(25-12-2025, 06:25 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Such mistakes cause the system to fail.

And they didn't care. Or it was one of the ghostly retracers who was just guessing.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(25-12-2025, 06:15 PM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.No, it ist from yale: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Ah thanks, I got those.

All the best, --stolfi

This late 15th century dictionary translates the Latin "applicare" as "nahen oder valden". Not entirely sure of we can get "fold" from that. Maybe in the sense that the two halves are "joined" when you fold something?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

There are several possibilities, but I suspect that valden in the sense of "nahe bringen" = "bring closer" fould makes the most sense here. But I would like to add: I'm not entirely sure.

But if you take 8 as "d", you have ‘tod’ in the first line, thats good, but also ‘portad’, and that doesn't make sense.

But d/t/ts/tz are not as static in medieval German as we perceive them to be today.


I am still looking for an example in a handwritten text for: 8 = tz. I have some that come close, but there is still a small upward stroke visible on the upper left side of the 8. However, the writer also draws the t very small here, so that it could be "smudged".

If you take 8 as tz, then that's totz = block of wood (Klotz is also considered an insult, ‘Holzklotz’ = block of wood = no brain in it), but whether that makes more sense is another matter. 

Perhaps Marco is right and they are different 8s – at least they seem to have been written differently.

There is a much better meaning of m chiton = Mary's chiton, which refers to Mary's undergarment.

At first, I thought it referred to Mary and Jesus' chiton:
Source: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Then I found that the protective cloak of Mary had great significance in the Middle Ages. But the protective cloak is not a chiton in the classical sense and was also written differently in Latin:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

But there is indeed Mary's chiton, which Mary is said to have worn at the time of the Nativity. It is kept in Aachen Cathedral and is one of the four great shrines of the Middle Ages.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (further down, unfortunately only available in German).

This gives us historical evidence for the chiton – in the sense of protection/healing. Medieval pilgrims believed that even the fibres of the garment could heal illnesses. The Aachen Marian garment was so famous in the 15th century that every Bavarian pilgrim knew that if you invoked the ‘Mary's shirt’ (the chiton), illness or evil had no chance.

   

I had written that there was actually still one demon missing that needed to be banished. And now I have found something that could be just right for that. 

Simyel is assigned the following sigil/shorthand in the Clavicula Salomonis:

   

That reminded me of the third word in the 116th charm. A few minims and the beginning of an ‘L’ (?)

And Simyel (source 16/17 Jahrhundert / Simiel (source 8. Jahhundert) would make a lot of sense in the context of a charm: first invoking Mary's chiton  for protection and healing, then uttering a magic word (aladaba8) that ‘banishes’ the demon Simyel with three candles (Trinity) that he is to carry.

We know how Simiel was spelled in the 8th century because Aldebert, a Christian preacher in the 8th century, invoked the demon ‘Simiel’.

Source: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (4th paragraph, line 2)

PS. in VMS there is one minim more - However, I don't believe that the number of waves was really decisive. Especially if a scribe was thinking of Simiel (not simyel) while writing....

A while back I went down a bit of a rabbit hole involving Sara (various spellings..) and the Cave of the patriarchs, I just stumbled on a snip I made which reads "SARRA VX ABRA".
Wondering what this was I stupidly consulted GPT (why do I do this...) anyway, after being fed nonsense I went and found the source. From this is it clear it is abbreviated "Sarra ux(or) Abra(ham)" - Sara wife (of) Abraham. 

Out of curiosity I wondered if there is a "Abia" rather than "Abra" and there was, it seems like a (European?) variant of "Abijah" - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

No idea if relevant or coincidence, but its a name documented in Christianity ("In Matthew's gospel, Abijah appears in the genealogy of Jesus.") next to Maria so who knows.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

   

I recently wrote a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. about the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. marginalia in my blog. In general, not much new, while I explain why I'm inclined to consider "portas" a verb, not a noun. I also wrote about how I connect all the lines together.
Initially, portas might appear to me to be a noun (“gates”), but its interpretation as a verb seems more consistent with the syntax of the line. Thereby, this yields two verbs in the line. They are in the second person singular, in different tenses:
dabas — imperfect indicative (“you were adding / you had added”)
portas — present indicative (“you carry / you place”)
One of the meanings of porto, portare overlaps with ponere (“to put”) or dirigere (“to apply”), which fits the context well. The resulting structure is therefore:
[you had added …] — [now you place …]
In Latin, nouns typically precede the verb; thus anchiton and ola belong with dabas. I interpret ola not as a dialectal form, but as olea (accusative plural of oleum) with a letter e omitted, a phenomenon also visible in the marginalia (cf. mi[l]ch in line 4).
Thus: anchiton ol[e]a dabas — “you added oils to the anchiton”.
Borrowed words often remain undeclined, which explains the unchanged form anchiton.
The verb portas governs teer/tar and cere. The latter is almost certainly cerae, with the common medieval shortening of -ae to -e. The presence of the Germanic teer instead of Latin pix (picem) may seem unusual, but given that the first and fourth lines are written in a German dialect, it is not implausible.
Rendered fully into Latin, the phrase becomes:
picem cer[a]e portas — “you put pitch to wax” or "you put pitch-wax"
This mixture is known as maltha, defined in Latin sources as:

Maltha — pix cerae permixta
(“Maltha — pitch mixed with wax”)

Maltha was used as cement, mastic, or sealant, particularly valued for its water-repellent and sealing properties. Variations in composition are well attested across time and place. Some included resin, ochre, wax, oil (or fat). Also Maltha sometimes was used as a material for making seals.