Regarding the deviant TTR values of Quire 13 (see previous post), people asked whether there is a difference between both types of Q13 pages. This question was first raised by VViews on the forum, and Nick raised it again in the comments.

While Rene’s graph suggested that Q13 was overall low compared to the rest of the VM, it still showed quite some fluctuation in the affected area. Therefore, I thought it would be the clearest if I visualized both Q13 subsections in line with the last post.

To avoid confusion, I’ll use “P” for those pages with central Pools, and M for those pages with nymphs in the margins.

P = 75, 78, 81, 86, 84
M= 76, 77, 79, 80, 82, 83

To measure each folio, I combined the r+v sides of the same number, since otherwise word counts per file are too low. By this method, my smallest file was 456 words, which I took as the largest window instead of 500 or 1000. For the mid-range window, I kept the crucial m50.

In the figure below, the green dots top right are Herbal sections A and B. Q13 Pool pages are yellow, Marginal nymph pages are blue.

Naamloos-4 kopiëren.gif

To my surprise, it looks like there is a cluster of blue dots in the higher region.

One blue dot is very low: f77. And one yellow dot is particularly high: f81.

m50 m456
VM_HA.txt 0.8525882069 0.5984450253
VM_HB.txt 0.8734397358 0.6181549737
VM_M.txt 0.8140009381 0.5161150641
VM_M_f76.txt 0.8251002227 0.5209510452
VM_M_f77.txt 0.7630220713 0.4671610431
VM_M_f79.txt 0.8445402299 0.5227413615
VM_M_f80.txt 0.8152368421 0.5060495559
VM_M_f82.txt 0.8104562738 0.5018696115
VM_M_f83.txt 0.812 0.5454719235
VM_P_all.txt 0.7815717256 0.4826530502
VM_P_f75.txt 0.7604671533 0.4498845082
VM_P_f78.txt 0.7877735849 0.4891818607
VM_P_f81.txt 0.8021634615 0.5204301075
VM_P_f84.txt 0.7731419458 0.4717792656

The next chart uses normalized data, comparing (top to bottom) Herbal B, Herbal A, Q13 marginal and Q13 pool. Here the difference is at least as clear, if not more so.


I don’t have more time today, but this looks like something that needs further investigation. Full data are available in my share file, which is also basically my work file, so you’ll have to deal with some mess.

Any illuminating opinions are highly appreciated 🙂


EDIT: I made a graph for m50 alone. This has turned out to be a critical value in previous tests, and might be more reliable here than m500 given the small text samples per page. It shows that m50 “predicts” image type in all cases but one:

Naamloos-2 kopiëren