Hallo friends, I was in Holiday, thus this is why I could not answer to
the initial question of Richard here. I will try to tell you everything
I know about this socalled "Codex Rachonczy".
The original is to find at the Archives of Siences of Hungaria at the
position A 1.173/II. This is a book 12*10 cm, 448 pages, each page with
9-14 rows which was keept until the year 1907 in the city Rochoncz. In
the work of Bela Toth (Rare Hungarian Books,1907) was aöready known that
this Codex was given to the Hungarian Science Academy in the year 1838
by the graf Batthyany Gusztav.
The founder of the Hungarian linguistic , Hunfalvi Pal has sent th codex
to the German Linguist Jülg Bernat. This one could not find any
solution to descipher the codex. There have been many people who tried
to find out what about this codex. Some names here:
Fejerpataki Laszlo, Nemeti Kalman, Briquet, Vajda Joszef, Otto Gyürk and
now the most controversial person versus this Codex, Ms. Viorica
Enãchiuc.
The lady mean she could translate this Codex, the codex was written in
"Balcan Latin". She publiced the original codex with the "translation"
in 2002 but she did not showed any translation algorithmus, promissing
she will do it this year. I am not aware if she published this year
anything regarding the way she could crack the codex. I would like to
gie a link ( I guess I gave this link to Glen too as I asked about this
alphabet.)
There is a discution about the codex, a kind of forum and I guess there
are all 448 pages of the codex scaned for everyone.
http://www.dr-savescu.com/codex/original/original.html
Now for Miguel's amusement ( as Latin Specialist)I will give the "Balcan
Latin" text or "ProtoRomanian" text. Of course, not all, just a little
piece of it. For instance, it is supposed that in the year 1078 there is
a speach for the soldier in the time of the petcheng incursions. The
original text is the page 4:III;8 p.14 and here follows the language
which is supposed to have something with Latin, *Latin, ProtoRomanian or
what ever, to do. I mention that there where one see the "[**]" that
means this there is an ideograme.
VASO GLATER TELE LERA IU EUA AIT
NEVI IUK SOID RENI IKERA NEVIS VASO
IUKES=IRITAI UIRE DICA VA
NEVI TER IRI ATES [**] VICIST DIRE AETS IK-
IU TIT A NEVIS DI IUS NEGLIK IU VITI
IURA VASO SIM TER VIS ETERE IU IKES AS NEVI
DITI IB ALES A IURA TELES INET VASO IKEN
UVERED IRE / IKES IM VASO TER VICERE IU
(R)A NERA AIRIT CESAC IKES UDIT IRET
GLI A IUK NEVIS VASO RALNA SUOAR RAN AL-
VIK VI DIC ASTED SUC BESIS AN VETITI TER
URA IUK NEVI ALESO IKO NAT FRI AB OLACE
IRE AI URA IRA VLAD ETA NEVIS VASO.
I cannot recognise there any Latin, Romanian or something like any known
Carpatho-Balkanian language:-)))
My opinion on this Codex is that this is not a codex but this is at
least in its very first part ( almost 200 pages) the Bible since the
pictogrames on each page show exactly the events which are storied in
the Bible.
Regards,
Alex