John Collins wrote:When the MT was originally looked at by Irv Thomas, in 1991, a friend of Glenn Rouse, visiting Kassel on Glenn's behalf, among other destinations, he described the MT as being right at the back of a very large binder some 12 by 18 inches and some 5 inches thick.
...and so why the penciled in page numbers are so large, I suppose?
ETA: I see that Stewart addressed that. I can be a little slow at times.
Thanks, Stewart.
I don't believe in conspiracies!
I prefer working alone.
It explains why the page numbering systems were altered.
I'm not sure what possessed someone at the library to rub out the individual items numberings and replace them with new ones (the same number ?) at a different location on the page.
I was/am of the opinion that those original numbers in MT were done by Bessler (as per JC's 1991 material). Mainly by the use of the intermittent i (1) usage and style.
I remember checking for the same style in Bessler's hand written accompanying notes and thought they were consistent. Some have dots above the 1 and some don't.
So we are still left with i (1); z (2), vv (10, 55) and that Bessler was knowledgeable about scared geometry and the 3;4;5 triangle and the pentagon, not to mention the ordinary and funky bent arm 'A's, sometimes both on the one drawing.
