🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Wed, Apr 22, 2020 07:31 PM UTC:
Looking at the first line of the original document, it is hard to read but looks more like Grande than it does like Grant. The link shows both text and a scan of the original document. You can tell from the text that the word Grant or Grande is supposed to be at the top right of the left column of the first page, and in that scan, I see what looks like a d, but not anything looking like a t. Just in case a t might look like a d in this script, I checked the words "huestes," "bestias," and "touiessen" further down the column, and the t's in those looked more like t's. Curiously, it does not look like the word "acedrex" appears with "grant" or "grande" in the first sentence. However, the two words do appear together in the fourth line up on the last page, and it does look like "grant acedrex" there. If we do go with that as the correct name, we should still mention the name it has been known by in Murray, Gollon, and Pritchard.
Looking at the first line of the original document, it is hard to read but looks more like Grande than it does like Grant. The link shows both text and a scan of the original document. You can tell from the text that the word Grant or Grande is supposed to be at the top right of the left column of the first page, and in that scan, I see what looks like a d, but not anything looking like a t. Just in case a t might look like a d in this script, I checked the words "huestes," "bestias," and "touiessen" further down the column, and the t's in those looked more like t's. Curiously, it does not look like the word "acedrex" appears with "grant" or "grande" in the first sentence. However, the two words do appear together in the fourth line up on the last page, and it does look like "grant acedrex" there. If we do go with that as the correct name, we should still mention the name it has been known by in Murray, Gollon, and Pritchard.