"kutz" is "Kitz" (a young goat). This nicely links with "pox" in the beginning of the line.

"kotz" is also valid: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

"schlimmer Husten, zunächst bei Haustieren, bes. aber beim Schweine (beim Pferde Bitb), dann auch derb beim Menschen"

or

"überflüssiges, lästiges Gerede"

Very interestingly ( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ) :

Kotz II - verdrehte Form für "Gottes", "Gotts"

And this links nicely with pox, also!

***

But then the problem is with "fer".

(01-09-2016, 01:39 PM)Davidsch Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@marco, yes i saw that we are missing a leg for the m in vinom.

We can discuss every letter in my line "vox leben vinom purifier” 
that is fine but i am afraid i am not capable of coming up with paleographical arguments for every letter, the same with my "mud miel".
...

I've proposed many different readings of the last page because I like to keep alternatives (even weak ones) on the table until a problem is solved, but here is what the last word on the top line looks like to me...


I don't see an "r" in the middle of the word. The writer writes "r" in a very specific and recognizable way in Gothic cursive, with the stem almost completely disconnected from the following upswing-dot (it's a less common way to write it, but it is not unusual—I have many examples from 15th c manuscripts). There might be an "r" after "lebe" (last letter is too smudged to be sure) and it's probably an "r" at the end of putpfer, but not in the middle.


First letter:

Not clear. If that is a descender rather than an illusion in the parchment, it might be a "p" but the writer doesn't usually make the leading stem on the "p" that long, so it's also possible that it's a "v" or "u", both of which were usually written like "v" in the 15th century when at the beginning of the word. The reason I'm not certain if it's a "v" (assuming no descender) is because this writer usually makes the base of it flatter and the end stroke more curled.


Second letter:

Not clear. It doesn't resemble any of his usual letters. It's not a normal vowel shape. The letter is slanted backwards so that the pen hits the page in the same way as Voynichese letters (which gives it a different thick/thin balance than the other letters on that line). Look at the "aror" bottom left and you'll see the same kind of stroke—the downstroke is a little thicker. I think it's probably a vowel but it isn't shaped the way he usually writes "u" or "o" and the stroke order and connection (or lack thereof) is wrong for "a".


Third letter:

It looks like "t", drawn the same way as the other "t" letters with a curved base and the crossbar only just barely poking out on the left. The top of the downstroke is slightly above the level of the other letters, which matches well with the other "t" letters on the page.


Fourth letter:

Once again, as with the first letter, the descender is not for certain—it's very faint. If this is a "p", which appears possible, it differs from the others in having a larger and more disconnected loop. If that's not a descender, then it does resemble the other "r" letters somewhat except that the curve of the end-dot is unusually long and back-curved. If there's no descender, that back-curve makes it look like a "v/u", similar to the one at with the long beginning stroke at the front of "um?n". I lean toward it being a "p" but I am not certain. Linguistically, a "p" before "f" is found in Middle German (I've located examples) as in modern German "pferd" (horse).


Fifth letter:

Not clear because there is a light spot on the vellum above the crossbar that makes it look disconnected, but the only letter that it looks like, if it is intended to be connected, is "f". If the shape above it is a dark spot or a worm-trail rather than a hook, it still doesn't look like "r" or "t" because the stem and crossbar are too straight to resemble the other "r" and "t" letters.


Sixth letter:

Looks like a fairly clear "e" and while the writer tends to vary the curve of the loop on "e" every time he writes it, they are reasonably readable (except the mystery letter in "vald?n/vals?n" which might be an "e" but looks almost more like a "c" with a tail or someone else's style of "e"). The "e" in the top right word is similar to the second "e" on leben/leber and the "e" in ubren.


Last letter:

Gothic cursive "r". I don't know what else it could be other than maybe a small "i" followed by a mysterious big round brown dot—but that seems unlikely. I think it's probably an "r" with a truncated stem.



What does it say? I don't know. Since three letters are unclear and it would probably take a microscope to verify whether the first and fourth letters have descenders, it's really hard to tell. If it's two words, then based on the way the writer might be dropping sounds (e.g., mich/milch), then I suppose "pfer[d]" is a possibility.


But... whether it's one word or two, I'm not sure. This writer usually puts wide spaces between words, so it's probably one word, which makes "pfer[d]" less likely.

Quote:I don't see an "r" in the middle of the word. The writer writes "r" in a very specific and recognizable way in Gothic cursive, with the stem almost completely disconnected from the following upswing-dot (it's a less common way to write it, but it is not unusual—I have many examples from 15th c manuscripts). There might be an "r" after "lebe" (last letter is too smudged to be sure) and it's probably an "r" at the end of putpfer, but not in the middle.

Agree.

Quote:Not clear. If that is a descender rather than an illusion in the parchment, it might be a "p" but the writer doesn't usually make the leading stem on the "p" that long, so it's also possible that it's a "v" or "u", both of which were usually written like "v" in the 15th century when at the beginning of the word. The reason I'm not certain if it's a "v" (assuming no descender) is because this writer usually makes the base of it flatter and the end stroke more curled.

Agree. But a "k" should be considered.

Quote:Not clear. It doesn't resemble any of his usual letters. It's not a normal vowel shape. The letter is slanted backwards so that the pen hits the page in the same way as Voynichese letters (which gives it a different thick/thin balance than the other letters on that line). Look at the "aror" bottom left and you'll see the same kind of stroke—the downstroke is a little thicker. I think it's probably a vowel but it isn't shaped the way he usually writes "u" or "o" and the stroke order and connection (or lack thereof) is wrong for "a".

Agree. Should be considered as "o" or "u" equally likely. Maybe the problem was with the parchment in this place when writing.

Quote:It looks like "t", drawn the same way as the other "t" letters with a curved base and the crossbar only just barely poking out on the left. The top of the downstroke is slightly above the level of the other letters, which matches well with the other "t" letters on the page.

Agree. Defintely a "t".

Quote:Fourth letter:

Once again, as with the first letter, the descender is not for certain—it's very faint. If this is a "p", which appears possible, it differs from the others in having a larger and more disconnected loop. If that's not a descender, then it does resemble the other "r" letters somewhat except that the curve of the end-dot is unusually long and back-curved. If there's no descender, that back-curve makes it look like a "v/u", similar to the one at with the long beginning stroke at the front of "um?n". I lean toward it being a "p" but I am not certain. Linguistically, a "p" before "f" is found in Middle German (I've located examples) as in modern German "pferd" (horse).

This is the most puzzling thing in all the line. "pf" is fine - you have "pferd", "opfer"... But there is no such thing as "pfer$"

Two additional possibilities are:

- "zi" - in this case the "z" would be like "z" in f17r, but quite shrinked, and the "i" would be also very shrinked; although "zifer" is a good word
- "z" - in this case the "z" would look like the modern German "z", but with curved baseline

Quote:Not clear because there is a light spot on the vellum above the crossbar that makes it look disconnected, but the only letter that it looks like, if it is intended to be connected, is "f". If the shape above it is a dark spot or a worm-trail rather than a hook, it still doesn't look like "r" or "t" because the stem and crossbar are too straight to resemble the other "r" and "t" letters.

To me it's a clear "f".

Quote:Looks like a fairly clear "e" and while the writer tends to vary the curve of the loop on "e" every time he writes it, they are reasonably readable (except the mystery letter in "vald?n/vals?n" which might be an "e" but looks almost more like a "c" with a tail or someone else's style of "e"). The "e" in the top right word is similar to the second "e" on leben/leber and the "e" in ubren.

Agree.

Quote:Gothic cursive "r". I don't know what else it could be other than maybe a small "i" followed by a mysterious big round brown dot—but that seems unlikely. I think it's probably an "r" with a truncated ascender.

Agree. I consifered the "i" option follwed by a dot, but the dots in the ends of sentences seem unlikely for these years (although my question on RG on this issue has been hanging open for 1,5 years already).

(07-09-2016, 01:07 PM)Helmut Winkler Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Marco.

I think the last word in line 1 is "putrifer", at least it looks like it it to me when I analyze the single letters.  The first line could be "poxleber p[ri]m[u]m putrifer", with could mean "Goats liver is as first to go into putrefaction", which would be what really happens. I feel quite sure of the reading, less of the translation and the line would very likely be a probatio pennae.

Thank you Helmut!

Is "putrifer" a documented Latin word? Or is it German?
I know of the close French "putrifier".

As Anton and JKP (see their letter-by-letter comments) I also have problems seeing the "i" in putrifer.
The sign between "t" and "f" seems to me very close to the "r" at the end of poxleber. So I can read putrfer, but not putrifer.

---

Putting together the suggestions of JKP and Anton, I get a list of about 300 candidate words. Since I am not familiar with German, it is of little use to me.
If the first letter can be a "K", then "kutpfer" for "kupfer" (copper) seems to me possible (but I have no idea of a possible connections with "pox leber" via "umen").

Can you get more reasonable candidate  words from  the combinations of the possible readings for the letters?

Marco, did you actually compile a list of words or was that a quick calculation? If a list were published, maybe people would see something they recognize...

(07-09-2016, 07:27 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Marco, did you actually compile a list of words or was that a quick calculation? If a list were published, maybe people would see something they recognize...

List attached (270 elements). I hope I got all the options mentioned by JKP and Anton.

I included "v" but not "u": so keep in mind that in all words, "v" can be read as "u".

PS: it all boils down to this, which is maybe easier to go through:

  p v u k
   u o a
     t
p r v u zi z
   f r t
     e
    r i

Thanks! Do you guys think then that the first section can be read as "uut"? That's a common word in Middle Dutch, but it seems a weird reading to me because both potential u's lean different ways.

It's annoying not to have the physical object for inspection, and a magnifying glass...

---

Some of the options are pretty funny. Kutprei means "c*nt leek" in modern Dutch.

There's also pit leek, pot leek and barrel leek...

Another incantation from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
It is mostly German, so I can't read it. But the Latin is:

...German... rax pax fax ++++ in xpo [christo] + filio + da=
vid ...German . . . appolo[n]ia .....
..... ave ma[r]ia

The "rax pax fax" could parallel "six+marix+movix+vix" in line 3.

Thx Marco,

This list would be better examined by an expert in Middle High German (whom we've long been trying to invoke, but yet to no avail).

I'd suggest to take into account that "u" and "v" may be interchangeable, so e.g. for your option "vvtprer" actually four options should be formally considered:

• uutprer
  
• uvtprer
  
• vutprer
  
• vvtprer
  

However, taking Koen's resonable remark into account, we could leave only

• uvtprer
  
• vutprer
  

because two "u"'s or two "v"'s in a single word would look the same indeed.

Regarding Helmut's reading, it's quite tempting , but I join Marco in his question of whether the grammar is OK. And also is "pmm" a valid abbreviation?

I would add that tracing all the possible meanings against Woerterbuchnetz is quite cumbersome, because one word usually has not only many meanings, but also many variations with many meanings. E.g. you open word 1, it says see word 2 and word 3, and so on...

---

(07-09-2016, 08:25 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Another incantation from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
It is mostly German, so I can't read it. But the Latin is:

...German... rax pax fax ++++ in xpo [christo] + filio + da=
vid ...German . . . appolo[n]ia .....
..... ave ma[r]ia

The "rax pax fax" could parallel "six+marix+movix+vix" in line 3.

Look at the beginning of the German portion.

It reads:

?????? den zant schwen schraib (or schrais, not sure) an daz wag mit aine hutte...

But what is this character?

       

(07-09-2016, 08:25 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Another incantation from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
It is mostly German, so I can't read it. But the Latin is:

...German... rax pax fax ++++ in xpo [christo] + filio + da=
vid ...German . . . appolo[n]ia .....
..... ave ma[r]ia

The "rax pax fax" could parallel "six+marix+movix+vix" in line 3.

All right, I'll have a go at this. The native German speakers are welcome to correct/enlarge on my interpretation:

?? er den zant schwern schreis an daz warg mit ainer tiutter rex rax fax ++++ in xfar? (in Christ father?) + filia (the son) + david vid u?? schreis den namen appolaria (appolinaria?) von sterch? z von n-r? u-n? z ave maria

I think the standalone "z" might be und/and.

I think he probably means "zahnt" when he writes "zant" and "zahnt" is tooth. Schwer[e]n is bad or heavy, and schreis is to shriek or cry, so I think he may be talking about a remedy/charm for a bad toothache.

The next part I'm not sure about because I have no idea what tiutter is (it looks almost more French than German), but "mit ain-" is "mit einer" (with a, with one),  an instruction to call out/invoke the names, and then the Latin charm words and Ave Maria at the end.