Anton > 15-07-2017, 03:13 PM
Quote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. from the University of Karlova, recorded an incident of bad behaviour by Albertus Wroblicius Silesius, in June 1606.
Quote:Albertus M. Wroblicius (probably born approx. 1580 to 1590 and probably still alive at least until 1642)
Quote:Ab Anno 1611 ad Mensem Martium, diem 16 indictione septima. Anno 1624 hunc librum talem qualem vides inveni M. Albertus Wroblicius... Baccal parochus Maioris Bitessi.
Quote:In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Albertus Vroblicius/Wroblicius is listed on page 374 [as a graduate?].
-JKP- > 15-07-2017, 07:46 PM
(15-07-2017, 03:13 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thanks JKP, excellent findings! How do you manage to find all this stuff?!
Quote:I have seen the Runeberg reference to the Martin Wroblicius's exlibris before. But the Christie's East 1981 catalog is something new. It must refer to another book, because in the Runeberg reference it is said that the exlibris is attached (opklæbet - which I guess is rather "glued" than "clipped"?) to the inner side of the binding (Paa Bindets Inderside), while the Christie's East reference says that the exlibris is in folio 2. Interesting that both are dated to 1626.
Quote:About Michael and Laurentius Wroblicius I wrote above in this thread. They are surely brothers, since both of them were born in the same place. Notably, they are both listed as members of SJ...
Quote:I would note that the incident of bad behaviour refers not to Wroblicius, but to student number 9, Matthaeus (Mathaeus) Dlugos, also from Silesia.
Quote:But what gets more interesting is that we also find Martinus Wroblicius Mstoviensis Polonus under number 120! The town of Mstów is also situated in Silesia. So this guy is Silesian as well.
Quote:I wonder why you call him "Albertus M. Wroblicius", and not simply "Albertus Wroblicius" - any reference for that? Where is the following assumption from:
Albertus M. Wroblicius (probably born approx. 1580 to 1590 and probably still alive at least until 1642)
Quote:Quote:Ab Anno 1611 ad Mensem Martium, diem 16 indictione septima. Anno 1624 hunc librum talem qualem vides inveni M. Albertus Wroblicius... Baccal parochus Maioris Bitessi.
This phrase I fail to understand. "Ab Anno 1611 ad Mensem Martium, diem 16 indictione septima" means "in the year 1611, in the month of March, on 16th day of the seventh indiction". However (as I calculated), 1611 belongs to the ninth indiction, not to the seventh one. Next, if the guy found the book in 1624, then it is not clear what is the 1611 dating about. Furthemore, it is not clear whether it was Albertus Wroblicius who found the book, or Albertus Wroblicius was the previous owner of the book found by the author of the inscription. Last, I completely fail to understand "Baccal parochus Maioris Bitessi". What is "baccal" and what is "Maioris Bitessi" (suppose it's in genitive?).
Quote:Quote:In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Albertus Vroblicius/Wroblicius is listed on page 374 [as a graduate?].
"Matrikel" means the list of enrolled, not of graduated.
Quote:The current bottomline is that we still are not sure whether Wroblicius died before the death of Sinapius (Sep. 1622) or later? That is important to narrow down the range of circumstances under which Sinapius could acquire the book number 4.
Koen G > 15-07-2017, 07:54 PM
-JKP- > 15-07-2017, 08:20 PM
(15-07-2017, 07:54 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Just dropping in to say that "klaebe" is certainly glued. It's cognate with for example Dutch "kleven", to glue.
The specific nature of the "klaebe" root is that it always involves a sticky substance
See the second meaning of cleave here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Also, I can't be of much help with the subject of this thread, but I'm reading it with great interest!
Anton > 15-07-2017, 09:32 PM
Quote:I explored the idea that those connections MIGHT go back prior to Jakobi á Tepenecz, that he might not have gotten the book from Rudolph II
Quote:Also, I can't be of much help with the subject of this thread, but I'm reading it with great interest!
Quote:I'm still on the fence about it, but kind of prefer "attached" as it reflects the ambiguity.
-JKP- > 15-07-2017, 09:38 PM
-JKP- > 15-07-2017, 09:53 PM
ReneZ > 16-07-2017, 03:32 AM
(15-07-2017, 01:13 AM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hmm... I am puzzled now. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. state (referring to Prinke) that "In a manuscript owned by ... Pontanus, ... the signature of de Tepenecz appears in the same place as in the Voynich Manuscript and 'has the same form' ".
Does Prinke mean book number 40? If so, then this contradicts the image on your page where the signature does not appear in the same place, neither does it have the same form. Or does Prinke mean any other Pontanus's book which features de Tepenecz's signature? Or do Kennedy and Churchill just make a mess of Prinke's statements?
Anton > 16-07-2017, 04:09 PM