3 ms·

Here[1][2] is the scan of manuscript from 1429, image #251 [1] https://lib-fond.ru/lib-rgb/304-i/f-304i-308/#image-251 https://lib-fond.ru/lib-rgb/304-i/f-304i

• klyrs 4y ago
  It's curious that the red ink blobs behind the "eyes" aren't included in the unicode glyph either...
• aasasd 4y ago
  So the text at that point literally talks about ‘many-eyes seraphims’. The eyes symbol is a pure gag—seems to be spliced in place of the letter ‘о’ in the word ‘eye’ just a little down the line. (However, Old Slavonic is a tough read due to no spaces, so I'm not sure about that word. But at least it's not the Glagolitic script, which was just ridiculous and actually had multi-circle letters.)
  • chickenimprint 4y ago
    As far as I can tell it swallows up the preceding го. It seems to be preceded by other jocular glyphs among scribes. A regular o received a central dot when writing the word "eye": ꙩ Words containing "two" or "both" had an o replaced by two conjoined os: ꚙ It is only natural to carry on the in-joke for the dual and plural "eyes" like this: ꙭ Our scribe simply got a little excited, following the pattern to it's logical end point in the term "many-eyed"
• nashashmi 4y ago
  Looks more like a diagram in the middle of text. It's very unique. It should not be a character
  • squeaky-clean 4y ago
    It's used in place of the letter "o", so not purely a diagram but it feels like the role of a font to me, not a dedicated character.