(08-08-2026, 06:25 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Who says charms have to mean anything? They’re often strings of invocations of saints or angels, references to remedies—because people thought that alone would help—and magical words that can no longer be reconstructed. Here’s below an example from an English book (B. L. Sloane 3160) that also contains some errors in the Latin words.
What’s particularly nice about this charm is: REX + AREX + RYMEX (this is essentially the same as “six marix morix vix” because the endings in “x”—see also “max pax brax”—are very typical of charms.) ... Then the typical magical words: six = six (also in German), marix morix vix (quickly).
Yes, yes, ... but again: the bloke saw a couple of smudges in the second line that looked like crosses, and since there is no letter in that script that looks like a cross, he concluded (like everybody has been doing for the last 100 years) that the line was a charm. And thus he "reconstructed" it as a charm.
Do you realize that you are admitting that it is a waste of time to try to get the meaning of the text, because it is just a bunch of "magical" words with no meaning? Which is a major consequence of the Big Wipe theory...
Quote:The charm 116v invokes “maria,” specifically the most significant relic in the 15th century at Aachen Cathedral in Germany, which—according to the beliefs of the time—promised powerful healing simply through touch.
There is no reason to think of Aachen specifically. "Maria" would be just as likely to be invoked in a charm from Galicia as in one from Edessa.
Quote:It is Mary’s undergarment the one she is said to have worn at the birth of Jesus = mchiton.
Except that the word is "anchiton", and anyway it cannot be "mchiton" because a charm is meant to be read aloud.
And "chiton" in Latin meant specifically a Greek-style tunic. Is there any text anywhere that says that Mary was wearing a chiton (or any specific clothing) under her garment when she birthed Jesus?
Quote:“Alada” refers to hellebore (a remedy); “bas” means “better” (there is an effective form of hellebore and a less effective one).
But the first letter is definitely "o", not "a", and, even if we concede that the last letter is "s", it would be a single word "oladabas".
Quote:“Multos” is used for emphasis, meaning “many.”
Emphasis of what? Many hellebores? And what is that "bowtie" under the "o"?
Quote:A candle or wax (cere) is to be carried.
The word "cere" does not mean "wax candle" in Latin. That would be "candela". Or "candela cerea", if one really wanted to be redundantly redundant.
According to the lalamo at hand, "cere" could legitimately be only the imperative of the verb "cerare" = "to wax", like "Miss Smith, please wax the floor right now!"
Quote:“N” stands for an invocation of Christ, or for the name of the person in question.
Yes, that is
probably what the bloke thought that the smudge in that corner was. Although it is not a capital N -- only a big lowercase "n".
Quote:“abia” can have many meanings—it could simply be a misspelled Latin word, as in the text from the English book, or “avia” (Christ’s grandmother, Anna), or the name “abia,” or something else.
Said more simply, "it has no meaning".
Quote:Maria is invoked again.
Why "again"? There is only one occurrence of "maria" on that page.
If that word was the name of Mary, one would expect the "m" to be capitalized. With lowercase "m", "maria" is a perfectly correct Latin word that means "seas", as in "per maria et terras". Why wouldn't that be the intended meaning of that "maria" on f116v?
Quote:“balsam” (palsen)
For that reading you must assume that the
big "8" is an "s", even though "s" is supposed to be written as a
small "8" only at the end of words.
Quote:possibly in the form of a paste (pbrey)
My faithful lalamo indeed confirmed that "pbrey" is a Medieval spelling of "brei" which means "paste", "porridge" etc.
... but, when asked about the source, it said that the
only Medieval document where that spelling occurs is ... drum roll ... the Voynich Manuscript.
So, no, sorry -- "pbrey" is not "in the form of a paste". Even because a balsam is a liquid...
Quote:and then it says, “so nim es af mich,” which means something like, “so take it from me” (the illness).
It says "so nim gas mich o" or "so nim gaf mich o". The parsing of the "g" as "es" would require introducing a
third variant of the letter "s", which AFAIK would have been very rare in manuscripts of the time.
Quote:these interpretations ... still illustrate the underlying principle.
The "underlying principle" is that, on f116v,
- there are a bunch of signs, most of which (but not all) can be identified as Latin letters in bad handwriting.
- more than half of the words formed by those letters are not valid words of Latin, German, or any known language.
- the few words that can be identified with valid Latin or German words do not make meaningful sentences.
All the best, --stolfi
