Huck wrote:Why I think, that it might be a sort of Pachisi ....
If you observe the "dots" (1-4 dots) and some fields, which are marked with i, ii, iii and iiii instead of 1-4, you get that, what is marked green, blue, yellow and violet. The 4 corners (each with dots) seem to present a starting field, the 4 middle sectors seems to present, where the game figures finally should end, if successful. It seems, that 4 four figures are destined to arrive there, cause there are 4 positions (as in Mensch ärgere Dich nicht).
marco wrote:Huck wrote:Why I think, that it might be a sort of Pachisi ....
I agree that Alea Evangeli could be a four players game. I do not see other similarities with Pachisi.
Ah, I found a picture
I have observed the dots. As you noticed, they also appear in the four corners, each of which is associate to one of the Evangelists. That works as a kind of legend: it says which number of dots is associated to which evangelist. This is are the dot assignments and the colors I added following the dots:
The upper left angle is St. Matthew (marked with 1 dot) - Black
The upper right angle is Luke (marked with 3 dots) - Blue
The lower right angle is St. John (marked with 4 dots) - Red
The lower left angle is St. Mark (marked with 2 dots) - Green
The Roman numbers from I to X, marked with a cross, indicate which is the canon illustrated by the corresponding group of pieces. This is described very clearly in the manuscript.
The 16 pieces of the central canon (canon I) are additionally split into groups of four, marked I-IIII, in order to allow the extended description in the manuscript I quoted above.
I agree with all the comments I have read: the game is related to Hnefatafl. The symmetry of the board and the presence of a single main piece at the center of it are typical of that kind of game. But I think that the relation is not as strong as that postulated in most comments. The fact that the text describes the assignment of the pieces to the four evangelists, and does not mention a division in defenders and attackers, seems significant to me.
Huck wrote:For "The Roman numbers from I to X, marked with a cross," ... I count 12 crosses, and I can't see a number row of 1-10.
The beginning of each canon is to be found where there is a cross with a number.
Can. 10 is seen to stand in four places: for wherever you can see no. 10 with a cross, this belongs to the 10th canon.
If any one would know this game [aleam] fully, before all the lessons of this teaching [hujus disciplinae documenia] he must thoroughly know [scire animo] these seven: to wit, dukes and counts, defenders and attackers, city and citadel, and nine steps [gradus] twice over.
The fact that the text describes the assignment of the pieces to the four evangelists, and does not mention a division in defenders and attackers, seems significant to me.
Ross G. R. Caldwell wrote:The first I thought might be "fhi", but on comparison with the "r" of "figura" in your first detail, it could be "flr", which still doesn't help at the moment.
The second seems to be "tab/u/la", but then that circle under the erstwhile "t" might make it a "g", hence "gabula", but what would that be?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests