5 ms·

> Hodgkinson figured that the first symbol was a cross, followed by "Eadburg": almost certainly the name of the book's owner. > The subsequent letters were a b

> Hodgkinson figured that the first symbol was a cross, followed by "Eadburg": almost certainly the name of the book's owner. > The subsequent letters were a bit more enigmatic: could it mean "bears cwærtern" – the Old English word for "prison"? The Latin passage it accompanies describes the imprisonment of the Apostles, so Eadburg might have been drawing a parallel with her own situation. A completely different interpretation jumped to my mind which I feel is at least equally plausible: A young novice, stuck in her cell and told to read the bible, vents her frustration by scratching that the abbess Eadburg is keeping her in prison. And doodles in other margins, using just her nail or sharp splinter or something because that's what she had that she could use. Its defacement, vandalism, revolt. And perhaps it was never detected?

wrp 4y ago
Given the crude form of the letters, I like your interpretation better. Books were extremely expensive and cherished items. I expect an adult wanting to personalize a book would have taken greater care.
- ploum 4y ago
  Could we imagine that those notes were taken on a different material which was thin enough to let some trace on the book? I know they didn’t had paper but maybe they had some kind of tissue on which they could clean their stylus, doodling in the process and not realizing that the page was keeping a record of it.
uhtred 4y ago
Your interpretation is not very different to the journalists: > The subsequent letters were a bit more enigmatic: could it mean "bears cwærtern" – the Old English word for "prison"? The Latin passage it accompanies describes the imprisonment of the Apostles, so Eadburg might have been drawing a parallel with her own situation. I agree with the journalist though-- it seems more plausible to me that Eadburg was the doodler. It was very common when I was at school to scratch something like "SW was here" into a table. Eadburg was here in nun prison.
mc32 4y ago
I wonder, if there is no evidence of inks, dyes, etc. accompanying these marks in velum, could this have been a medium under the directly marked medium? So two "sheets" one on top of the other where this sample was on the bottom of and another that was being marked was on top and we're left with these enigmatic doodles and scratches?

wrp 4y ago

Given the crude form of the letters, I like your interpretation better. Books were extremely expensive and cherished items. I expect an adult wanting to personalize a book would have taken greater care.

ploum 4y ago
Could we imagine that those notes were taken on a different material which was thin enough to let some trace on the book? I know they didn’t had paper but maybe they had some kind of tissue on which they could clean their stylus, doodling in the process and not realizing that the page was keeping a record of it.

uhtred 4y ago

Your interpretation is not very different to the journalists: > The subsequent letters were a bit more enigmatic: could it mean "bears cwærtern" – the Old English word for "prison"? The Latin passage it accompanies describes the imprisonment of the Apostles, so Eadburg might have been drawing a parallel with her own situation. I agree with the journalist though-- it seems more plausible to me that Eadburg was the doodler. It was very common when I was at school to scratch something like "SW was here" into a table. Eadburg was here in nun prison.

mc32 4y ago

I wonder, if there is no evidence of inks, dyes, etc. accompanying these marks in velum, could this have been a medium under the directly marked medium? So two "sheets" one on top of the other where this sample was on the bottom of and another that was being marked was on top and we're left with these enigmatic doodles and scratches?