The Stuttgart Psalter is a copiously illustrated 9th century psalter, with detailed coloured illustrations or illuminated capitals on almost every one of its 300 or so pages. It was probably made in about 820 in the monastery of St Germain-des-Prés, in Paris, but is now kept in the State Library of Württemberg, in Stuttgart and can be inspected in detail at digital.wlb-stuttgart.de. Folio 43 verso contains this image:
It illustrates Psalm 34, including verse 16:
Dissipati sunt, nec compuncti; tentaverunt me, subsannaverunt me subsannatione; frenduerunt super me dentibus suis [the words above].
They were separated, and repented not, they tempted me, they mocked me with scorn, they gnashed upon me with their teeth (Douay-Rheims translation).
When it was submitted to Shroudstory on 20 October 2013, it was touted as an obvious reference to the Shroud of Turin, an opinion enthusiastically endorsed and denied in equal part. However, a few days later a much more esoteric discussion ensued, regarding the curious configuration of the mens’ fingers (of their unoccupied hands), which appeared to carry some kind of symbolism. The ensuing discussion has been heavily edited to make it grammatically more coherent, less repetitious, and generally easier to follow.
Max pointed out that both executioners hold their left hands quite awkwardly, their index fingers pointing to their own head (left) and Christ’s head (right) respectively.
Max: Both left hand signs cryptically echo the tailed-Epsilon-shaped blood rivulet we can observe on the Shroud man’s forehead, just above his left eyebrow.
[Stephen Jones noticed that the epsilon has to be reversed actually to match the curve of the knuckles, but was in no doubt that this was ‘smoking gun’ evidence that the artist was working from the Shroud.
Not to me, it wasn’t. The whole psalter can be viewed at digital.wlb-stuttgart.de, so I studied it.]
HF: It is clear that neither Jones nor Hamon are familiar with many others of the 150 or so illustrations in the Stuttgart psalter, the majority of which contain unnaturally curved fingers, and a hefty proportion of which are in exactly the same configuration as they are here. Several of these show people pointing to their own head, which I believe to be a convention representing thinking, and perhaps by corollary, guilt.
Max: I don’t know for Jones but as for me I am perfectly familiar with these miniatures. I was the first to draw your attention to them. So don’t you posture as a Stuttgart Psalter specialist, please. It seems you find it hard to understand that the hand gesture in this illustration is specifically in conjunction with the head of Christ. It also seems to escape you that in Carolingian times, all the monasteries and abbeys were under the Rule of St Benedictine and that Benedictine artwork is rooted in early cryptochristian tradition. What’s more several common themes are missing in the Psalter, such as the Lamentation and the Visitatio by the Holy Women.
HF: ‘Totally ignored”? Nonsense; I was the second person to comment on it in detail. “Stuttgart Psalter specialist”? Nonsense. I’m simply reporting my observation. “The hand-gesture is specifically in conjunction with the head Christ”? Nonsense. There is nothing exclusive about the hand gesture. “Several common themes are missing.” So what? “Benedictine artwork is rooted in early cryptochristian tradition.” Have you any evidence that this is true?
Max: “I’m simply reporting my observations.” In fact you are reporting some most subjective observations alleged to be plain facts. That is nonsense. May I remind you that I have been familiar with the Stuttgart Psalter since 1998, while you knew nothing of it until I drew your attention to it. That is a fact. . Have I any evidence that Benedictine artwork is rooted in early cryptochristian tradition? Well, what do you make of the fact that cryptochristians were living in clandestiny and had to hide from their persecutors (30-313AD)? Nothing!
And what do you make of Syriac and Byzantine secret liturgical rituals? Nothing! And, more recently, what do you make of the fact that during World War II, the Holy Shroud was hidden in a Benedictine Abbey? Nothing! Your denial of any secrecy in conjunction with (crypto)Christian sacred objects has no rhyme nor reasons, just blabla.
And Hugh, you also wrote, out of your shallow arch-scepticism, “So what?” in response to my mentioning that :“Several common themes are missing.” Had you been familiar with Medieval (Carolingian, Romanesque, Gothic) and/or Renaissance Benedictine steganographic art (an art of which you most obviously ignore the very existence), or remembered my previous comments, you would have known that one of the medieval Benedictine steganographic techniques consisted in scattering/fragmenting a secret/sacred informative image into clues to be reinserted in a series of illustrations within the same manuscript. Christ’s Flogging, Crucifixion, Anointing, Burial and the Visitatio of the Holy Women should be the first scenes we find. Apart from the flogging, it is significant that the rest are missing. This is steganographically significant.
HF: “One of the medieval Benedictine steganographic techniques consisted in scattering/fragmenting a secret/sacred informative image into spy clues to be reinserted in a series of illustrations within the same manuscript.” That’s very interesting, Max. How do you know?
Max: My own 25 years’ experience of Medieval and Renaissance Benedictine artworks and the Benedictine art of hiding most sacred/secret information in plain sight.
And when you wrote earlier that I seemed unfamiliar with the other illustrations in the Psalter, well, have you done your stats homework and counted how many the occurrences there are in the whole Psalter of the very specific gesture of a hand forming a tailed epsilon and pointing to a head? How many are there? I’d very much like to know. Please, don’t overrate yourself, at my expense, as an an iconographic cryptanalyst, because you most obviously are not.
HF: No, Max, I haven’t tabulated the whole psalter, but then, neither have you. The first 20 pages at digital.wlb-stuttgart.de contain 17 illustrations with depictions of 73 people and 6 ‘hands of God.’ The illustrations also show 79 hands, of which 59 have five fingers and are more or less accurately depicted (with one or two very snaky fingers), while 20 have four fingers, the outside two being much longer than the inside two. Of these three or four are pointing, two of them at their own heads. As I suggested before, these people appear to be guilty of something.
I don’t think I need to go on. Although I have not tabulated the entire manuscript of 130 pages or so, I have looked through it carefully, and doubt that the relative proportions of people or hands changes much. The hand gestures of the people holding whips clearly has nothing whatever to do with the epsilon stain, and, if it is a convention, has more to do with the depiction of guilt than any other hidden meaning. I’ve no doubt readers will understand that I have demonstrated that by actually looking at the whole context of an illustration anybody can become an ‘iconographic cryptanalyst’ without much fear of contradiction.
Ooops…
Max: By means of a self-delusive most arrogant comment, British Earth Science Secondary High school teacher Hugh Farey claims he can turn into a professional cryptologist/ Medieval image cryptanalyst overnight. His stance speaks volumes! Here is my reply to this layman thinking himself a medieval image expert:
Hugh, your self-delusiveness and sheer arrogance as far as Benedictine artists’ image (crypt)analysis is concerned, has you going so far as to claim “readers will understand that I have demonstrated that by actually looking at the whole context of an illustration anybody can become an ‘iconographic cryptanalyst’ without much fear of contradiction.” Only the gullible can take your claim at face value. Only a most arrogant Medieval image non-(crypt)analyst cannot fear contradiction. Actually, your PSEUDO-statistical approach and PSEUDO-objective demonstration are TOTALLY INVALID.
a) Your alleged cryptanalysis bears only on “The first 20 pages of the Psalter. How do you know these are representative of the whole?
b) Your ‘random sample’ of 79 hands totally fails objectively to discriminate between left and right hands, back views and front views, vertical, horizontal and oblique inclinations and whether they point to Christ or not. Your alleged ‘stats’ are totally MEANINGLESS and your alleged ‘demonstration’ is NO DEMONSTRATION AT ALL except in your arch-sceptic’s dream.
c) You also claimed that “the hand gestures of the people holding whips clearly has nothing whatever to do with the epsilon stain, and, if it is a convention, has more to do with the depiction of guilt than any other hidden meaning.” Actually, your PSEUDO-interpretation is TOTALLY INVALID too. It totally overlooks the five main contextual layers involved here. 1) the intrinsic immediate context (i.e. the miniature itself); 2) the extended intrinsic immediate context (the Stuttgart Psalter itself); 3) the extrinsic immediate context (Carolingian miniature iconography); 4) the extrinsic typological context (Scourging of Christ iconography); 5) the extrinsic extended/overall context (Medieval iconography).
Your utter ignorance of Benedictine, Carolingian and Medieval iconography means you have missed a crucial piece of evidence: this specific hand gesture is exceptional in the whole Medieval manuscript corpus, appearing only in the Stuttgart Psalter.
You also overlook the fact that the hand gesture can be seen as a slightly cryptic variant of an apotropaic hand gesture known as the ‘sign of horns’ formed by extending the index and little fingers while holding the middle and ring fingers down. Done with the right hand, it can be read as Victory over Evil or Death, or Good Luck; and done with the left hand, it can read as Mockery or the Defeat of Good by Evil or Bad Luck. In the Stuttgart Psalter it can also be read as a Recognition or Identification Sign according to the specific context.
Your failure to discriminate between right and left hand gestures shows that you have totally missed the real meaning. If you have in fact succeeded in demonstrating anything, it is how shallow, arrogant and unscholarly your arch-scepticism is.
David: Max, please, is there one person among your cryptoarcheology peers who can corroborate your assertions? You simply can’t keep proving your work by quoting yourself. Even if you are some kind of pioneer in this field, and thus have no peers, you must then accept the skepticism that all pioneers face from others – and accept it with a smile, instead of tirades. Knowing in your heart that you are right should be consolation enough, no?
Max: David, I do understand your layman’s view. I am not just quoting myself. I am referring to facts and true scholarship. If you don’t believe me, why don’t you ask a cryptologist familiar with medieval iconography and/or Benedictine steganography? Facts, or what are most likely to be facts, are my sole peers.
Remember, the executioner’s left hand elongated finger gesture, pointing to the head of a Shroud-like stark naked back view of Christ is not ‘co-incidental’ at all: it is unique in the whole Medieval miniature corpus. It is an iconosteganographic crux. In other words, the Stuttgart Psalter miniature is crucial/’smoking gun’ iconographic evidence proving the Shroud now kept in Turin was already in existence as early as 9th c. CE..
Charles Freeman: Max, you are totally incomprehensible. Even if you are the world’s number one cryptopalaeobore or whatever, no one is going to recognise the fact so why don’t you do a course in the writing of plain English? What possible use is all this to anyone in the way you present it here?
Max: Charles, what don’t you do a course in steganography (the perception of what is hidden in plain sight) yourself? That should spare me a thousand words. In fact, among dozens of telling examples that can be taken from the Stuttgart Psalter, the Betrayal of Judas (fol. [19]-8r) is one that speaks more than a thousand words:
[Psalm 7:17: “Convertetur dolor ejus in caput ejus, et in verticem ipsius iniquitas ejus descendet.” (His mischief shall return upon his own head, and his violent dealing shall come down upon his own pate. – KJV)]
Most curiously Judas doesn’t betray Jesus with a kiss alone also with the left hand gesture forming a 3 with a tail pointing to Jesus’s forehead, just above his eyebrow. There are many more such intriguing clues in the whole Psalter, but they need an astute observer to find and decode them.
I can already hear Hugh Farey’s comment that it is just co-incidental.
HF: So. No evidence at all suggesting I might be wrong. I guess I must be right!
Max: Hugh, please, keep your bad faith and cheap arch-scepticism for the gullible. I shall continue to try to make the intellectually blind see that the scourger’s hand gesture pointing to Jesus’s forehead is both exceptional throughout Medieval manuscripts and also deliberately repeated throughout this particular one. It is no use being in denial of the whole series of pieces of evidence; methinks you have eyes, but intellectually you just cannot see.
In the Betrayal of Judas, the latter’s left hand gesture can read both as a sign of recognition/identifiction (at face value) and a cryptic evocation of Jesus’ most specific bloodmark on his forehead (at steganographic level).
HF: Or it can be read as a sign of guilt or betrayal, or both, which indeed it clearly is. The psalter is full of “ordinary” hands showing recognition/identification, so this isn’t that, and it is also full of similar hands indicating guilt/betrayal which have no connection with the epsilon bloodmark, so it isn’t that. Sorry, Max, no cigar this time.
Max: Seriously, do your homework: in the Garden of Gethsemane Judas identifies Jesus for the soldiers. And in several scenes Jesus points to himself with a similar gesture, as a sign of Victory over Death. The gesture has nothing to do with guilt.
HF: I disagree with your Garden of Gethsemane interpretation. Judas identifies Jesus by hugging and kissing him. The hand is not pointing to Jesus but himself, a sign of guilt and betrayal. When pointed at somebody else, it can be used to suggest either that they have been betrayed, or that they have betrayed someone themselves. That particular finger configuration is also occasionally used simply when drawing somebody holding something, when it might not have any particular significance at all. If you’d like to mention the plates which show Jesus pointing to himself, I’ll do my best to explain them for you.
Max: Hugh, you disagree with me just out of your mere shallow arrogant unscholarly arch-scepticism verging to absurdity and blind ignorance since methinks you are not even able to correctly discriminate between, on one hand, a teaching hand, a blessing hand and a hand of Justice and on the other hand a Victory over Evil/Apotropaic hand, a God Election hand, and inversely a Victory over Good/ Perversion hand as a mockery sign, or a Recognition/Identification hand. My Goodness, how can somebody totally ignorant of medieval hand gesture symbolism try to explain to me anything about it? This speaks volumes about your cheap arrogant unscholarly arch-scepticism! You even go as far as writing against the iconographic fact/common sense: “The hand (Judas’) is not pointing to Jesus but himself (Judas)”. You mean pointing to himself via Jesus so? Oh really? The true visual fact is Judas draws the soldiers’ attention with his right hand index finger (just in case you haven’t noticed it yet!) while pointing at Jesus with his left hand index finger. In other words, Judas is saying, via his kiss and hand signs: “this is the man to arrest.” Judas’ right hand gesture looks natural while the left one looks totally unnatural. Whether you like it or not, Judas’ left hand gesture points to Jesus forehead, just above the eyebrow. At symbolic level, it is both an Identification hand and a Victory over Good hand (implying perversion, not guilt at all). Re your alleged ‘guilt sign’, this is just a figment of your own unscholarly imagination in terms of Medieval symbolism. It never ever existed as such. First get coached in medieval iconography and symbolism before passing comments lest you keep writing more and more nonsense on this thread.
Both in the Stuttgart Psalter and on the Shroud inner and outer sides, an Epsilon/numeral 3 with a tail can be observed. Hugh will tell you this is coincidental. Both in the Scourging scene and on the Shroud dorsal image Christ has no halo. Hugh will tell you this is co-incidental. In the Scourging scene the executioners have doubled-pelleted whip lashes. Hugh will tell you there is only one pellet to each lash. I would advise him to go to Stuttgart and see for himself. Get a x25 magnifying glass or see an eye-doctor.
[I stand by my claim…]
Max: Both in the Scourging scene and on the Shroud dorsal image Christ has a pig-tail, although in the Psalter it is half undone. You can see a broad dark area narrowing into a single strand. Co-incidence? Really?
[No, not really…]
Max: In parallel with the Flogging of Christ (fol. [90]-43v) we can also find the Second Beating of Christ (fol. [149]-73r) just after Pilate has turned Jesus over to his soldiers to be beaten.
[Psalm 61: 5-6: “Verumtamen pretium meum cogitaverunt repellere; cucurri in siti: ore suo benedicebant, et corde suo maledicebant. Verumtamen Deo subjecta esto, anima mea, quoniam ab ipso patientia mea.” (They only consult to cast him down from his excellency: they delight in lies: they bless with their mouth, but they curse inwardly. My soul, wait thou only upon God; for my expectation is from him. – KJV)]
One of them is about to beat Jesus with a long reed and points diagonally at Jesus’s forehead with his left (Perversion) hand symbolising Victory over Good while another soldier points to his own head with a similar gesture. He seems to invite the soldier with the reed to hit Jesus on the nose instead.
HF: No. The two people who are actually hitting Christ are making the gesture. One points to himself, as a guilty man, and the other to Christ, the figure being betrayed. It’s perfectly clear, and occurs in other places in the psalter.
Max; I have repeatedly asked for references from you that would help me understand that your interpretation has some kind of scholarly validity, and is not simply as subjective as mine. You have repeatedly ignored these requests, and instead called me “posturing,” “a shallow arch-skeptic,” “self-deluded,” “arrogant,” “ignorant,” “pseudo-statistical,” “pseudo-objective,” “of bad faith,” and “unscholarly.” I am fortunate that other people read these comments, and, it appears, do not find me as described. Everything I have observed can be observed by anybody. If my conclusions are unjustified, then anybody can explain why, using appropriate references. Nobody has, least of all you. Simply saying I’m wrong isn’t really good enough, you have to explain how, and unless you are playing some kind of game with us, it increasingly looks as if you have nothing whatever to substantiate your dogmatism.
For instance, you speak, apparently with some knowledge, of a “Victory over Evil/Apotropaic hand”, a “God Election hand”, a “Victory over Good/ Perversion hand,” and a “Recognition/Identification hand.” Are any of these recognised shapes in medieval iconography? If so, where can I find them discussed and illustrated? Are any of them typically shown as four-fingered hands, the outer two extended and the inner two flexed? If so, where can I find other examples? Please, Max, don’t just reply saying how stupid I am, show me how to become better informed. Thank you so much.
Max: Hugh, how could you believe me? You are intellectually blind and totally ignorant as far as the Medieval Benedictine Art of Steganography is concerned. As long as the Art is totally unfamiliar to you, it just doesn’t exist in your eyes. How scientific, how scholarly this approach of yours is indeed!
Matthias: Ok, I might be risking a hurricane but…
Max you have some interesting and useful perspectives at times, but your mannerisms leave a lot to be desired, and frankly this so called epsilon connection thing is bonkers. It’s stuff like this that really gives shroudies a bad name. This is coming from me, someone who thinks on balance the shroud is probably authentic, and someone who thinks the Pray Manuscript is probably influenced by the shroud. So clearly I don’t have a closed mind to either authenticity nor historic art connections with the shroud predating the 1200s. You have brought our attention to an interesting historic fragment, but nothing more. Please can we move on now.
Max: Matthias, intellectually speaking, you just think you don’t have a close mind. But what do you know about the Medieval Benedictine Art of Steganography a.k.a. the Medieval Art of hiding sacred/secret information in full sight? NOTHING! Except what I have just written in this very blog. Can you refer me to any another Medieval MS showing a similar hand gesture pointing its index finger to Christ? You just cannot. That’s precisely what makes the Psalter-Shroud connnection unique here.
You wrote: “frankly this so called epsilon connection thing is bonkers.” Objectively speaking, what are your scholarly intellectual tools to claim any such thing? And notice that the gesture is not only a ‘tailed epsilon’ but also a ‘tailed 3’. Both the Psalter and the Shroud (both sides) have both of these symbols. It is CRYSTAL CLEAR that you too JUST CANNOT discriminate between ordinary natural hand gestures, symbolic hand gestures and cryptoallegorical non-natural hand gestures, and your opinion is just that of a non-enlightened amateur. The true fact is that neither you nor Hugh are familiar with the subtleties of Medieval cryptic miniatures, paintings, graffitis and scupltures, so you think the Psalter-Shroud connection is bonkers out of your blatant ignorance of iconographic analysis, Medieval Art History and Medieval Benedictine Steganography.
Well, good for you if you enjoy your shallow most unscholarly opinion and think it is smart to move on and totally overlook this extrinsinc proof that the Shroud now kept in Turin was in existence more than half a millennium before the radiocarbon date.
Matthias: Wow, that was some hurricane.
Max: Hugh, by way of a comment on the Second Beating of Christ in the Stuttgart Psalter (fol. [149]- 73r) you wrote:
“The two people who are actually hitting Christ are making the gesture. ONE POINTS TO HIMSELF AS A GUILTY MAN and the other to CHRIST THE FIGURE BEING BETRAYED.” (uppercase mine)
Since you think that anybody can become an ‘iconographic cryptanalyst’ without much fear of contradiction”, are you man enough to ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
Please could you refer me to any book/paper on Medieval hand gestures allegedly symbolizing ‘guilt’? How do we get to the specific hand gesture found only in the Stuttgart Psalter? Could you trace the evolution for me of this specific hand gesture or sign? What is its prototype if the hand gesture in the Psalter is not a variant of the apotropaic ‘sign of horns’?
The people in the Stuttgart Psalter (fol. [149]- 73r) scene are actually unarmed soldiers or, to be precise, an early 9th century monk’s rendition of the Roman soldiers mocking Jesus as King of the Jews after Pilate had turned over him to them So could you please explain how the theme of betrayal and guilt is relevant in a scene where Judas isn’t even present? Besides can you account for the depiction of a stark naked Christ figure with no halo at all surrounding his head (fol. [90]-43v)? And can you provide me with another example of a similar Christ figure seen in back view? And finally can you also provide me with other examples of the same hand gestures pointing at heads? WAITING FOR YOUR REPLIES
For Medieval Christian iconography and symbolism textbooks for first-year students, just check the Archaeology-Art History department library of any good university. As a starter (or homework), you can read the nearly 1000 page ‘bible’ of Christian symbolism: Bestiary of Christ by French Christain symbolist, Louis Charbonneau-Lassay, ed Archè-Milano, 1940… For hand gestures symbolism, just look up pp. 109-123.
HF: Hi Max! No, I can’t do any of these things. Can you?
Can you refer me to any book/paper on Medieval hand gestures allegedly symbolizing anything at all? No chance, I guess.
Still, I must thank you for your finally mentioning an authority other than your own. You will be pleased that I have ordered a copy of “A Bestiary of Christ” and very much look forward to pages 109 – 123. I have even looked at the ‘glimpse’ view on Google Books. Remarkably, there is no reference to a “Hand of Victory”, nor “Victory over Evil”, nor “Victory over Good.” But then I expect you know that.
There is, however, a reference to a “Hand of Justice,” so I looked that up on Wikipedia. The Hand of Justice shown is a model of one used at Napoleon’s coronation and looks nothing like the gesture we have been discussing. However, it led me to investigate the “Sacramentaire de Charles le Chauve” which you may not be familiar with, as it also contains instances of the gesture you claim appears in the Stuttgart Psalter only.
Max: Hugh, although earlier you claimed that “anybody can become an ‘iconographic cryptanalyst’ without much fear of contradiction”, now you actually have to admit your impotency to become one as “[you] can’t do any of these things”! All your claims are unsubstantiated, in other words just wind and blabla.
You cannot justify any hand gesture symbolizing ‘guilt’ or ‘betrayal’ within any typology of Medieval hand gestutres. Your claim has no iconographic ground at all. It is nothing but a figment of your layman’s imagination. Unless you can provide us with a proof to the contrary, which you can’t, such a specific hand gesture never ever appears in conjunction with the Betrayal of Christ scene anywhere in Medieval iconography. This is an iconographic fact.. It is clear you haven’t done much research work and are totally ignorant of medieval iconography.
The true fact is that the specific hand gesture can be read as a cryptic variant of the apotropaic sign of the ‘horned hand’. Such a sign does exist and your ignorance of this very fact is just flabbergasting! Actually it dates back to Antiquity. In the context of pointing to Christ’s head it is a visual pun on the epsilon-shaped blood mark.
Depending on whether done with the right or left hand, it symbolises good and justice, or, pervertedly, evil and bad judgement. The right handed gesture can be seen in Le Livre des Merveilles by Marco Polo (Ms. Fr. 2810, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, miniature of King Chesumur Rendering Good Justice, Folio 19v), and the left hand gesture in the Stuttgart Psalter. Just ask any Medieval Art Historian worth his salt, they can all confirm my reading.
Hugh, you wrote: “The Hand of Justice shown is a model of one used at Napoleon’s coronation and looks nothing like the gesture we have been discussing. However, it led me to investigate the “Sacramentaire de Charles le Chauve” which you may not be familiar with, as it also contains instances of the gesture you claim appears in the Stuttgart psalter only.”
The true fact is that the Royal Hand of Justice must not be mistaken for either God’s Left Hand of Justice, or his Right Hand of Mercy. Because you are totally ignorant of medieval hand gesture typology, actually you cannot discriminate between the three.
Regarding the sacramentary of Charles the Bald, the latter contains only one instance (and not instances as you misleadingly implied) of the symbolic hand gesture of Royal Power bestowed upon an earthly king. It has nothing to do with ‘guilt’ or ‘betrayal’. The index finger is not pointing to anybody’s head, just to a cloud, and the epsilon/figure 3 is not vertical. You are just a layman totally lost in medieval hand gesture typology mixing oranges with stones while imagining you can turn into a medieval image analyst/cryptanalyst overnight or in 15 minutes.
You also wrote: “You will be pleased that I have ordered a copy of “A Bestiary of Christ” and very much look forward to pages 109 – 123. I have even looked at the ‘glimpse’ view on Google Books. Remarkably, there is no reference to a “Hand of Victory”, nor “Victory over Evil”, nor “Victory over Good.” A Bestiary of Christ is a book for beginners and first-year students in Archaeology/Art History (in France). A third-year student is expected to be able to correct, revise and complete the typologies by himself. You are worlds and lightyears away from becoming a medieval analyst or cryptanalyst . You still have more and more homework to do my green man till you can correctly read a medieval miniature.