à propos, I ever forgot to mention that I have got that print-on-demand book about Alexander's gates earlier this year - that to immediately find out that it is a continuation of another book by the same author Anderson.

Although it quotes several interesting mentions of "anchiton" (in various spelling and from different sources), nothing in it brought me any farther from anchiton itself in the desired direction of oladabas. Besides, it quotes lengthy passages in Latin and Greek without translation - which makes it difficult to follow for those who are not fluent in those.

"dabas" is meaningful in several languages (Estonian, Latvian, Spanish), so my brain always wants to read it as ola dabas or o la dabas.


And there is also λάδι βάση in Greek. (For those not familiar with Greek grammar, "o" is used as an article (masculine).)

.......
Edit [addition]: I also keep forgetting to mention that πόρτα/πόρτες (plural)/πόρτας (of the) also works in Greek but it is derived from Latin (although they did have πόρος in ancient Greek). Portas is found in a dozen languages with essentially the same meaning so it really can't be tied to one language.

   

I don't know the answers to these questions. I've been assuming the hole at the top is a wormhole based on shape and darkness, but the resolution isn't high enough to know for sure.

The bottom one, at the end of the word, I can't tell. It might be a wormhole (or other kind of hole in the parchment), it might be ink.

René, you've had some communications with Yale. Do you know how difficult it would be to get answers to these questions? Do you by any chance know the answers so we don't have to bother them with repeat questions?


Thanks

   
I think we can confidently say without Yale that the bottom one is not a wormhole (making up an "r"). The top one looks like a wormhole to me.

I put a green sheet behind the facsimile and here is the result
   

Does that mean that the publisher of the fac simile made manually holes ?
If yes, it's certainly a long hand-made job. That explains the high prize of the book.

Yes, the sheets are supposed to be exact replicas. The holes are hand-made from a crafted template which corresponds exactly to the original (or so I am assured   )

(07-10-2018, 04:56 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Yes, the sheets are supposed to be exact replicas. The holes are hand-made from a crafted template which corresponds exactly to the original (or so I am assured   )

So now we have holes copied from natural holes, along with holes copied from artificial holes made to mimic natural holes in the Voynich's predecessor document.

Holey Moley!

Are there holes in this research though - or has a wholistic approach been taken?

(05-01-2017, 04:44 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Now, "carcere portas" is something familiar from the biblical tradition, because when Christ decended to Hell he "crushed the gates of copper and broke the bars of iron". In orthodox Bible it is Psalm 106:16. In catholic it is 107:16:

"For he hath broken the gates of brass, and cut the bars of iron in sunder."

In comments to Bible there has been the established term of "carcere portas aereas" (copper gates of prison).

It is interesting to note that the Alexander's Gates legend typically (from what I've read) has his Gates made of brass, and less often of brass and iron or of iron exclusively.

For the inclosed nations (Gog & Magog and others) Alexander's Gates would be the gates of a "prison". Interestingly, as the legend goes, these Gates would fall closer to the end of times (and the tribes will break free). I wonder if all this may in a roundabout fashion trace back to Psalm 106:16.

***

I'm re-reading the Anderson's book to rethink it all over - it pays attention to minute details but its greatest deficiency (beside broad quotations in various languages) is that it cannot boast a very systematic narrative, and you have to re-systematize it all in your own head.

The two points of interest that I can personally note are that

a) in no other source is the substance called exactly "anchiton" save in the Hebrew source (which was already mentioned in this thread above, I believe)

b) how would "anchiton" of the Alexander's Gate (a substance with which the gate is covered) become "anchiton" of Nicholas de Lyra (kind of wood)? If they both descend to the same origin there must be some missing link. Or are they related only linguistically?