Third, occasionally the Red-Ink Annotator sneaks his own nota below an existing flourished N, as in figure 15, to reinforce the emphasis by the Big Red N hand.
Finally, the Red-Ink Annotator also does the same kind of imitation for the other preexisting notae in the manuscript.
When the Red-Ink Annotator wants to reinforce an emphasis by the Ruby Paraph hand, he sneaks a "no" under the paraph in imitation of the Little Brown notae (fig.
To summarize, the Big Red N is different paleographically from the N of the Red-Ink Annotator's hand, in notae and elsewhere, in the former's more angled duct and its flourishes; the Ruby Paraph is completely different from the Red-Ink Annotator's paraphs.
Further evidence for the separation of these hands emerges from the passages marked by Ruby Paraph, Big Red N, and the Red-Ink Annotator.
The Ruby-Paraph annotator, however, reminds us that Margery's Book is also the personal testimony of a lay mystic, a point much more fully explored by the Red-Ink Annotator.
As Meech notes, there are no signs that the Red-Ink Annotator used any other manuscript, let alone the de Worde or the Pepwell editions of the short Margery, to check for the corrections or anything else.
Thus we have three distinct constructions of Margery among the annotators of her Book: the vita approach of Little Brown, who is probably scribe Salthows; the passio approach of Big Red N; and the contemplative approach of Ruby Paraph and the Red-Ink Annotator, along with Wynkyn de Worde.
This scribal mediation so close to Margery's life must be distinguished from the sixteenth-century work of Wynkyn, the Red-Ink Annotator, and the other two annotators wherever their dates may fall.
Meech and Allen, Book of Margery Kempe, xxxvii, admits to doubt that all the red-ink annotations are in the same hand.
Red-Ink Annotator's trefoils occur on 3r, 9r, 26r, 28v, 31r, 31v, 32r, 40r, 45r, 53v, 70r, 71r, 72r, 75v, 76r, 79r, 80v, 82v, 84r, 92v, 104v, 105v, 110v, and 120v.