4,991
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
What we do know is where a block of 224 recipës which stand out from the rest as being written in a particularly archaic language come from. They are all old Polish translations of recipës from the Czech ''Kuchařství''. It’s clear from the style and the grammar of these recipës that they were all written in early-16th-century Polish, which means that the translation couldn’t have been made at the same time as the manuscript was written. The copyist must have used an existing 200-year-old translation, which was either still preserved in its printed form at the time or had already been copied by hand from a printed book before.
There are other clues, too, which confirm that the author of the manuscript had access to the same printed cookbook of which only the three sheets survive today. One is that the manuscript contains the modified title of one of the recipës that we already saw on the sheet found at the Jagiellonian Library: “buffalo, bison or other game which is uncommon in Polish lands, but only in foreign countries”. Another is a word incorrectly written with the letter “t” T where one would expect the letter “k”K. It looks like the 18th-century copyist had trouble reading the 16th-century typeface, in which the k’s K’s and the t’s T’s do indeed look quite similar. See for yourselves: can your make out the word written in the picture below?<ref>The correct answer is: ''“kotła”''.{{czyt|kotła}}</ref> So if the copyist misspelled a word because he 'd misread a printed letter, then he must have been copying a printed text – and this means that the printed text must have existed in the first place!
[[File:Kotła.JPG|thumb|left|upright|What does it say? Can you make out the letters? Hint: it means “of a cauldron” in Polish.]]
