I don't have an example at my fingertips, but the old Pagan charms used to start with a short statement about a hero.

If "alpha and omega" is really a staple in charms, then this is my new preferred explanation for the O + dots:

   

Koen: very nice, I like it!
Ahmet Ardic and others have speculated about the potential inclusion of vertical vords hidden in the Voynich text and this would be a pretty neat one.

Very nice idea. Yes, alpha-and-omega is frequent in charms, in one way or another. The blog post I wanted to get posted last night (I ended up working a 14-hour day, so I never got to it) has some info on alpha and omega.


This idea works well from an alphabetic point of view, but also if the person who did it was Christian. Mary was the beginning (the mother of Jesus) and is very frequently in charms, as well. Suddenly the extra cross looks like it might have been added for a specific reason rather than just as an afterthought.

Also, Jesus was born under a star, Mary and the star are linked. Falling star. God's seed come to earth. Also, images of hail, rain, fire, and numerous other projectiles falling from the heavens are part-and-parcel of biblical manuscripts.


I should mention that it doesn't necessarily have to be Mary the virgin who is in charms (she was, but it wasn't always this Mary). Mary Magdalene, Mary of Egypt (who are sometimes considered the same Mary and sometimes different), and Mariam are all represented and Mariam is frequently abbreviated as Maria with a macron over the last "a".


If this is the correct interpretation (it's an amazingly cool one), then whoever did it is someone who perceives things in terms of patterns and relationships. In other words, it MIGHT be someone who could devise a cipher or drawings with double meanings.

Ah, well put JKP. Mary is indeed a beginning, so to speak. And from the medieval Christian perspective, the cross is much more of a beginning than an end as well. The genesis of the church through Christ's death.

If the Maria-Omega hypothesis is true, then this charm is indeed more complex than we initially thought, and I would agree that it betrays a similar mindset as shines through in the rest of the MS.

Historically, I wonder how long people have been wishing upon [falling/shooting] stars.

Comets are well represented in medieval books of astrology/astronomy but usually in terms of predicting their next appearance, not so much to do with spells (as far as I know).

I think it's all overcomplicated and superfluous.

First of all, it's quite possible (in fact, I'm pretty sure in that) that it was not the Voynich scribe who invented the spell, because it already conveys some lyrical patterns not fitting grammar and orthography rules, and therefore revealing themselves as folk-lore.

In all charms having been exhibited in the forum, it's plain "ave maria", but here it is "abia maria". The "marix morix vix" exhibits the systematic "-x" pattern characteristic for folklore (I suspect the roots of these may have been "marceo - morior - vivo" (I wither - I die - I live [again]).

Second, I see no reason at all why the "alpha" part would be picked up from the middle of "maria", and not from the very beginning of the spell (where the beginning really is).

Third, I see no reason why there would be a standalone "omega" outside of the spell, instead of "omega" being somewhere in the end of the spell.

Fourth, the dotted line is probably not for nothing, but taking it at face value (as the first and foremost choice), we find it linking the "o" to "maria", or the "o" to the spell as a whole, or the last line to "maria", or the last line to the spell as a whole. That's what would seek explanation in the first place.

Fifth, the "o" is clearly not of the shape of a star.

Sixth, the cross above a word is not unique (as we discussed before, it designates the need to cross oneself while spelling that word).

Supporting my point 1) above, there are indications that he just blindly copied the spell from elsewhere. I really like the idea about the Alexander's gates being fastened with anchiton, and the grammar works (correct me if it does not), because "te" is ablative. But be it the "gates of Tartar" or "gates of Tartaria" (pretty one and the same thing in the eschatological context), it must be "tartere", not "tar tere". He just did not understand in full what he's been copying, and thus he introduced the space where he shouldn't have.

Next, this "oladabas", the Holy Grail of the Voynich Studies. The day when "oladabas" is found elsewhere must be celebrated. So probably "ola dabas", not "oladabas", this time the space omitted. "Thou givest the jar", not much sense in that (and the more so with the subsequent "multes" (many) or "inultos" (unavenged)), but at least the grammar is respected.

There are many medieval manuscripts where the stuff falling from the sky is drawn in strange ways, including cubes.

The cross is not unique. But it is positioned as though it were an afterthought (it's not in line with the others, it's inserted).

The cross above Maria creates a miniature representation of a scene at the front of every Medieval Christian's mind. Probably the most important scene during the 15th century (some books of hours included the image more than once).  Three crosses, Mary at the foot of the central one.