[Bell Historians] Re: Nicolaus Angelus

[Timothy Hurd]

Thanks, John - I had already considered the accusative (objective) case for 'Angelus' = 'Angelum', hence the confusion over subject/object on the inscription, in this instance. 

Thus far, 'Nicolaus Angelus' appears to be a 'one-off'. There are heaps of errors in Medieval inscriptions, mirror images/upside down/every which-way... I am put in mind of Tom Lehrer's famous injunctive, from his song "Be Prepared" (about The Boy Scouts) = "Don't write naughty words on walls if you can't spell...". 
Twine embossing or thin-section
 impressed wax coiled inscriptions/founder's marks on early bells (in core/cope process, reading in negative) are endlessly fascinating, if not equally confusing. The founder 'Nicolaus' (in DK bells) generally used a stylized 'anchor' identification motif on reverse side, opposite to the name 'Nicolavs' (on obverse side). My correspondent in Norway has not indicated the presence of such an anchor motif, so I am still searching for further evidence.
If the bell founder in question really cast TRULY outstanding bells in (his) time, he could certainly have been considered 'THE ANGEL' (nominative case). However, the vast majority of Medieval bells have serious  non-concentricity issues (= 'wow, wow, wow' interference patterns) and are, therefore, maybe not so 'Angelic', at least to our post-Modernist ears... but who is to judge, from this remove?
I could be mistaken, but I question whether the various incarnations of 'Sanctus Nicolaus' were actually bell founders, per
 se, rather than the expected 'saintly' nobility/worthies and/or reverential 'objects' - therefore, the name 'Nicolaus' still probably refers to the founder's principal name (as maker), rather than any other attribution.
I think the next step has to be am on-site visit & find out face to face... More anon.
Any other informed input? Thanks, in advance...

Cheers,TH



--- On Sat, 23/2/13, John Camp <camp at wdNn0W-3x_LUCt9VSlqVMiekq7wHRO5lx5AL0dHQKCxyvte5aIsmjnDgjnHTR_l4Ebn7GcEyqoiEYm-5sA.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

From: John Camp
 <camp at wdNn0W-3x_LUCt9VSlqVMiekq7wHRO5lx5AL0dHQKCxyvte5aIsmjnDgjnHTR_l4Ebn7GcEyqoiEYm-5sA.yahoo.invalid>
Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Re: Nicolaus Angelus
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Received: Saturday, 23 February, 2013, 8:39 AM
















 



  


    
      
      
      At 00:53 on 23 February 2013, Timothy Hurd wrote:



> Certainly the spelling 'Nicolaus' could indicate Prussian/Polish

> origins, possibly from Danzig (Gdansk) region.



It also happens to be the Latin spelling.  Saint Nicholas is "Sanctus

Nicolaus".



> So the (extra word) 'Angelus' is probably not the founder's surname

> or a descriptor at all, but could refer to the bell itself as in:

> 'Nicolaus' made me (an 'Angel')  or a bell made for ringing the

> Angelus (hence, a 'Messenger').



The trouble with this is that the accusative "Angelum" would be

needed.  (Of course, incorrect Latin in inscriptions is not unknown,

even in modern times.)



John Camp





    
     

    
    






  








           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20130223/7f025158/attachment.html>