Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Could the "Rohonc Codex" be related to Aramaic Scripts?
Could the mysterious "Rohonc Codex" be related to Aramaic Scripts? It'sa book in unknown language and writing system, look for more info at Wikipedia:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

some pages:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

you can access all pages at
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

IMHO, this Rohonc Codex is related to Aramaic/Syriac writing systems (it means, this looks like a mix of Aramaic letters and something more). Could anybody identify it better?
Shlama (peace) to you Mesnick, and welcome to the forum. I sincerely hope you enjoy dialoguing with us and offering your opinion in return.

I have looked very carefully at many of these pages, and I am more sure about what it is not than what it is, but I will give you my opinion on both scores.

First, sorry to disappoint you, but this is not related in any way that I can see to any known Aramaic, or for that matter Semitic, alphabet or script style. The text appears to be a re-telling of the Gospels but the letters do not correspond to any Greek or Latin styles that I am aware of. Granted though my specialty is not with Greek. Others here may be more qualified than I on that score. But Aramaic? I highly doubt it. There are passing similarities it seems to a few Turkish tendencies, and other parts remind me of Cyrilic (Russian). Given the location it was found, it is not hard to figure out where this "inspiration" comes from.

Okay, so that's what it is NOT. So what is it? As I see it, there are two possibilities.

Scenario #1: It's just a joke or hoax, done by someone who wanted to mish-mosh ancient and modern alphabetic styles and have nice folks like yourself wondering what the heck is going on.

Scenario #2: It is a cipher or letter for letter replacement schema of a more common language like Greek or some Slavic dialect. Again, not my specialty there. But what I can say is that it most reminds me of a Civil War replacement code used by the Confederacy. I saw it in a book when I was growing up and just liked writing in it, but really cracking it was beyond easy if you knew how. When I say it most reminds me of this I do not mean stylistically or that the letters resemble the code. I mean instead that the writing approach as far as I can determine--and I could be wrong--reminds me of that technique.

Of course it is possible BOTH scenarios could be true. The mish-mosh is the code and vice versa. If any of the other Aramaicists here disagree with me particularly about it not being Semitic based I am open to hearing that out and why, especially from Paul Younan. If you want to know what it MOST resembles on the Semitic side, even though to my mind it is not suffficient to posit a link, I would say Serto. But I am willing to bet this writer never saw a Serto letter in his life.

As I said, sorry if this disappoints you, but a very interesting question!

Shlama w'burkate (peace and blessings)
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Bingo! One of the first words on the tip of my tongue as I looked more closely at it, Andrew, was also "cipher". I'm just pitching in my thoughts here, mesinik, as I am less qualified than Andrew, but here's some key words that 'struck' me while looking at it.

Of course, the illustrations look medieval, and the overall "feel" of the codex is Slavonic as Andrew postulated (Romanian, perhaps?), but the 'language' itself strikes me as "Draconic". I noticed an infatuation with 3's throughout the pictures (words subsistent of the same letters, clumped), and so this is essentially my tentative thesis:

a hermetic text.

I think with a code key, it just might say something intelligible. Such as what? I dunno, but I don't think they'd be visiting our forum. To whom? I have no idea, but it reminds me of Aleister Crowley for some reason <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

This Rohonczi Codex is a mystery for quite smart people since 1838... so, if somebody wants to tell something new about it, so it's nice to think twice and take some time. The question of this topic is, could somebody with more expertise see more common features with Aramaic-based stuff. But other opinions are welcomed ,too, if they don't try to mess this thread up, OK?
I see Mesnick--so you don't think I have enough expertise in Aramaic to venture an opinion? How sad. I was trying to be accomodating to you and said my expertise was not in all Greek and Slavonic tongues, but I have been reading Aramaic and Hebrew for 40 years and am telling you Rohonc is not any script I have seen, but if someone can show me how it matches something obscure that I don't see a lot (Gershoni Nabatean etc), go ahead. I was just trying to be honest, not get my strong suit questioned. I looked at these pages for a quite a long time, ventured a theory and then found others who have studied Rohonc more closely seem to agree with me, like <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m --> which says:

Rohonc Codex
The Rohonc Codex (Rohonci k??dex) is named after the city of Rohonc, in Western Hungary (now Rechnitz, Austria), where it was kept until 1907, when it was moved to Budapest. The origin of the codex is uncertain. In 1838 it was donated to the Hungarian Science Academy by Gusztav Batthy??ny, a Hungarian count, together with his entire library. It is written in an unknown language and script and has defied all attempts to decipher it.

Not trying to toot my own shofar here or be difficult---I just think you underestimated me unintenionally.

Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Shlama Ahki Andrew,
there are those who dont under-estimate you, who know your work and expertise, and hold you in the highest regard ...
the sound of the shofar that you blow ... is recognized by those whom appreciate both you, and your wonderful work.
from one netzarim to another ... in expectancy of Mari/PEACE.
ahava, chesed and shalom
Hi Mesinik,

I've analyzed mostly image 26 (with the cross); as it seems to be a good place to start, due to the inscriptions on it. Here's what I've found out:

-The script is written Right-to-Left, which is obvious by the general directionality of the script and the margin on the right.
-It seems to have been written after that region was exposed to Islam, given the Christian, pagan and Islamic symbols used. (i.e. see the images like on p. 9a and p.26)
-I initially approached it as an Aramaic script, and determined that the script was derived from two Aramaic scripts => Palmyren and Siegel Agemen
-When I transcribed some of it, it didn't make any sense and didn't follow familiar characteristic of Aramaic or other Semitic languages.
-After find an article here => <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m --> <= I'm convinced that it is written in an ancient version of the Brahmi script. This script is adapted from the Aramaic script for use by a non-Semitic language, which also accounts for the non-Aramaic letters and morphed Aramaic letters found in the Codex.
This article confirms most of my obersvations, and a closer look at the Brahmi script shows that the script of the "Rohonc Codex" is a derivative of it.
-I found another article on someone (Mahesh Kumar Singh) who actually translated the "Rohonc Codex", and claimed that it is a regional Brahmi script that he knows and can read.
=> <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
=> <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
-The only thing that I managed to do with this research is find the Aramaic scripts that the Brahmi script derived from, but in regards to the "Rohonc Codex", the true credit goes to "Mahesh Kumar Singh"


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)