+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Marginalia (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-45.html)
+--- Thread: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v (/thread-2163.html)
RE: 116v - bi3mw - 31-10-2017
@VViews: I assume you mean Anton's interpretation based on the word "Lab":
Quote:You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
....
It reads "lab", which is German (albeit Middle High) "Lab", namely abomasum, or rennet-bag. To see what it looks like, photos and sketches of abomasum are readily available in the Internet. ...
This is of course a way to interpret the object. I see the text as "Ioh" and assume a reference to a passage in the Bible:
Quote:Ioh.1:29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world !"
Based on the reading of the text ( see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ), a reference to the Bible seems plausible in terms of content. I would call this hint a "diversionary maneuver," like the reference to holy Mary. Of course, one could rather expect a hint to verse from the Old Testament ( e.g. 2. Mo 12: 3 ). In my opinion, this is not problematic for the interpretation of the object as an oven. As said, it's about Maria and not Mirjam
( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ).Currently I'm looking for more different names for the (ger.) "Gebildbrot" for Easter ( see first post ). The similarities to the last word in the 4th line are quite noticeable.
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - Anton - 31-10-2017
Yes, the advantage of this interpretation is that not only the stuff looks like those intestines, but also "lab" means abomasum in German. Abomasum is peculiar to ruminants, so not necessarily a goat: may be, say, a lamb.
BTW, it was exactly Damschen who once suggested the reading of "lab" (I quote him in my blog post referenced above), but somehow he did not pay much attention to that option.
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - Helmut Winkler - 31-10-2017
The word between the strange thing and the lamb really looks like lab to me and it seems to have been written by the person who uses the big loops and wrote (most) of 116v, compare the oladabas to the right. Rennet was taken from several animals, not only from lambs amd calves and used as medicine. And lab has something to do with liver and this sounds very tempting when you think of the pox leber in the first line (cp. Grimmsches Wörterbuch, s.v. lab, renne)
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - -JKP- - 31-10-2017
I can't tell what the last letter is, but the first one doesn't look like ell to me, it looks like a Voynich r with a tail. There does seem to a right-angle to the right before it goes over the top of the fold. The light streak in the skin has wiped out part of the tail and part of the third character (assuming the third one is a character and not part of a drawing).
Unfortunately, the fold does distort it quite a bit. The second character looks like a vowel (o or a) and the last one, I don't know... it's not quite a block-style B but I can't make out anything coherent.
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - bi3mw - 01-11-2017
(31-10-2017, 04:15 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Yes, the advantage of this interpretation is that not only the stuff looks like those intestines ...
I hope that my interpretation is not reduced to "the illustration looks like an oven". My approach is designed to put as many parts of the page as posibble in a meaningful context. Based on the reading of Damschen ( 2nd and 3rd line ) my assumption that it's about the liberation of the Israelites from slavery is perfectly acceptable. The Passover celebrates this liberation and the illustration of ovens is a common motif in the Haggadah. Mostly, the slaughter of a lamb is directly shown afterwards. So both illustrations have a relation to the text and also to each other ( in the sequence ). The intended ambiguity "Maria / Mirjam" and "Passover / Easter" at least opens the possibility for further investigation of the 4th line in the same context.
By the way, it was exactly Dr. Damschen who literally saw "the vessel" as a possible illustration above the lamb ( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ).
Quote:Dr. Damschen, Voynich Manuscript Mailing List, ( Mon, 5 Sep 2005 )
...
P.S.: Just a guess: If we assume the woman left to the lines on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is Virgin Mary, then the animal above her could be a lamb and the thing above it a vessel ?
....
Maybe he didn't follow this path any further because it leads to nowhere ?
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - MarcoP - 01-11-2017
Human anatomy is of course different, but I am not aware of XV Century schemes of goat or sheep anatomy. These two illustrations of human stomach are from
Johannes de Ketham You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Venice 1491
and
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (1450 ca)
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - Koen G - 01-11-2017
Note how in the rightmost image, the bone in the upper leg has a similar shape as well.
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - Diane - 02-11-2017
I do wish I could remember who it was - perhaps someone else will - but it was suggested some time ago that the figure was a form of dragon. I can certainly see it, and add the illustration here. But in the end, trying to read an image so indistinct, without any knowledge of where the thing came from, or what relationship was intended for the various elements on f.116v, I don't think it's possible to get beyond guesswork and speculation about it. But that's just my opinion.
The reading of 'goat's milk' btw is constantly asserted but remains speculation too. It was first mooted ... what, eighty years ago or 'so, and though this reading has been pushed, constantly, and revived again when superceded, it is still just one possibility of several, and I don't think it sure enough to influence our interpretation of anything else. Not yet, anyway.
It's such a pity we don't have a Voynich-pedia in which it is possible to cross-reference the various interpretations of this or that detail, and who said what. Perhaps after we've all passed on.
![[Image: lastpagetopleft-outline-dragon-maybe.jpg]](https://voynichimagery.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/lastpagetopleft-outline-dragon-maybe.jpg)
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - -JKP- - 02-11-2017
(02-11-2017, 08:46 AM)Diane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
The reading of 'goat's milk' btw is constantly asserted but remains speculation too. It was first mooted ... what, eighty years ago or 'so, and though this reading has been pushed, constantly, and revived again when superceded, it is still just one possibility of several, and I don't think it sure enough to influence our interpretation of anything else. Not yet, anyway.
...
As long as the word "pox" (which can be read as boch in medieval script, and means goat) and "mich" are on the page, the idea of goat's milk will (and probably should) remain.
It hasn't been superseded. To say it has been superseded implies that someone has demonstrably given a better reading. Since all readings are almost equally speculative, it all needs to stay on the table.
RE: [split] The Strange Thing on 116v - Anton - 02-11-2017
"Mich" is not "milch", but as suggested in the main 116v thread by those who are more proficient in linguistics than myself, that kind of omitting a letter is generally OK for the century in question. The problem with milk (as well as with liver) is that they сould be justified as components of a recipe, but where's that recipe?
One could argue the same in respect of the alleged rennet bag, but the rennet bag is not something derived from the text area of f116v. It resides in the clearly separated (!) "imagery area" in the corner of the folio lefwards to the parchment impairment, so apriori assumptions of that this imagery has something to do with the text area do seem to me unreliable.