+- 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: 116v (/thread-437.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
RE: 116v - Anton - 08-09-2016
On consideration, "tintter" as ink is also not perfect. Why would "ink" go with "einer"? No "einer" would have been needed.
I think I've exhausted all possibilities but "Twitter". A good contextual match, by the way.
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 08-09-2016
(01-09-2016, 01:16 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
PS: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is a lovely mix of Latin and German from the same manuscript:
"Item si vis venaturam facere so nim aines totten menschen haupt...."
Hahaha! I don't think I want to know why they want "aines totten menschen"!
This is what the first word, second line You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. looks like to me.
- The disconnected loop on the "a" is typical of how he writes. He rarely connects the bottom to the stem.
- I don't think that's a dot for the "i"—it's too big and doesn't look like the rest. I think it's a stain in the parchment. Unlike Voynichese, the marginalia "i" usually has an upright stem. The way it's joined and the angle suggests to me it's the last leg of an "n".
- There are many scribes who put a loop at the beginning of an "m" but it doesn't look to me like that is what is happening here. The "a" is smaller than normal but I still think an "a" was intended. The letter at the far right of that line doesn't match anything on the page. it's bigger, rounder and doesn't even look like the same hand. I've always wondered if it's a different hand. If so, it's difficult to know if it's "m" or "n" as there aren't enough examples so I'm hesitant to use it for deciding if the first letter is "a" or "m".
![[Image: Anchiton.jpg]](http://voynichportal.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Anchiton.jpg)
I'll concede that the first letter is ambiguous, that it could be taken as either "a" or "m" but... I don't think the "i" (or lack thereof) is ambiguous. I don't see any clear evidence that there's an "i" after the first letter, so my vote is for "a" followed by "n".
RE: 116v - Oocephalus - 08-09-2016
I think the dash over the preceding letter can indicate both r and n, and I have the impression that it's more straight for n, more bent for r. So I read this as:
???er den zant schwern schreib an daz wang mit ainer tintten (magic spell follows)
I interpret schwern as "You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view." (to suppurate), wang would mean cheek (in moden German this would take the article "die" instead of "das", but this may have been different back then in the dialect Buitzruss spoke) and tintten is ink, with the n being the dative ending, which is obsolete in modern standard German but was still used at that time.
So this would mean something like:
If you have a suppurating tooth, write onto the cheek with an ink...
RE: 116v - Koen G - 08-09-2016
About anchiton: Could the c be a t with a too short vertical line?
And the h a large R? That would give 'an tRiton'.
Oocephalus - that looks like a reasonable reading.
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 08-09-2016
(08-09-2016, 01:58 AM)Oocephalus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think the dash over the preceding letter can indicate both r and n, and I have the impression that it's more straight for n, more bent for r. So I read this as:
???er den zant schwern schreib an daz wang mit ainer tintten (magic spell follows)
I interpret schwern as "You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view." (to suppurate), wang would mean cheek (in moden German this would take the article "die" instead of "das", but this may have been different back then in the dialect Buitzruss spoke) and tintten is ink, with the n being the dative ending, which is obsolete in modern standard German but was still used at that time.
So this would mean something like:
If you have a suppurating tooth, write onto the cheek with an ink...
If schwern is schwären, it would fit well with zant being tooth.
...if the tooth is abscessed, write on a ______ with a _____ [spell, etc.]...
RE: 116v - ThomasCoon - 08-09-2016
-JKP- Wrote:Hahaha! I don't think I want to know why they want "aines totten menschen"!
And even worse, only the "haupt" of the toten menschen
I believe the first letters in the "an/michiton" were the same ligature used for "an" in other German manuscripts of this time. Helmut Winckler confirmed this. I'll try to find a picture from a German manuscript.
RE: 116v - Searcher - 08-09-2016
I have a question: In which cases the letter "l" with an additional leg can be used?
The point is that, if the word in the third line of the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is "alia", the next word is rather not "maria". Could the cross/plus-symbol mean a missed syllabe? For example: ma(+)ria = materia or magisteria.
RE: 116v - MarcoP - 08-09-2016
(07-09-2016, 09:06 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-09-2016, 08:25 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Another incantation from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
It is mostly German, so I can't read it. But the Latin is:
...German... rax pax fax ++++ in xpo [christo] + filio + da=
vid ...German . . . appolo[n]ia .....
..... ave ma[r]ia
The "rax pax fax" could parallel "six+marix+movix+vix" in line 3.
All right, I'll have a go at this. The native German speakers are welcome to correct/enlarge on my interpretation:
?? er den zant schwern schreis an daz warg mit ainer tiutter rex rax fax ++++ in xfar? (in Christ father?) + filia (the son) + david vid u?? schreis den namen appolaria (appolinaria?) von sterch? z von n-r? u-n? z ave maria
I think the standalone "z" might be und/and.
Thank you, JKP!
I definitely agree on "rex": excellent!!!
For the rest of the Latin, I would stick to my initial idea, for the moment. If you look at "appolonia", you can see the difference between "a"s and "o"s (of course, initial -upper case?- a is different from the normal "a").
See also "filio da=vid".
"a", "o", "e" are all rather similar in Buitzruss' handwriting, but after a while you can easily tell one from the others (in most cases).
RE: 116v - ReneZ - 08-09-2016
My guess (using good suggestions already made):
?fuer den zant schwern schreib an das wang mit einer tintten rex pax fax ++++ in chris?a + filia + david
unn schreib den namen [......] z ave maria
PS: my uneducated guess is that this is rather nieder-deutsch. zant (tooth), schwern (to be infected), wang (cheek)
are closer to Dutch than to German.
RE: 116v - Helmut Winkler - 08-09-2016
(07-09-2016, 07:06 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thank you Helmut!There is another letter between the r and the f, which looks very much like a single stroke, which would mean an i, putrifer is derived from puter, -is and ferre, a word every 15th Latin scholar could produce and pm is more common, but pmm is according to abbreviation rules, everyone produced his own abbreviations, which you can see in most 15th c. Mss., clm 671 is agood example
Is "putrifer" a documented Latin word? Or is it German?
I know of the close French "putrifier".
As Anton and JKP (see their letter-by-letter comments) I also have problems seeing the "i" in putrifer.
The sign between "t" and "f" seems to me very close to the "r" at the end of poxleber. So I can read putrfer, but not putrifer.