Dominus Anulorum - Old English Script

[mliptrot]

Thank you to all who have commented on my Carolingian topic. Here is something a bit less 'heavy' but in heavier script!

 

Text is courtesy of Mike Nagoda and his blog:

 

Mike Nagoda's blog

 

Ink and pens the same as last time but I used some Basildon Bond writing paper this time - nice watermark! Please comment, constructive criticism is welcome as I'm a relative beginner and have found endless help by reading through this forum.

 

Mark

[Darteres]

I like it!

[Ernst Bitterman]

These Gothic scripts are the very devil to do, because their boxy nature amplify any wobbles of incremental angles in their vertical strokes. One almost needs to put in guidelines running up and down as well as the usual ones. This is just a matter of practice, of course, and eventually overcome. If you've not been at it long, there's no shame in having the occasional line 0.5 degrees off the plumb.

 

The other thing I'd suggest (as a long out-of-practice and never-brilliant calligrapher) is to pay very strict attention to the spacing of the upright strokes. In the second line, if one leaves the first and last letters out of 'Dominis', what's left should be a very close-packed set of marks of extreme difficulty for the modern eye to separate. You might almost go through and do the appropriate number of vertical lines, all the exact same distance apart, then come back and do the different horizontal treatments which make them into diverse letters.

[KateGladstone]

The writing is splendid!

May I venture a word on the spelling?

 

A certain important word in the poem

requires two "n"s in Latin translation ("annulus" -- or "annulorum" in the genitive plural).

 

When written with one "n" (as you have it), the word becomes a diminutive form of the Latin word for a certain orifice of the body.

 

In other words --

 

"Anulus" with one "n" means "small rectal orifice" --

and you can probably figure out, then, "Dominus Anulorum."

Edited September 30, 2010 by KateGladstone

[Ghost Plane]

I'm glad I wasn't the only one grinning!

[Inkling]

  On 9/30/2010 at 4:29 AM, KateGladstone said:

The writing is splendid!

May I venture a word on the spelling?

 

A certain important word in the poem

requires two "n"s in Latin translation ("annulus" -- or "annulorum" in the genitive plural).

 

When written with one "n" (as you have it), the word becomes a diminutive form of the Latin word for a certain orifice of the body.

 

In other words --

 

"Anulus" with one "n" means "small rectal orifice" --

and you can probably figure out, then, "Dominus Anulorum."

 

 

None of my dictionaries have any entry for 'annulus', only 'anulus'. It rather appears that 'anus' and 'anulus' are etymologically related, which makes some sense when one thinks about it (but then again, why would one want to...). That being said, I don't think a classicist of Tolkien's caliber would have approved entirely of Mike Nagada's efforts. But I do believe Tolkien the calligrapher would have appreciated Mark's script - lovely work, Mark!

[KateGladstone]

Which dictionaries have you checked? The ones I've checked all have "annulus" for "ring" -- and don't list "anulus" although it would be a regularly formed diminutive of "anus" which they *do* list ...

[Inkling]

  On 10/7/2010 at 1:45 AM, KateGladstone said:

Which dictionaries have you checked? The ones I've checked all have "annulus" for "ring" -- and don't list "anulus" although it would be a regularly formed diminutive of "anus" which they *do* list ...

 

I checked Lewis and Short (link), Blaise's ecclesiastical Latin, and my pocket version of the Oxford Latin Dictionary. It seems to me that 'anulus' actually is related to 'anus', and that the anatomical use of the latter is based on its core meaning of 'ring'.

 

Anyway, the OP's inspirational penmanship is the main thing here, of course - keep them coming!

[mliptrot]

  On 9/27/2010 at 4:37 PM, Ernst Bitterman said:

These Gothic scripts are the very devil to do, because their boxy nature amplify any wobbles of incremental angles in their vertical strokes. One almost needs to put in guidelines running up and down as well as the usual ones. This is just a matter of practice, of course, and eventually overcome. If you've not been at it long, there's no shame in having the occasional line 0.5 degrees off the plumb.

 

The other thing I'd suggest (as a long out-of-practice and never-brilliant calligrapher) is to pay very strict attention to the spacing of the upright strokes. In the second line, if one leaves the first and last letters out of 'Dominis', what's left should be a very close-packed set of marks of extreme difficulty for the modern eye to separate. You might almost go through and do the appropriate number of vertical lines, all the exact same distance apart, then come back and do the different horizontal treatments which make them into diverse letters.

 

Thanks for the advice - in fact, I've just posted my first (again, wobbly!) attempt at the tongue-twisting suggestion in another thread. I'll get there - naughty Latin notwithstanding!

 

Mark

[pe2dave]

  On 9/24/2010 at 5:32 PM, mliptrot said:

Thank you to all who have commented on my Carolingian topic. Here is something a bit less 'heavy' but in heavier script!

 

Text is courtesy of Mike Nagoda and his blog:

 

Ink and pens the same as last time but I used some Basildon Bond writing paper this time - nice watermark! Please comment, constructive criticism is welcome as I'm a relative beginner and have found endless help by reading through this forum.

 

Mark

 

Please repeat what pens you're using (or link to the original referenced post).

 

Lots of tiny nits (which no doubt you can see) but overall I'm quite jelous!

Question, do you (like me) '(bleep) your head' to one side when writing? I'm

noting a few 'long' uprights which have a few degrees of tilt?

 

I'd dreading looking at black type, for the reason you've clearly demonstrated,

it is *difficult*. all those little 'flourishes' that need to be exact.

I try and imagine the poor scribes doing that all day long.

 

I love the wandering capitals, and wonder what your intent was.

I could see it (but couldn't do it myself) if you were looking for right justification,

but it seems just 'wavy'? Has a very nice overall effect though.

 

Thanks.

 

Dave

[caliken]

A few words of wisdom from Horace, written in a form of narrow Gothic Blackletter

 

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/NarrowGothicSat500.jpg

Edited October 16, 2010 by caliken

[caliken]

  On 9/24/2010 at 5:32 PM, mliptrot said:

Please comment, constructive criticism is welcome as I'm a relative beginner and have found endless help by reading through this forum.

 

Ernst Bitterman's excellent reply contains very sound advice IMO.

 

You've made an excellent start and my only suggestion would be to practice on grid paper for a while. This shows up any deviation in verticals as well as horizontals, and really belps to keeps things straight until you become accustomed to the discipline of this style.

 

Good work!

[mstone]

  On 10/6/2010 at 9:46 AM, Inkling said:

That being said, I don't think a classicist of Tolkien's caliber would have approved entirely of Mike Nagada's efforts.

Less an issue of classicism than linguistics and setting the environment of the story. Tolkien's work is fairly unique in that it incorporates the relationship between English and its parent tongues into the story in a way that's essentially impossible to translate into other languages. There are some languages where you could possibly duplicate the effect, but doing so would result in a very different story (even more so than most translations).