see above, an early manuscript containing fragments of Virgil's Aeneid, made in Rome in about 400 AD., one of the oldest surviving sources for the text of the Aeneid.
what do we have here?
1. the text: written by a single scribe in rustic capitals. there is no separation between words. (if they aren't there is because they didn't need them).
the scribe probably worked first leaving spaces for the illustrations, which were added by three different painters, all of whom used iconographic copybooks.
2. the illustrations are contained within frames and include landscapes and architectural and other details. see that the miniatures are set within the text column, although a few miniatures occupy a whole page. the human figures are painted in classical style with natural proportions and drawn with vivacity. we realize an illusion of depth quite well. the interior scenes are based on an earlier understanding of perspective, but occasional errors suggest that the artists did not fully understand the models used.
3. the punctuation: many people see these scrolls and go: what a monotonous way of writing!
2. the illustrations are contained within frames and include landscapes and architectural and other details. see that the miniatures are set within the text column, although a few miniatures occupy a whole page. the human figures are painted in classical style with natural proportions and drawn with vivacity. we realize an illusion of depth quite well. the interior scenes are based on an earlier understanding of perspective, but occasional errors suggest that the artists did not fully understand the models used.
3. the punctuation: many people see these scrolls and go: what a monotonous way of writing!
here I have two points to make: first, the role of the scribe is to simply record everything he or she heard, to create documentation. since speech is continuous there was no need to add spaces. the scribe is not making an aesthetic statement.
4. how about the reader? the reader of the text happened to be a trained performer, who would have already memorized the content and breaks of the script. now, during these reading performances, the scroll acted as a cue sheet and therefore did not require in-depth reading.
guess what, without punctuation, the reader had more freedom to interpret the text; they could insert pauses and dictate the tone, making the act of reading a significantly more subjective activity than it is today). so, with no punctuation the reading context is RICHER! you have more ambiguity.
they knew what they were doing!
No comments:
Post a Comment