text probably copied by a drunk official

[Zefiro]

Another thought, which involves a gross misreading, is that 'scites bear' is actually 'takes place'. (s=t, ci=a, t=k; b=p, e=l, r=ce)

One of these confusions in a word might be easily spotted, but here it would mean having a whole lot of them all together. I wonder...?

I was wondering the same. It would be a (far-fetched?) solution that elegantly solves the sentence.

I also have a few other remarks:
impress of
except that
viewing the steps

[Zefiro]

second page:
to give an opinion

[JanSeifert]

I also have a few other remarks:
impress of
except that
viewing the steps

Yes, these small mistakes happen all the time. But this is just the first step in my process, the rough transliteration. There are two more steps to iron out these mistakes  . But thank you for spotting them!

»steps« at that place in the sentece in my opinion would be too far from context. there were no steps mentioned elsewhere in connection with the temple.

J.

[arthurk]

...viewing the steps

»steps« at that place in the sentece in my opinion would be too far from context. there were no steps mentioned elsewhere in connection with the temple.

Having read the full transcription, I now wonder if mckha was right after all:

I wondered if “etope”” was slope.

I did too for a time, but the tall letter is crossed like a 't'.

Yes - but this is a document that has been copied from another document. So it could be a mistranscription. Slope makes sense if you consider the description of viewing petrifried wood which could be on a slope of a river bank for instance.

The temple is on a "hilldoh", which I think must be a hilltop. It's surrounded by something which is prevented from falling by these small palings made of petrified wood. For someone approaching and seeing them for the first time, "the first impression left upon the mind in viewing the slope" would make good sense.

It's most unfortunate that a word seems to have been missed out ("a little ... raised all round it") so we can't really envisage the scene. Or can we make "raised" into a noun that would fit the context?

[JanSeifert]

One of these confusions in a word might be easily spotted, but here it would mean having a whole lot of them all together. I wonder...?

But if you look closer and notice the clusters of mistakes on the two pages it does not seem too far fetched. The scribe was tired after a long day's work, the light bad &ca. The original too, that was copied by the scribe was a personal (field) diary by Pemberton, written under unknown circumstances (on the way) and could have been very hard to read. And scribes were not hired to understand the texts they had to copy. While it was done word by word. Meanings of the sentences were of less concern.

Could you make sense out of tresbage on p. 127? I concluded, it could be leafage – the only thing that made sense to me in the context?

J.

[JanSeifert]

The temple is on a "hilldoh", which I think must be a hilltop. It's surrounded by something which is prevented from falling by these small palings made of petrified wood. For someone approaching and seeing them for the first time, "the first impression left upon the mind in viewing the slope" would make good sense.

It's most unfortunate that a word seems to have been missed out ("a little ... raised all round it") so we can't really envisage the scene. Or can we make "raised" into a noun that would fit the context?

And the thing »raised« had to make the temple »remarkable«. Or do you think »raised« ist the marbled version of the word?
I will put it on my list for »a shot in the dark« reading (Pemberton was certainly not the only one ever visiting the place. There is a few more published texts about Ava from slightly earlier and later which I will check.)
J.

[JanSeifert]

Having read the full transcription, I now wonder if mckha was right after all:

I wondered if “etope”” was slope.

Now looking very close there are two small strokes on the right hand side of etope, striking out the crossing of the »t«?

j.

[arthurk]

Could you make sense out of tresbage on p. 127? I concluded, it could be leafage – the only thing that made sense to me in the context?

I think it's 'herbage' - and in this case written correctly. I wouldn't consider it to be an everyday word, but maybe it was more common then. Some of these more obscure words probably survived longer than they might have done because writers often used 'elegant variation', preferring unusual synonyms and circumlocution to simply using the most obvious word more than once.

[JanSeifert]

Thank you all! I think I can proceed for now. There will be more problems for sure. If I find out anything about the place I will post it here.

J.