HS 3227a

[Gabi]

I have a problem with a line in this manuscript an I thought that perhaps here can help me someone;

.... in mete in und hoe quasi quomodo prius irlichm sine atque meo

Has anybody an idea what this line could possibly mean?

[admin]

Latin mixed with German..

[Gabi]

Exactly that is my problem!!!

[Andreas Engström]

I don't really think I could help anyway, but without the context it's definitely almost impossible.. could you please include a few lines before and after, and other stuff like what the rest of the chapter is about, etc..

-Engström

[Harry]

originaltext from döbringer


here the possible transcription:

Hier merke das / viel Bewegung / schlägt ihn in / Beginn / Mittel und Ende / allen Fechtens / nach dieser Kunst und Lehre / als daß einer in einem Schnellen / Beginn / Mittel und Ende / ohne Unterlaß und ohne Hindernis seines Gegners vollbringe / und einen mit Nichte lasse zum Schlage kommen / Denn auf dieses gehen die Wörter Vor / und Nach zurück / das ist der Vorschlag und Nachschlag / mit einemmal ihm zuzuschlagen ist hochwichtig als wenn auf welche Weise auch immer fehlerhaft und vor allem ohne noch dazu abzuweichen

[Gabi]

originaltext from döbringer


here the possible transcription:

Hier merke das / viel Bewegung / schlägt ihn in / Beginn / Mittel und Ende / allen Fechtens / nach dieser Kunst und Lehre / als daß einer in einem Schnellen / Beginn / Mittel und Ende / ohne Unterlaß und ohne Hindernis seines Gegners vollbringe / und einen mit Nichte lasse zum Schlage kommen / Denn auf dieses gehen die Wörter Vor / und Nach zurück / das ist der Vorschlag und Nachschlag / mit einemmal ihm zuzuschlagen ist hochwichtig als wenn auf welche Weise auch immer fehlerhaft und vor allem ohne noch dazu abzuweichen

I don't really think that "in mete in und hoe quasi quomodo orius irlichm sine atque meo"
can be translated as
"mit einemmal ihm zuzuschlagen ist hochwichtig als wenn auf welche Weise auch immer fehlerhaft und vor allem ohne noch dazu abzuweichen"

I doubt that translation not ohnly because it is allmost impossible to read the original manuscript in this place.

(This place is in the middle of 17v, sorry I forgot to write that)

[Harry]

well gabi, I just postet the translation richard did in the ars-gladii forum

I am not able to read a word this picture.

[Andreas Engström]

"in mete in und hö quasi quomodo prius irlichem sine atque meo"
"in the middle and in the high, just as in the preferable way, honourably and without fleeing"?

I don't know.. it doesn't quite make sense.. but almost. It's as though some crucial word is missing or something..

But I think it should be "prius" and "irlichem", and that the "hö" might be a shortened "höhe", which would make sense with the "mete" interpreted as "mitte" and the "in" and "und" switched places.

Or perhaps "mete" should be interpreted as it stands, as "mit/damit".. and the second "in" may be "ihm" (that word is so blurry it could be just about anything).. but it feels like that makes less sense in the context. "in with him in and high".. but perhaps the dots over the o in hö really is a w, it's hard to see.. so it would be "how" and the sentence could then be something like

"in with him and strike just as in the preferable way, honourably and without fleeing" (fleeing being my very free interpretation of "meo", really it ought to be "to go, to pass"). That would make some kind of sense, wouldn't it?

I actually don't know if I'm making any sense. I think I should sleep some, and perhaps think more about this tomorrow. Or leave it to those who are better at this.

BTW, where have you found the digital images of the original manuscript? I have only seen transcriptions before.. It would be very interesting to see the rest (and perhaps it would help in reading this sentence). It would be wonderful if there were some better-quality image of the passage in question..

-Engström

[Claus Sørensen]

Hello Andreas!

http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread ... k+Hagedorn

This is what Dierk Hagedorn originally wrote about the manuscript! And where one can get the digital images!

Best wishes

Claus

[Gabi]

".. but perhaps the dots over the o in hö really is a w, it's hard to see.. so it would be "how" ...

-Engström

I wouldn't be too sure abaout that. It ist a german manuscript and an english word wouldn't fit to this.
Maybe the two pints mean just, that this word is an abbreviation for something.
Is there a latin word which begins with "ho" an could fit into this sentence?

[Andreas Engström]

".. but perhaps the dots over the o in hö really is a w, it's hard to see.. so it would be "how" ...

-Engström

I wouldn't be too sure abaout that. It ist a german manuscript and an english word wouldn't fit to this.
Maybe the two pints mean just, that this word is an abbreviation for something.
Is there a latin word which begins with "ho" an could fit into this sentence?

Of course it wouldn't be the english word "how", it would in that case be the middle high german "houw", cut/strike. Spelling varies wildly between how, houw, haw, hauw, heu, etc.

-Engström

[Andreas Engström]

New idea. The first word on the second line is so badly blurred, it would be wonderful to look at the real page and see how it really looks.. but I now think it actually looks like it ends with "..ch", possibly with "..tich". If there is a very badly worn "s" that is invisible in this image, the word might be "stich" which would fit very well with the context ("mete stich und houw", "with thrust and cut/strike") and transform the first part into something more meaningful.

"in mete stich und houw quasi quomodo prius irlichem sine atque meo"
"in with thrust and cut, just as is the preferable way, honourably and without backing off"?

But at this stage speculation has taken over, I fear. I think one would have to have a much better image of the page to be able to say anything conclusive. And better true knowledge of latin would help as well. I'm just a hack.

-Engström

[Gabi]

That really does make sence; not only in this particular sentense but also in the whole context.
Thank you very much, you are a good hack!

[Andreas Engström]

Hm, what I said is probably mostly hogwash, I'm afraid, pretty as it may have sounded.

I've delved into the wonderful world of latin abbreviations, discovering that most of the previously suggested transcriptions are in all probability dead wrong. I trusted the previous transcribers too much and didn't check the abbreviations myself, which I obviously should have done.

Quite probably the whole passage is latin.

"Immediate ??? una? hora quasi dictum primus reliquam? sine aliquo medio.

"Absolutely somethingorother at a single time, just as declared foremost leaving no place in the middle". Bleah.

Not making much sense, I'm afraid. So obviously wrong. The parts "immediate", "quasi dictum primus" and "aliquo medio" are most likely correct, but "reliquam" could just as well be something else, or even two words. The first word on the second line is still illegible, especially if it's supposed to be latin.

I think I give up for now. My latin simply isn't good enough.

-Engström

[Andreas Engström]

I guess the lesson one may at least learn is that one shouldn't blindly trust a transcription just because it has been replicated in many places. Now I kind of wonder what else may have been botched. We tend to trust transcriptions, don't we? Perhaps overly much...

-Engström

[Fab]

Precisely so. Who remembers the hamster....

Though transcribing is a job in itself, it yet can be undertaken by almost anyone, with the proper tools and dedication. And patience. As shown this year in Dijon.

[Harry]

well reconstruction is a 3 step doing...

1. transcription (and translation for you puny non-germanspeaking lads)
2. interpretation
3. training and drill

I guess we all agree with that. me for myself don't trust transcriptions and manuals.... I only trust them after step 3

[Gabi]

It's ok chek the transcription by trying the technique, I do this as well.
But what should we do if we can't trust the transcription in the foreword?