+- 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 - Aga Tentakulus - 23-10-2019
Thank you Helmut Winkler
It gives me a better understanding of language development.
Since I know the origin of the VM from clues in the northeast Italian search, and that falls exactly into this language soup.
Here is another interesting dissertation.
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 23-10-2019
(23-10-2019, 07:14 AM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Maria would be the virgin Mary, especially if surrounded by crosses
I've been assuming, since I first looked at 116v, that there's a good chance it's a reference to virgin Mary, so as I've been collecting samples of handwriting, I have also been collecting samples of which regions wrote it "marie" and which ones wrote it "maria". Unforunately, there are no clear demarcations, there's lots of overlap, but there are a few regional tendencies and at some point it might be possible to map them.
RE: 116v - Anton - 23-10-2019
(23-10-2019, 06:00 AM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Some would argue that if you are going to cross yourself in the middle of a word, then Maria is the perfect word.
If there are examples, that would be convincing, but I have seen none so far.
RE: 116v - davidjackson - 23-10-2019
But Anton, the word assumed to be Maria hasn't got a cross in the middle of it. It has a cross above it.
![[Image: image.jpg?q=f116v-724-208-307-71]](https://voynich.ninja/extractor/image.jpg?q=f116v-724-208-307-71)
RE: 116v - -JKP- - 23-10-2019
The distance between ma and ri is quite far, which makes it look like they intended to leave space for a cross (and maybe didn't leave enough) but... the argument doesn't work because the distance between ri and a is also quite far and no cross was inserted there.
RE: 116v - davidjackson - 23-10-2019
Intonation of the syllables. You cross yourself once whilst intoning the syllables, which have some space between them to give emphasis for the writer.
RE: 116v - Anton - 23-10-2019
(23-10-2019, 05:46 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.But Anton, the word assumed to be Maria hasn't got a cross in the middle of it. It has a cross above it.
That's as if the guy forgot to place the cross in this place, and thus placed it afterwards. It does not look as if the cross refers to the word as a whole.
RE: 116v - Koen G - 23-10-2019
Maybe they just wanted "Maria" to be surrounded by three crosses? Either as a reference to the Holy Trinity (who all have a cross in their halo) or the crucifixion?
RE: 116v - arca_libraria - 24-10-2019
I have an example from my non-VMS research of crosses being drawn above the names. I agree with everyone in the thread who is saying that it's much more common to find crosses preceding the name, but I wanted to share that I have seen a few crosses over holy names. I don't think I have ever seen crosses separating the syllables of holy names, but I would not be at all surprised if someone was able to find an example of that somewhere.
The image that I'm sharing is from an English or Welsh manuscript written c. 1100-ish. The main text of the manuscript is John the Deacon's Life of Gregory the Great, but the final few leaves have some medical recipes. The picture is of a page with several medical prayers and medical recipes - the first is for women in childbirth and in the fourth line you can see the crosses above the text.
Please excuse the terrible quality of the picture - this was only meant to be a private research shot to allow me to triple-check the text. I haven't written the name of the manuscript in this post as I'm not quite sure whether sharing it on a forum is in accordance with the library's photography policy and I would prefer it if this didn't pop up in a casual google, but if you can read my note in the top corner you'll be able to see the shelfmark. The manuscript has not been digitised; there is a description online, but it's based on a description from the 1850s which incorrectly says that the manuscript is from the 10th century.
RE: 116v - Koen G - 24-10-2019
Impressive!
By the way, is this "tere"?