(Manuscri(p)t) Un prêtre en 1839

[mken...@aol.com]

Bonjour les connaisseurs, bonjour les connaisseuses,

Hello connoisseurs,

I got some useful information from Ariel. He told me to look closely at the manuscript because there are some mistakes and even some omissions in the transcription.

Transcription (Cherche midi edtition): Et toute l’histoire d’une longue suite d’architecture était écrite dans cette incroyable structure

Do you think it could be "architectes" instead of "architecture"? Would the sentence still be correct and make sense?

Un Prêtre en 1835 - Visionneuse

Cheers,

Matthias

[Garmt de Vries-Uiterweerd]

I think it says "de cette longue suite", and yes, "architecte[s]" not "architecture". The sentence makes more sense that way.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jules Verne Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jules-verne-fo...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jules-verne-forum/39b7f09a-bc30-439d-8cc8-b93165430d6cn%40googlegroups.com.

[William Butcher]

It doesn't look like cette to me, since the 1^st letter isn't curved. But I agree that architecture seems unlikely: Verne usually puts at least squiggles when he omits more than one letter. 

As regards the previous discussion, the omission of a dieresis on aigue would not be surprising as Verne often omits them.(they're rarely functional whereas the presence of eg a circumflex can change meaning (peche, tache).)

Best 

bill

---

From: jules-ve...@googlegroups.com <jules-ve...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Garmt de Vries-Uiterweerd <garmtd...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 11:53 PM
To: jules-ve...@googlegroups.com <jules-ve...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [JVF] (Manuscri(p)t) Un prêtre en 1839

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jules-verne-forum/CAFuNt7dmwWhrxzEDWwdEvw25%2BPO4AQ2VGJ8Gk_ajT7QJycZ9_A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Stephen PERIN]

Hello,  I clearly read "architecte", with the missing terminal "s", required by the plural.

And I also  read "une suite" - there is a kind of "terminal flourish" which obfuscate the reading at first. 

See above in the letter, many terminal "e" have the same kind of flourish, but a bit less exacerbated indeed. More simple.

Regards,

S.

[mken...@aol.com]

Thanks to all! Thanks of course also to Ariel for his valuable info.

I guess that one is settled now, but additional comments are always welcome, of course.

Do you like challenges? Then here comes a real one for all of you:

«Certainement on n’avait pas songé à les entourer de ces gracieuses colonnettes au chapiteau corinthien,

Ces chapiteaux à jour dont les feuilles d’acanthes

Semblent trembler au vent du soir

pour en dissimuler la massive épaisseur, bien vue au XIIIe siècle, on le fit dans le style ogival primitif. Le gros pilier est surchargé et fait ventre.»

The two lines in italics are from a poem by Jean Reboul (easy to find with a search engine).

Robin (the transcriber) set question marks after ›bien vue‹ and ›gros‹, but ›gros‹ looks correct, I think. He also has ›surcharge‹ instead of ›surchargé‹, but that’s probably a typo, isn’t it?

The real challenge is the ›bien vue‹ I looked hard at it for five minutes or so and came up with ›congrue‹, but I’m unsure (of course) and I don’t know if it can make sense in this context.