+- 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 - 21-10-2017
Yes carcere is ablative, yesterday I read a large article about Latin ablative (unfortunately, it's in Russian), and there are sixteen (!) kinds of ablative in Latin, some of them require prepositions, and some do not.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
If we consider removing someone from prison, then that would be the so-called "ablativus separationis" (the ablative of separation). It is used either without prepositions or with prepositions such as a, ab, de, e, ex.
The following examples are provided in the article:
Cave tibi =a cane muto= et =aqua silente (Beware (like "save yourself from") a quiet dog and still water)
Duces copias =castris= educunt. (Warlords are leading their troops out of the camp)
The latter example is somewhat like our prison use-case.
Inultos carcere portas? Carry the unavenged out of prison? Maybe. But is "carry" an appropriate word for that? And what shall we do with "te"? Force it to be "tunc"?
RE: 116v - Koen G - 21-10-2017
If the Latin is written by someone whose native language demands personal pronouns, they are more likely to insert a "te".
RE: 116v - Anton - 21-10-2017
Would they use it in wrong case?
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 21-10-2017
I have doubts that the n/m written at the end of the "anchiton" line was written by the same person who wrote the rest of the text. All the "m" shapes on the page are angular and some are backleaning (slightly).
But... if it is the same person (it might be, some people do tend to write bigger and bigger as they add more words), it's more likely "n" than "m". Note how the ens are more rounded throughout than the ems.
RE: 116v - Anton - 22-10-2017
I think of is as of "sign" rather than a literal letter. "Magnifico" in Cappelli looks somewhat similar.
RE: 116v - Anton - 22-10-2017
The bad thing is that carcer here is in singular, which does not align with multos if we would like to treat it as "gates of many prisons".
Well, the main issue with "carcere" is that there is a distinct, large space between "car" and "cere", which cannot be just neglected. Either, as JKP once suggested, the "car" is just a flawed inscription, having been abandoned, with "cere" providing a clean start, or we should treat "car" and "cere" separately, in which case I would inspect both "t" and "c" as options for the leading letters, and look for abbreviations, since "car" or "tar" is not a word at all, and "cere" as wax does not fit grammar. The important point here would be that "car" and "cere" are not separated by a cross, so they must be really closely tied, much like "anchiton" and "oladabas".
RE: 116v - voynichbombe - 22-10-2017
sorry to disrupt all that latin-ess, but if the intention here was to collect all possible readings, the "Pahlavi Hypothesis" part on the colophon, "explicit liber" on 116v should very well get included here.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
starting on page 16 of the PDF, alas too tired to elaborate, anyways according: the VMS could have been produced in Trabzon. a very interesting place.
(this paper should not be underestimated for a number of reasons)
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 22-10-2017
(22-10-2017, 02:14 AM)voynichbombe Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.sorry to disrupt all that latin-ess, but if the intention here was to collect all possible readings, the "Pahlavi Hypothesis" part on the colophon, "explicit liber" on 116v should very well get included here.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
...
The interpretation of 116v in this paper is one of the most bizarre things I've ever read. It calls to mind the common phrase, "What drugs was he on?" Even though I read it twice and read it very carefully, and am open to wildly different ideas if they are well-argued and well-supported, I can't see it as anything but... I'm searching for a word to describe it... it has a hallucinatory feel to it.
By the way, I'm not discounting the possibility of Pahlavi or Latin or Greek or Hindi, or any number of languages, but the arguments in support of any of these languages have to be convincing and internally consistent.
RE: 116v - Koen G - 22-10-2017
So far the only marginalia reading I'm over 50% satisfied with is "der mus del" as a specific legal term, as already suggested in the early days.
That said, I've found this thread encouraging for a Latin reading of the oladabas line, though we're not quite there yet, and I agree that at this point it would be wise to keep considering a number of different languages.
When I'm back home - in two weeks - I'm going to take a fresh look at this.
RE: 116v - MarcoP - 09-11-2017
Erwin Panofsky Wrote:The entry on the last page reads: "So nim geismi[l]ch o." This is again old German, the first word generally introducing a sentence following a conditional clause; the translation would be: "[If such and such a condition prevails], then take goat’s milk."
We know that Panofsky's opinion was based on Richard Salomon's analysis.
We have seen that both 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. appear in the XV Century notebook of Conrad Buitzruss ms You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. of the agricultural encyclopaedic textbook You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has a recipe for healing wounds that includes a similar sentence:
“so nimm honig geiss-milch und mehl zusammen”
then take honey, goat-milk and flour together