iographer and the great archaeologist were made enemies for a long
time by means of our codex.
"From Kingsborough's work various specimens of the manuscript passed into
other books; thus we find some in Silvestre, Paleographie universelle,
Paris, 1839-'41, fol.; in Rosny, Les ecritures figuratives et
hieroglyphiques des peuples anciens et modernes, Paris, 1860, 4to; and
also in Madier de Montjou, Archives de la societe americaine de France,
2^de serie, tome I, table V.
"In 1834 Ebert died, and was followed as head librarian by K. C.
Falkenstein. He, unlike his predecessor, strove especially to make the
library as much as possible accessible to the public. Visits and
examinations of the library became much more frequent, and our
manuscript, being very liable to injury, on account of its material, had
to be withdrawn from the hands of visitors, if it was desired to make it
accessible to their sight. It was therefore laid between glass plates and
thus hung up freely, so that both sides were visible. In this position it
still hangs in the hall of the library, protected from rude hands, it is
true, but at the same time exposed to another enemy, daylight, against
which it has been protected only in recent time by green screens. Still
it does not seem to have suffered much from light during these four
decades; at least two former officers of the library, who were appointed
one in 1828 and the other in 1834, affirm that at that time the colors
were not notably fresher than now. This remark is important, because the
coloring in Humboldt, as well as in Lord Kingsborough, by its freshness
gives a wrong impression of the coloring of the original, which in fact
is but feeble; it may have resembled these copies some 300 years ago.
"In 1836, when the manuscript was being preserved in the manner
indicated, the two unequal parts, which were considered as a whole and
which no one seems to have thought susceptible of being deciphered, were
divided into two approximately equal parts from considerations of space
and for esthetic reasons.
"The first five leaves of Codex A, that is, pp. 1-5, with the backs
containing pp. 41-45, were cut off and prefixed to Codex B in such way as
to have p. 46 and p. 5 adjoining; when I examined the codex more closely
I found that between 5 and 46, and therefore also between 41 and 74,
there was no such pellicle as generally connects the other leaves. By
this change one part was made to contain 20 leave
|