whit_merule: (Default)
[personal profile] whit_merule
Okay, anyone want a transcription of Crowley's scroll?

Caveat lector: the Latin is very badly written. Which is fine, of course, because they weren't trying to make a proper legal document, just something that looked pretty and had a lot of the right words in it. However, their cases and tenses and subject/verb agreement and, basically, grammar generally, are very hit and miss. Add this to the fact that most of the sentences are in fragments, and what you have is basically what you'd get in English if you took all the words in a sentence, removed off any endings or pronouns (like "'s" or "s" or "his" or "theirs") that told you how things were organised, burned half the words, then flung the remainder randomly at the floor and tried to assemble the original sentence from that. This means that, while I've got all the words that appear, my ordering of them in the sentence may not be what the writers meant, and is largely my own interpretation according to sense and context.

(Also, to be paleographically pedantic for a moment, I have to say that the reason this caught my eye in the first place is the combination of a scroll - obsolete technology except for very specific purposes as of, to be generous, the 5th century - on paper - 16-18C approximately, made from rags I think - with a handwriting that looks like it's trying to be Gothic, which was pretty much the first 400 years of the last millennium. And the layout is sort of 12Cish, and the punctuation and random capital letters on important nouns is 17Cish. Crowley is nice and generous with his time periods. Okay, I'm done. On to what Crowley's actually saying.)

Crowley's scroll


... debet in gen... [he/she/it] must in gen… [could be anything, but a lot of Latin words starting with ‘gen’ ended up the same or similar in english. Possibilities: in general, in generating/begetting (unlikely construction), in that generation, into the father (genitor)]
... quis daemonum a... to/from whom that demon a… [note: I think they mean ‘daemonium’ - ‘daemonum’ would be the genitive plural of ‘daemon’ (ie, ‘of the demons’), and I don’t think the genitive plural can fit into this sentence (although, honestly, tiny tiny fragment, but I suspect we’re just talking Crowley here. ‘daemonium’, on the other hand, would be the nominative or accusative of ‘daemonium’, which means the same as ‘daemon’ but is formed differently. I think we want nominative here! Ie, ‘to/from whom the said demon (will do something)’.]
…tur irritum, et sic pars ... is [?render]ed useless, and the said party ...

…[n/a]da convenit cohibere omnes daemonum ... [in Canada?] it is agreed that all demons will be restrained/confined … 
... de Canada, similiter, pars de primum conven... … of Canada, similarly, the party of the first part [agrees?]
...atio designatus ...  [?could be any word ending with ‘-ation’ in English, sorry!] designated … [I want to say it’s ‘nation’ - ie, ‘the designated nation’ - but ‘designatus’ is masculine and ‘natio’ feminine, so we’d have to assume they forgot to match their genders up. They are both in the right case, though!]
... Geographicus terminus Foederatarum Americae. … national border of the United States of America.
... Commutatio Bona ... the Good Change/Exchange/New Order [possibly?]
a. Officiis secundum rationem cibus pars prima pars altera ... To the office of the party of the first part [pertains?] by the second account/invoice/rule, the food... [very messy and I'm completely guessing at the missing verb, rearrange the words to suit yourself]
('sanguis') si ad primam partem...  (‘blood’) if to the first party
b. Secunda pars constat, ut ait Moyses sanguinem Convenit… The second party agrees, as dictated by the blood of Moses [He agrees / It is agreed]…
Sam & Dean Winchester. Secunda pars exhibetur sang[uine]... Sam and Dean Winchester. The second party is to present the blood… [is 'Moyses/Moses' perhaps the name of the demon whose blood this actually is?]
Secunda pars sanguine exhibetur. The second party is to present the blood. 
-----
...unicationis    of communication 
Ut in prima parte actionis vult recedere ... That, in accordance with the first part of the act, [someone] should be willing to draw back …
…arte dictum est prius, et auferetur ... the part/party aforesaid; and will be removed/stolen/taken away/obtained
...ntione eius Partes designantus [typo for designatus]… the [intention? agreement?] of the designated Parties ...

...utris usum exscrib... [for?] the use of either [party] to write/be written out [or possibly ‘neither’ - ‘neutris’ or ‘utris’, but we can’t see anything before ‘u’. ‘utris’ makes more sense, though.]
... eius possession... of his/its possession[s?]
... Quae... Which...


As for the other part, which contains actual complete sentences and therefore SHOULD be much easier, I'm afraid my eyes are failing me. I can catch bits, but it's too pixellated to get most of it. If anyone can come up with a more high-res version of this, I'll transcribe and translate it too!

Crowley has a red crayon!
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

whit_merule: (Default)
whitmerule

December 2015

S M T W T F S
  1 2345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 14th, 2025 05:00 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios