- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Morten St George Theory
- Morten St George Theory
-
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 23-08-2019, 02:30 AM
(23-08-2019, 12:45 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Keep looking, Morten. They are out there.
Well, JP, they are definitely not in the Lexicon Abbreviaturarum, a book of more than six hundred pages packed full of medieval Latin abbreviations, nor can I detect a "m9" combined as superscript in any of the nine depictions that you showed us.
As I have explained in prior posts, there was motive for manipulating the quire number linked to folio 72, a number which represents the number of divine names on the Sigillum Dei needed to decode the VMS. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 23-08-2019, 02:51 AM
(22-08-2019, 07:26 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(22-08-2019, 02:17 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What makes you so sure that a large number of pages were not removed from the manuscript, with the order of the remaining pages rearranged, prior to the application of both page numbers and quire numbers?
Morten, that IS what I'm saying.
I'm saying that we don't know what happened to the manuscript in between the time they stopped working on it and when it was bound. Any number of things might have happened, including sections being missing or folios being rearranged.
Binding was usually done sometime later, by different people. Whoever added the quire and folio numbers might not have known ANYTHING about who created the manuscript or what it contained. Frequently a bookbinder's assistant added the numbers.
Sometimes a particular person was assigned to add the numbers. A large number of Vatican manuscripts are foliated in the same handwriting but the manuscripts are all from different regions and centuries, which means they sat a very long time before those numbers were added (often a couple of centuries).
It was NORMAL and TYPICAL in medieval times for manuscripts to be bound by people other than those who created it or originally owned it, sometimes decades or centuries later. It's also very common to find unfinished manuscripts.
Plus, there was a lot of famine and plague in those days. Many manuscripts have no provenance because their owners died unexpectedly. We know nothing about the history of a great number of manuscripts other than what we can discern by touching, smelling, feeling, tasting, scientific testing, and reading.
JP, I feel that this is not the time and place to renew our debate on the origins of the VMS. Right now, I would like to dedicate all my time and efforts to the decoding which, if successful, will provide us with many of the answers we seek. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 23-08-2019, 05:39 AM
I'm not trying to renew any debate about the origins of the VMS.
I'm trying to explain why your idea that someone was trying to encode a mystery into one letter of one of the quire numbers is very unlikely. The people who added the quire numbers may not have had any knowledge whatsoever about the origins or contents of the VMS and there's nothing unusual about superscripting one or more letters of quire numbers. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 23-08-2019, 05:47 AM
(23-08-2019, 02:30 AM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(23-08-2019, 12:45 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Keep looking, Morten. They are out there.
Well, JP, they are definitely not in the Lexicon Abbreviaturarum, a book of more than six hundred pages packed full of medieval Latin abbreviations, nor can I detect a "m9" combined as superscript in any of the nine depictions that you showed us.
MORTEN, the one on the bottom right is a COMBINED SUPERSCRIPT. It is the superscript t plus superscript 9. Another scribe would combine m9 the same way this scribe combined t9. It just depends which language they are thinking in when they write it, Latin or their own language. Ordinals are slightly different in different languages. Just as we use 4th and 1st in English, they use different ordinal suffixes in French, German, Italian, Czech or Latin.
Instead of insisting it's some kind of coded message, why don't you just ask yourself, which language uses this style of ordinal? You would get a better answer. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 24-08-2019, 02:32 AM
(23-08-2019, 05:47 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
MORTEN, the one on the bottom right is a COMBINED SUPERSCRIPT. It is the superscript t plus superscript 9. Another scribe would combine m9 the same way this scribe combined t9. It just depends which language they are thinking in when they write it, Latin or their own language. Ordinals are slightly different in different languages. Just as we use 4th and 1st in English, they use different ordinal suffixes in French, German, Italian, Czech or Latin.
Pray tell, JP, in which language do you think the VMS quire numbers were written if not in Latin?
Though it was possible in Latin to combine a "9" with other letters in superscript, ie. "t9" for "tus", apparently the "9" was never combined with an "m". It's easy to see why: the "m", like the "9", was itself a very common superscript (an abbreviation of "um" found at the end of many words) and it would surely be confusing to put them together and especially so for a word like "undecimus" which does not include an "um".
To my thinking, s<sup>m9 would make sense as an abbreviation of "sumus" but for that I see they opted for a subscript "x" on the last leg of the "m".
Conclusion: Since, as yet, no one can demonstrate a historical precedent for 11<sup>m9, it becomes necessary to acknowledge the possibility of manipulation for cryptic objectives.
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif](23-08-2019, 05:47 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
[/font]
Instead of insisting it's some kind of coded message, why don't you just ask yourself, which language uses this style of ordinal? You would get a better answer.
Are you now insinuating that the use of 11<sup>th for eleventh was commonly seen in 16th-century English? I didn't know that.
Redaction by an Englishman aside, your theory still requires us to assume a careless mistake, namely, a writing of the "9" so messy that it could remind someone of the tail "n" to the left of "mich" on the last line of the VMS.
Overall, I think your theory is far-fetched: redaction by an Englishman who was familiar with the Latin "9" abbreviation yet ignorant of the Latin "m" abbreviation is simply not credible. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 24-08-2019, 02:55 AM
What theory?
I'm giving you facts about medieval binding and medieval palaeography so you can evaluate YOUR theory.
I'm not into theories.
Just this morning I glanced at a manuscript and in less than 20 seconds, I saw a superscripted m9 ordinal number and yet you're trying to tell me they don't exist other than in the VMS.
Quote:Morton:
[/font]
[font=Tahoma,Verdana,Arial,sans-serif]Pray tell, JP, in which language do you think the VMS quire numbers were written if not in Latin? ...
Redaction by an Englishman aside, your theory still requires us to assume a careless mistake, namely, a writing of the "9" so messy that it could remind someone of the tail "n" to the left of "mich" on the last line of the VMS.
Good grief!! What on earth makes you think everyone in the Middle Ages wrote in Latin? There are many manuscripts and ordinal numbers that are not in Latin. Thousands!!
The Roman Empire was long gone. Latin was used to intercommunicate, not to communicate. Within a bookbinding shop, many would have used their native tongue, not everything would have been in Latin.
The m9 ordinal is not Latin or English... I never said it was. I was hoping you would use your noggin to think about what language WOULD use the m9 ordinal (it's not a difficult question). That would be better than building a conspiracy theory into the fact that there is an "m" in an ordinal number, which is NORMAL regardless of whether it is common. I know because I see it in manuscripts. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 24-08-2019, 06:40 PM
(24-08-2019, 02:55 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Good grief!!
JP, Know that the VMS along with the marginalia within it were a product of the European underworld that recorded knowledge or expounded beliefs that were forbidden by the dominating religion of the epoch. For self-protection, texts of the underworld would typically employ encryption, deception, trickery, anything to ensure that they said nothing truthful that could be easily understood.
You recently revealed yourself as gullible to their trickery when you stated that the "mich" on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. means "me". Sure, "mich" is the German word for "me", but you ignore the fact that "me" is utterly meaningless in the given context. And you brush aside my finding that a sequence of Roman numerals on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. add up to the number of a certain prophecy and that words found in that marginalia are likewise found in said prophecy. It was a prophecy attributed to someone called (mich)el so surely that has to be the answer.
Did my theory that quire 20 contains prophecies and not cooking instructions upset you? Doubtless, you were looking forward to retrieving those secret recipes and trying them out, but that is unlikely to happen. On the other hand, fortunately, there may be a few people here and there who are interested in ancient prophecies.
Nearly all medieval manuscripts were written to be comprehensible and you might want to concentrate on them for applying your talents. The surviving texts of the underworld, mainly the VMS, parts of the Summa Sacrae Magicae and a few texts written in Hebrew, were clearly intended for people with an open mind. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
davidjackson > 24-08-2019, 07:39 PM
(offtopic)
Our first one thousand post thread!!!!
I am impressed by the tenacity shown
-
RE: Morten St George Theory
Koen G > 24-08-2019, 07:47 PM
Wow 100 pages MSGT. Here's to 100 more!
-
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 24-08-2019, 09:54 PM
(24-08-2019, 06:40 PM)Morten St. George Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(24-08-2019, 02:55 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Good grief!!
...
Did my theory that quire 20 contains prophecies and not cooking instructions upset you? Doubtless, you were looking forward to retrieving those secret recipes and trying them out, but that is unlikely to happen. On the other hand, fortunately, there may be a few people here and there who are interested in ancient prophecies.
No, why should it upset me? I've never assumed it was cooking instructions. I've never made any assumptions about it. If there's meaning in it, I can think of about 20 different things it might be.
Quote:Nearly all medieval manuscripts were written to be comprehensible and you might want to concentrate on them for applying your talents. The surviving texts of the underworld, mainly the VMS, parts of the Summa Sacrae Magicae and a few texts written in Hebrew, were clearly intended for people with an open mind.
All your theories are based on a towering heap of assumptions. That is not the definition of an open mind. That is tunnel-vision.