Language Atlas

Open Questions

Things this atlas does not know. Each entry is a question that specialists have posed and not settled, recorded with what would actually resolve it and which expertise the answer needs.

These are kept deliberately, rather than quietly omitted. An atlas that shows only what it is sure of implies a confidence it has not earned, and the gaps are often where the interesting work is. Several sit exactly where two fields fail to meet: identifying the hyssop of the Hebrew Bible needs a botanist and a philologist of Biblical Hebrew, and neither one settles it alone.

Grouped by the field an answer needs. A question sitting between two disciplines appears under both, which is why the group counts add up to more than the number of questions.

Filter By Specialty 99 fields

Showing 1 to 20 of 781 open questions, page 1 of 40.

History of Renaissance Occultism 28

Enochian Calls Which of the four Elemental Watchtowers does each of Calls 3 through 18 address?

Open Enochian Calls

Why It Is Open Secondary sources agree the sixteen calls between the two general openers and the Aethyr call work the four Elemental Watchtowers (earth, water, air, fire), but they disagree on the exact call-by-call assignment, and some later schemes (Golden Dawn) elaborate a finer subdivision (24 sub-angles) that is a 19th century systematization rather than Dee's own division. c2-esoterica declined to assign a specific element to any of the sixteen individual calls on 2026-07-27 rather than pick one scheme and present it as settled.

What Would Settle It A direct reading of the relevant Sloane manuscript folios (the calls proper, distinct from Sloane 3191's Heptarchia material) cross checked against Casaubon's 1659 print, or a specialist secondary source that states its own call-by-call table and its manuscript basis explicitly.

Expertise Needed Early modern manuscript studies / history of Renaissance magic

History of Renaissance Occultism Manuscript Studies

Question posed in A True and Faithful Relation of What Passed for Many Years Between Dr. John Dee and Some Spirits, John Dee, edited by Meric Casaubon.

De Heptarchia Mystica Does Sloane 3191 name any Heptarchia personnel beyond the seven Kings and seven Princes?

Open De Heptarchia Mystica

Why It Is Open The 2026-07-26 discovery and buildout design documents estimated 49 HeptarchicRoyalty rows for this table. Peterson's edition of Sloane MS 3191 and the parallel full text edition on archive.org name only fourteen individuals: the seven Heptarchical Kings and their seven Princes, one pair per day of the week. Each Prince is also described with a retinue of forty two attendant ministers, but the manuscript identifies these by table position or letter rather than by proper name, so seeding them as Name rows would mean inventing names Dee never gave them. c2-esoterica seeded the fourteen verified Kings and Princes on 2026-07-27 and left this gap open rather than closing it with fabricated rows.

What Would Settle It A closer reading of the full Sloane 3191 folios, or a scholarly edition that resolves whether the forty two ministers per prince carry individual names anywhere in Dee's working papers, or whether the 49 estimate instead conflated the Heptarchia with a different Enochian roster (the ninety one Aethyr governors, or the Watchtower angels) that has its own separate naming scheme.

Expertise Needed Early modern manuscript studies / history of Renaissance magic

History of Renaissance Occultism Manuscript Studies

Question posed in De Heptarchia Mystica (Sloane MS 3191), Joseph H. Peterson's edition, John Dee, edited by Joseph H. Peterson.

Theban A A Where does the Theban sign for A come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban A A

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban A are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

What Would Settle It A codicological survey of pre-1518 manuscripts in the ars notoria and Solomonic grimoire traditions for any script matching the Theban letterforms, together with archival work on Trithemius's own circle, including his students and correspondents such as Agrippa, and a collation of the Polygraphiae chart against the earliest surviving impressions. One dated witness earlier than 1518 would settle the priority; a draft, a letter or a working paper would settle the authorship.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Question posed in Theban alphabet (reference article), Wikipedia contributors, Origin and attribution: the ascription is not known to be mentioned in any writing attributed to Pietro d'Abano, nor the script in any Honorius manuscript except Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa..

Theban B B Where does the Theban sign for B come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban B B

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban B are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban C C Where does the Theban sign for C come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban C C

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban C are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban D D Where does the Theban sign for D come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban D D

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban D are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban E E Where does the Theban sign for E come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban E E

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban E are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban F F Where does the Theban sign for F come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban F F

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban F are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban G G Where does the Theban sign for G come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban G G

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban G are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban H H Where does the Theban sign for H come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban H H

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban H are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban I I Where does the Theban sign for I come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban I I

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban I are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban J J Where does the Theban sign for J come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban J J

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban J are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban K K Where does the Theban sign for K come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban K K

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban K are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban L L Where does the Theban sign for L come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban L L

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban L are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban M M Where does the Theban sign for M come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban M M

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban M are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban N N Where does the Theban sign for N come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban N N

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban N are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban O O Where does the Theban sign for O come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban O O

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban O are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban P P Where does the Theban sign for P come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban P P

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban P are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban Q Q Where does the Theban sign for Q come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban Q Q

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban Q are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Theban R R Where does the Theban sign for R come from, and does Trithemius's ascription of the script to Honorius of Thebes rest on anything but his own word?

Open Theban R R

Why It Is Open The three attributed-author facts recorded on Theban R are all marked unknown, and this is the question they leave open. Trithemius published the script in Polygraphiae libri sex in 1518, crediting Honorius of Thebes on the authority of Pietro d'Abano, but the credit has never been corroborated. The ascription is not known to appear in any writing attributed to d'Abano, the script is not known to appear in any manuscript of Honorius except British Library Sloane 3853, which names Agrippa as its own source, and no publication before 1518 has been found to carry it. A Trithemius era invention is widely assumed but has never been demonstrated, and no rival candidate has ever been named, which is why this is unknown rather than debated. It is one question about the whole Theban script rather than about this letter alone, and it is recorded on each of the twenty six letters because the atlas stores the attribution separately for every letter.

Expertise Needed Palaeography and codicology of late medieval Latin manuscripts, history of the early modern printed book, history of Renaissance occultism

Codicology History of Renaissance Occultism History of the Book Palaeography

Switch Atlas

The Inner World

The Civil World

The Natural World

Open Questions