+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Provenance & history (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-44.html)
+--- Thread: Illyrian Illyricum (/thread-2396.html)
Illyrian Illyricum - Davidsch - 11-06-2018
I read that in (one of the first /or the first / letter) Kircher wrote that the VMS resembled Illyrian language.
see. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I did not find examples of the exact characters he meant, but investigation of Kircher's suggestion looks interesting.
See also
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It seems that once there was a kingdom of Illyria (regnum nostrum Ilyriae) and the term was used by the Romans for pointing at "Serbs". Also it looks that Croatian is very close, or proto-serbo-Croatian. Source You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The Kingdom about 10 BC
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
From the Illyrian language there survive only three or four unambiguously identified lexical items and some personal names and place-names. There are no full sentences or even phrases available for analysis. Illyrian language, Indo-European language spoken in pre-Roman times along the eastern coast of the Adriatic Sea and in southeastern Italy. The language of the Illyrian fragments found in Italy is usually called Messapic, or Messapian. source :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messapian_language
It looks like (consists mostly of personal names)
klohi zis thotoria marta pido vastei basta veinan aran in daranthoa vasti staboos xohedonas daxtassi vaanetos inthi trigonoxo a staboos xohetthihi dazimaihi beiliihi inthi rexxorixoa kazareihi xohetthihi toeihithi dazohonnihi inthi vastima daxtas kratheheihi inthi ardannoa poxxonnihi a imarnaihi
and
klauhi Zis
Dekias Artahias
Thautouri andirahho
daus apistathi vinaihi
->
Hear Zeus,
Dekias Artahias
to the infernal Thaotor
set up (the rest untranslated)
languages: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
What is interesting is of course “daus”, but if I look at the structure of the transcribed text it is obviously following the standard Western language structure and it does not resemble the specific repetitive start and ending characters in the VMS. Also it seems to be written from right to left.
Some examples of the scripts can be found here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Examples of the language would have been extinct around the 1st cent. BC and merged into the Albanian language. See more on wiki.
Also, the many forgeries of the “found” inscriptions make it difficult to believe it has something to do with the VMS.
See also : You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Please note that many “Illyricum” examples of the script are just wrong or “self-invented” examples, aka forgeries or just bad research. Try google with ‘Illyricum alphabet’ and you see what I mean.
Perhaps Postel has some good examples, but I did not check.
For me the conclusion already is that Kircher really had no clue, because Illyricum is just a name used for languages they did not understand or could categorize properly.
RE: Illyrian Illyricum - Koen G - 11-06-2018
(11-06-2018, 10:34 AM)Davidsch Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Kircher wrote that the VMS resembled Illyrian language.
But how do we know this is about the VM in the first place? David argues that it isn't You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
RE: Illyrian Illyricum - ReneZ - 11-06-2018
What Kircher refers to is the Glagolitic script:
Quote:llyrico idiomate, charactere quem D. Hieronymi vulgo vocant
Ilyrian language, also known as "of Jerome".
See for example:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It is in response to a sheet that Moretus and/or Barschius sent to him in addition to the mysterious writing.
This book:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
has some handwritten entries (marginalia) too. See e.g. fol. 95v with some 'almost gallows'.
The introductory page (fol. IIr) again refers to "Caratteri Gerolimini"
RE: Illyrian Illyricum - ReneZ - 12-06-2018
(11-06-2018, 12:55 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.But how do we know this is about the VM in the first place?
This is how we know:
six weeks after Kircher wrote and sent this letter to Moretus, Barschius wrote to Kircher saying that he heard from Moretus that his earlier letter had arrived. He then goes on to describe the Voynich MS.
Only if one believes that the Voynich MS is a modern fake by Voynich...
All details, including image of the Kircher letter taken in 2016, new transcription and new translation, and the full context, are explained here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
RE: Illyrian Illyricum - Koen G - 12-06-2018
Rene, I was misled by Davidsch' opening post that Kircher thought the VM resembled Illyrian - which prompred my scepticism. Since JKP has been making clear that the VM consist largely of characters known in Latin script, it appears impossible to me that Kircher would have this confused with another script he was familiar with.
But I agree with your assessment that the resemblance to Illyrian was probably suggested to Kircher by Moretus, and the line must be seen as a reference to that.
One remaining issue is that we must assume Baresch sent a sample of VM script in book form. This seems excessive, but could be explained in a number of ways, a note in an existing book or some pages folded in half. Later in your analysis though, it looks like you equate this book to the actual VM Kircher would eventually receive?
RE: Illyrian Illyricum - ReneZ - 12-06-2018
Koen,
until 2017 or so, when the improved transcription and translation came out, the wording of the letter from Kircher was easy to misunderstand. Indeed, the 'comparison sheet' was an initiative of Barschius and/or Moretus, and Kircher quickly recognised its true nature.
Whether the extract of the Voynich MS was presented as a loose sheets or made into a booklet is not clear. The letter seems to suggest the latter. What is certain is that this consisted of copies made of the MS, not original pages.
As you may remember, Fabrizio Salani argues that the single sheet he has is one of the pages of this copy.
I've been looking at the question how Kircher would have been perceived from Bohemia, why he would have been contacted, and whose initiative this would have been.
It's quite an interesting question. In 1637, Kircher was not yet *that* famous. In fact, he was mostly known as the man who was "working on the translation of hieroglyphics", but he seems to have been a bit of a show-off without a lot of substance. He claimed to have a document that would provide the key, but refused to show it to anyone, and took forever to translate it.
His book 'Prodromus Coptus (etc.)' (mentioned by Barschius) would have been very expensive, and not many copies would have been in Prague yet, though the University should be expected to have one.
A little bit off-topic:
There is also somehow a mathematical connection. When Kircher went to Rome, in 1633, he was originally ordered by the General of the Society to go to Prague. (Kircher himself claimed that this was to replace Kepler as the court mathematician, which is not credible). Some influential people made the General change his mind. Grienberger, the mathematician at the Collegium Romanum went to Prague instead, and Kircher replaced Grienberger in Rome, officially as mathematician, but in practice to work on Hieroglyphics.
Moretus, the first to contact him, was of course also a mathematician (in Prague).
When Marci travelled to Rome two years later, his first stop was with the mathematician Paul Guldin in Graz.
This whole mathematical connection might be coincidental, however, or it may be a 'Galilei' connection instead.
RE: Illyrian Illyricum - Davidsch - 12-06-2018
@ReneZ. Thank you for you information! With respect to you and your research, I would like to understand and verify things.
You wrote on your pages (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)
"Kircher responds to a letter from Moretus and writes about unknown symbols from a book surrounded by mystery which Moretus had sent to him in his letter. This is the oldest extant reference to the Voynich MS that we presently know about. ...
Furthermore (but this may refer to another item or another page sent by Moretus at the same time - the Latin is somewhat ambiguous) he recognises a similarity with certain Illyrian characters in the style of Hieronymus, i.e. the Glagolitic script. ..."
This can go either way. The comment does not refer to the VMS, or the comment does indeed refer to it.
You write that the conclusion it does not refer to it, is clear from
a* the wrong translation. It should have been "the other folio". "Alterum denique folium"
b* later correspondence.
You wrote on letters:
"Then he discusses a second sheet, which has in the past led to some speculation, due to the absence of a reliable translation. Of this second sheet he immediately recognises the writing as being "Illyrian [...] commonly called St.Jerome's". This is a reference to the Glagolitic script You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Kircher refers to this second sheet as: "appeared to be written in the same unknown script", but since Kircher does not recognise the first writing,
while he does recognise the second, we may safely conclude on the one hand that the first writing is not in Glagolitic, and on the other that the suggestion that the two writings are similar must have been made by Moretus and/or Barschius."
I did not read that comment before. I was focused on the 'Illyrian' and perhaps blinded by finding it. But now, I need to have the facts straight.
a. Could it be possible Kircher received two folios of the VMS, or the full VMS and a separate folio of the VMS?
b. What later correspondence are you referring to.
The part "w[font=Verdana]hile he does recognise the second....etc." sounds [/font]if the [font=Verdana]Glagolitic script is referring to the "other folio" it does not refer to the VMS and I even got more confused than I was before.[/font]
[font=Verdana]Sorry to be a pain, but I mean no harm, I am just ignorant.[/font]
RE: Illyrian Illyricum - ReneZ - 12-06-2018
Hello David,
thanks for looking in such detail. I clearly caused the confusion because I did not update the 'solvers' page
with the correct reading of the Kircher letter.
I will do that this week still.
To understand the exchange between them, it seems best to first read the English translation of the Kircher
letter, and then the English translation of the Barschius letter. In the end, there is no further information.
Rene