-JKP- > 15-08-2019, 04:49 PM
-JKP- > 15-08-2019, 04:53 PM
-JKP- > 15-08-2019, 04:59 PM
(15-08-2019, 02:57 PM)Gavin Güldenpfennig Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.On page 116v I would read:
...
mi six marix movix vix adia matria orrorr hui valsen ubrey / ´o nim geis mich` !
...
Gavin Güldenpfennig > 17-08-2019, 01:00 PM
(15-08-2019, 04:39 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's not poxleder.
It is very clearly a Gothic "b" where you have a "d". No one wrote "d" like that and many wrote "b" like that.
I cannot tell if the last letter is "r" or "n" because it's faded or rubbed. It's not clear.
poxleben or poxleber (and there's some dispute about the x because the ink blobbed and filled in, but I think it looks like x).
You are mixing up Gothic "d" and "b" (getting them backwards) because in the oladabas word you read the "d" (which is a normal "d") as "b", but no one wrote b like that.
Both the "d" and "b" are written in a typical way for the time so I'm not sure why you are reversing them.
-JKP- > 17-08-2019, 01:28 PM
(17-08-2019, 01:00 PM)Gavin Güldenpfennig Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
Imagine, that you´re in hypnosis, trance or near to death. Would you write everything correct? Could you decide which letter is which one? I think, I couldn´t do this. It´s only an example, it could be something other behind that letter shapes.
Gavin Güldenpfennig > 17-08-2019, 01:40 PM
(15-08-2019, 04:49 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I don't think it says "multos". There is no "u" in front of the "l". It is a long-serif "i" written the same way as the other "i"' characters on the folio.
What is in front of it is harder to discern, because the minims could be m or n (and there might be a leading "i").
I don't think that's a "v" in cere. I think it's a long-serif r with a disconnected hook, which was a moderately common form and which is repeated elsewhere on the folio. That's not how they wrote "u/v" in the 15th century.
-JKP- > 17-08-2019, 02:19 PM
-JKP- > 30-09-2019, 02:08 PM
Aga Tentakulus > 30-09-2019, 02:36 PM
-JKP- > 30-09-2019, 11:48 PM
(21-04-2016, 10:50 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(21-04-2016, 08:58 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I am not saying that it is more likely to read one or the other, by the way. For me, the definitive reading should follow from either a comparison with other text in the same script (made by someone with some qualifications in this area), or by a convincing reading of the majority of the text.
I have been hoping to find some handwritten text that is similar to this. There are hundreds (thousands?) of German MSs online, but I never found a very close match. One that seems to come rather close is this one:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(One should look at several pages).
Characters that most usually are different from the text on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are the 'd' and the 'p'. It is really quite rare to find any text that has these similarities.
Thank you, Rene!
Of course, this deserves a serious study, and I agree that a true paleographer would save us a lot of trouble!
Here is a comparison based on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
- Top row (in black) "amen"
- Bottom row (in red) "ave maria"