RE: Rosettes page upper left corner
Quentin Da Silva > 24-09-2026, 09:24 AM
Hello, I am coming back to an older topic, and perhaps this may help you.
I should clarify that I have no particular expertise in many of these fields. I am simply extremely curious about everything, and I rely heavily on deduction.
The “V” that I read, as I mentioned in another one of my posts, is:
“Paris kar”
I came to this reading in a very direct and simple way, without spending hours trying to force an interpretation.
I reasoned that, at the time, the King of France was indeed a Charles, and that the manuscript may very well have travelled naturally from the hands of Johann de Laaz into his alchemical circle before eventually being acquired by the figures we are more familiar with today, such as Tepenec and others.
For me — and I know this may sound too assertive, so I apologize — the last holder of the manuscript was probably Johann de Laaz, or perhaps a physician close to Barbara of Cilli.
I have spent a great deal of time working on folio 116v, and to me it is simply a supplication, a ritual, or perhaps a final phrase transcribed shortly before her death.
There is no need to spend ten years researching it to notice that there appears to be a “Maria” on the page. To me, that seems remarkably straightforward.
Barbara of Cilli, as a reminder, died of the plague.
“Pox lever”, “lebev”, or however one chooses to read it, could fit this context.
Other terms also seem relatively easy to identify:
mavix
movix
vix
Perhaps even something like:
“Pox lever vin on Lucifer”
Other words also seem to point in the same general direction.
In any case, have a good day. I believe this line of investigation is serious. Perhaps understanding the historical context matters more here than cryptology itself. A strong sense of deduction may sometimes be enough to notice connections that are otherwise overlooked.
Finally, I would say there is quite an interesting connection between the Paris of Charles, Filarete and his ideal city, and Barbara on folio 86v.
That inscription may have been added after her death, perhaps as an attempt to understand what it meant.
Everything in this book seems strangely imperfect or irregular, even down to the so-called Ptolemaic diagram.
Could a woman not become bitter in a world dominated by men, wishing to write not for money or recognition, but simply as an act of revenge?
Would an indescribable book not be the perfect form of revenge?
A woman's book, very possibly dealing with transmutation.
I do not think this manuscript is necessarily most interesting because of its content.
I think its history may be far more important.
Look for the history rather than only trying to decipher the content, and perhaps more answers will begin to come to mind.