Some preliminary theories about the book
Yes: it is the most rational reason for why the lectionary leaves are interspersed in this way
Yes: the 2nd sermon, which is designed for New Year's Day, is arranged alongside lectionary readings for [NAME LECTIONARY DAYS HERE]
[RELEVANT IMAGE HERE]
No: none of the other sermons are clearly relevant to the accompanying lectionary readings. The Gospels and Epistles are not mentioned in the sermon notes, and there is very little Greek referenced at all.
(is there any more here?)
2) that the lectionary readings are largely used as extra space for handwritten notes.
Yes: NUMBER of the NUMBER lectionary leaves include sermon notes. These notes are mostly directly related to the sermons, e.g. they are linked to the main texts with carot-type symbols.
[IMAGE HERE]
Yes: the notes written on the lectionary leaves do not appear to be relevant to the readings on that page.
No: we know that the manuscript leaves were bound after they were written, so it makes little sense that the un-annotated leaves were included, since they weren't used for the original composition of the sermons.
(anything else to go here?)
3) is there a third theory??
This page has paths:
- Introduction to MS Codex 216 Alison Harper
- Why are there print and manuscript leaves interleaved in MS Codex 216? Alison Harper