Of course, *if* the word schaedata did not exist, this would overrule all other considerations, and the reading should be some other one. Now I don't know if that's the case, and one cannot use a classical Latin dictionary to decide this, since the Latin used in the 17th century differs considerably from classical Latin.
(When I first asked for the translation of the Barschius letter from a Latinist, she provided it with exactly this disclaimer).
Fletcher didn't seem to have a problem with it, but that's just for what it's worth, and we can't ask him - he died years ago.
If you can confirm that this word was not used in late Renaissance Latin, then I agree that this is a serious objection.
Let's also keep in mind that this/these schaedula/schaedata are the third of four different items of Barschius that were submitted to Kircher (beside the MS itself) , and the only one of which we can't really be sure that it relates to the Voynich MS.
The first was sent with the (now lost) letter from Moretus, and we know a bit about it from the response of Kircher: it had at least two items: some copied elements or even cut-out pages of the MS , and a sheet of Glagolitic text which Barschius and/or Moretus thought of interest for comparison.
The second was sent with the 1639 letter of Barschius, and we just know from Barschius that it was copied from the MS by someone else (based on P.Neal's translation).
The third is the schaedula/schaedata discussed here, and we don't know much of the form it took, and its subject matter.
The fourth is a set of notes of Barschius that Marci sent together with the MS itself. This I think is likely to be a booklet of some volume. Really too bad it got lost....
Beside the Voynich MS, discussions with Kircher also concerned the general topic of alchemy. Marci at first was not a 'believer' of this, but Barschius convinced him of its usefulness. Together they also managed to convince the Jesuit Santini of this. Several people also tried to convince Kircher, but this did not work. He was firmly against it.
This *could* have been the topic of the third submission, but this is speculation.
As a bit of trivia related to the evolution of Latin, my Latin teacher used a story to object against the use of the term 'dead language' for Latin. He was traveling somewhere in Eastern Europe and got into a conversation with a priest. It turned out that the only language they had in common was Latin, so they had a conversation in Latin.
Later, during my first marriage I could make the same experience. Since this involved three different countries, several forms had to be filled in, which were all in Latin.
Anyway, @Kestrel, don't get me wrong - I really appreciate your contribution, as it keeps us thinking about details that could be important. Don't hesistate to bring more.
(When I first asked for the translation of the Barschius letter from a Latinist, she provided it with exactly this disclaimer).
Fletcher didn't seem to have a problem with it, but that's just for what it's worth, and we can't ask him - he died years ago.
If you can confirm that this word was not used in late Renaissance Latin, then I agree that this is a serious objection.
Let's also keep in mind that this/these schaedula/schaedata are the third of four different items of Barschius that were submitted to Kircher (beside the MS itself) , and the only one of which we can't really be sure that it relates to the Voynich MS.
The first was sent with the (now lost) letter from Moretus, and we know a bit about it from the response of Kircher: it had at least two items: some copied elements or even cut-out pages of the MS , and a sheet of Glagolitic text which Barschius and/or Moretus thought of interest for comparison.
The second was sent with the 1639 letter of Barschius, and we just know from Barschius that it was copied from the MS by someone else (based on P.Neal's translation).
The third is the schaedula/schaedata discussed here, and we don't know much of the form it took, and its subject matter.
The fourth is a set of notes of Barschius that Marci sent together with the MS itself. This I think is likely to be a booklet of some volume. Really too bad it got lost....
Beside the Voynich MS, discussions with Kircher also concerned the general topic of alchemy. Marci at first was not a 'believer' of this, but Barschius convinced him of its usefulness. Together they also managed to convince the Jesuit Santini of this. Several people also tried to convince Kircher, but this did not work. He was firmly against it.
This *could* have been the topic of the third submission, but this is speculation.
As a bit of trivia related to the evolution of Latin, my Latin teacher used a story to object against the use of the term 'dead language' for Latin. He was traveling somewhere in Eastern Europe and got into a conversation with a priest. It turned out that the only language they had in common was Latin, so they had a conversation in Latin.
Later, during my first marriage I could make the same experience. Since this involved three different countries, several forms had to be filled in, which were all in Latin.
Anyway, @Kestrel, don't get me wrong - I really appreciate your contribution, as it keeps us thinking about details that could be important. Don't hesistate to bring more.