(23-05-2021, 01:05 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view."vmen" can, as I have already written, also mean ( from one ).
Such would be the meaning:
"pox leber" from what ? "v'men (from one) xxxxxx".
Here the breed of the animal would be an answer. If it plays an important role.

Based on this idea, I think that f116v's first line says Liver from a male logging horse (in the original, "Poxleber v'men Rukpfer"). "Rukpfer" would be Rückepferd abbreviated and phonetically written.

It makes sense, taking into account the goat reference on the last line (so take goat milk) and considering that both goats and logging horses were fairly common work animals in rural Medieval Europe.

However, I don't know if "Rukpfer" would be a valid word in Middle Upper German (the most likely dialect area for the German parts of the MS to have been codified in). Besides, I admit that the symbols I identified as r and k more closely resemble p and t, but "Putpfer" doesn't appear to be a real word for an animal (which it should be given the context).

As for the drawings, I think it's also a goat rather than an unicorn and the weird illustration at the top shows part of the goat's digestive tract (possibly of a goat with a displaced abomasum, just like in the annexed picture).

I don't know if I'm just repeating stuff already gone over or not. Apologies if so.

I found the below as part of my adventure into charms today.. 

Info taken from this paper - You'll be able to find online.
"WRITING ON THE HAND IN INK: A LATE MEDIEVAL INNOVATION IN FEVER CHARMS IN ENGLAND Lea T. Olsan"

“Peter before the gates” Latin "Petrus stabat ante portas" ("Ante portas") was (seemingly) common in 14-16c charms to ward off a fever. This was also wrote "Petrus ante portam".

15c Example
Apprehende manum dextram egroti et in palma eius scribe ter [cruces omitted?] et in vnaquaque vice dicas, Christus vincit + Christus regnat + Christus imperat +. Et postmodum in eadem palma, scribe + on pater + on filius + on ihs. Et mox aqua dilue scripta et bibat egrotus. In alia die scribe + on + aries + on + ovis + on + agnus. Et similiter bibat. In 3d [tertio] die + on leo + on vitulus + on vermis +. Et iterum bibat procul dubio. In tercio /die sanabitur. In nomine patris, etc. Ante portas Ierusalem Petrus iacebat et superveniens Dominus dixit ei, Cur hic iaces Petre? Respondit ei Petrus, Iaceo de febre mala. Dixit ei Iesus, Surge, dimitte illam et dimissa febre mala. Ait illi Petrus, Obsecro, Domine, quicumque hoc secum scripta portaverit, non possint ei nocere febres calide nec frigide. Et ait Jesus Petro, Fiat tibi sicut petisti. Iesu Nazarene Rex Iudeorum, libera famulum tuum N[omen] a febribus et omnibus malis amen. Et dicatur ter pater noster in honore trinitatis.

Another example
The first six seem to be in the same hand: "(1) Petrus stabat ante portas (2) Crux sacra + Crux splendida + Crux salua . . . (3) In monte cebon requiescunt vii dormientes (4) + Hel + Heloy +ya (5) in dextera palmi . . . fac 3es cruces (6) In nomine . . . Christus vincit + christus regnat. (7) In nomine . . . on . + on . + on . invokes holy names. (8) In nomine . . . christus vincit + christus regnat + christus imperat conjures the fevers by types. (9) Cape et diuide in tres et scribe"

On the same folio is another charm involving eating 3 wafers with words written on them, by the same scribe, who uses stacked dots in his "code".
"Sometimes this scribe uses codes to hide words"

"the word “oblates” for wafers in the instructions is coded into stacked dots leaving only “bl” legible."
Item scribe in iij. [4 stacked dots]bl [1 dot ] t[3dots] xps vincit sabaoth In altera xpc regnat agios. In 3cia . xpc imperat saday

The issue is that "London, British Library, Royal MS 12 B XXV" is not digitised..

I have attached images for the below, which are the only images I could find. I'd be interested in how these "stacked dots" look in particular. 
"opening line to a recipe for fireworks, from Royal MS 12 B XXV, f. 245r"
"Protective charms in Latin invoking St Agatha and St Columcille against fire, from Royal MS 12 B XXV, f. 283v"

I suppose that the crosses in those charms mark the points along the recitation when the person should make the sign of the cross, right?

(25-08-2025, 09:35 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I suppose that the crosses in those charms mark the points along the recitation when the person should make the sign of the cross, right?

From what I know, if the charm is meant to be spoken then yes and these were referred to as "crucis" "cruces" etc
If it is written, on parchment in an amulet or eaten on a wafer etc, it was more of invoking the powers of the ones/things named in the charm.
"The devotional invocation of the cross, “Behold the cross of the Lord, be gone, evil powers” (Ecce crucem domini, fugite partes aduerse)

(25-08-2025, 10:08 PM)Bluetoes101 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(25-08-2025, 09:35 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I suppose that the crosses in those charms mark the points along the recitation when the person should make the sign of the cross, right?

From what I know, if the charm is meant to be spoken then yes and these were referred to as "crucis" "cruces" etc
If it is written, on parchment in an amulet or eaten on a wafer etc, it was more of invoking the powers of the ones/things named in the charm.
"The devotional invocation of the cross, “Behold the cross of the Lord, be gone, evil powers” (Ecce crucem domini, fugite partes aduerse)

That's also what I gather. Maybe more often the second case, even. The written charm is often an example of what the user needs to copy onto something. What sign more powerful than the cross?

Hi, I read the blog post about the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Koen today, including the comments. I am asking myself if there was progress in the meantime?

This was Koen's final version:



I want to suggest this variation:

poxleber pinen p?tpfer
+ anchiton oladabad + maltos + te + cere + povtas + n +
six + marix + morix + vix + abia + maria +
palden pbren so nim gasmich

maltos ≈ malt
cere ≈ wax
povtas ≈ potash

As others have pointed out at least some words root (presumably) in medieval German:

poxleber ≈ Bocksleber (male goat’s liver)
so nim ≈ so nimm (so take)
gasmich ≈ Geißmilch (goat's milk)

So what do we have? A list of ingredients, a reference to a blessing (Maria) and instructions for use. This is quite something, I think. I hope others can fill the empty spaces.

In researching the video I'm working on right now, I've changed my mind on a number of aspects I wrote about before, but I'm still okay with the reading of the letters. (With much room for improvement). But especially the larger structure has become much clearer to me.

One thing I think we must keep in mind is that, despite our slowly growing understanding, we will always have to deal with the fact that this writing is possibly incomplete and the spelling deviant. For example:

• There is a relatively large gap between the first line and the rest. Is it separate, just weirdly spaced, or is something omitted?
  
• Some parts are almost certainly "magic charm nonsense", particularly the third line. But maybe also other parts? Magic words can take many forms and are extremely common.
  
• We have not yet found anything at all like "gasmich". If this is a dialectical form, there is no evidence for it, and I honestly doubt that anyone has ever called goat's milk "gasmich". However, "so nim" strongly suggests that an ingredient follows.
  

In short, we must take into account that we may never fully understand all the details, since it appears messy, fragmentary and/or truncated.


Regarding your suggestions: 
* the marginalia writer makes a nice curve on the left stroke of "a", which I don't see in the word that looks like "multos" or whatever. 
* I think the "r" in "portas" can only be read as "r" - this is quite consistent, although one could argue about morix/movix.

A recent development is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. pointed out by Michael/Magnesium. It uses 8 for 's', and (in my opinion) makes 8 as 'd' very unlikely (though not much can be entirely excluded, as always).

Hi! This is my first post. I am new to the Voynich world (if not to the manuscript itself). Last month I wrote a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. on 116v and thought I'd share it here. I am a linguist and wrote this with a linguist audience in mind so I apologize if it's too technical. I fully anticipate that people will disagree with me as this seems pretty different from some of the current theories on 116v I've since read, but I'd be happy just to have others engage with the ideas :)

(26-08-2025, 06:03 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There is a relatively large gap between the first line and the rest. Is it separate, just weirdly spaced, or is something omitted?

Strictly speaking, the first line is in the margin and the other lines are not.

The drawings are also in the margin. 

I'm no trying to pretend that I know what that means...