Theory: it says "visch" for fish, not the month of the year.

Index
Theory: it says "visch" for fish, not the month of the year.
Theory: it says "visch" for fish, not the month of the year.

Damiro > Yesterday, 11:03 PM

Translation to English is "Fish"

Language is Old High German form and variations are:
[*]
fisc
[*]fisk
[*]fisch
[*]fish
[*]fisg
[*]variants beginning with v, including visc, visch, and visg

- Most likely phonemic ?

Theory derived from:
- The amount of letters/symbols.
- The assumptions regarding the origin of a scribe
- The year it was written (1400s to 1500s)
- In my language (Slavic) we say "fish" for this zodiac as well.

The only thing that does not match well is the shape of symbols...
RE: Theory: it says "visch" for fish, not the month of the year.

Koen G > Yesterday, 11:13 PM

So "it would say visch if the letters were different"? I guess it would, yeah.
RE: Theory: it says "visch" for fish, not the month of the year.

ololololo > Today, 06:47 AM

The only thing that doesn't add up is the symbols
At least the first letter is m or n, v is only a stretch, and it is definitely not f. The last letter is not t or h, but s.
Why would this inscription stand out? When the author saw the Pisces, he decided to mark them as Pisces? Why didn't he sign all the women in balneology as "woman"?
Next Oldest Next Newest