The Voynich Ninja

(25-03-2018, 08:06 PM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's just the lines that are in all of the openings. Only this one has been painted incompletely. I'm not sure if at this scale we can say that it was intentional.

 Yes, Koen , I also took into account to the scale of the drawing. But the question arises, if the painter, with his "jeweler's" pen, is able to draw a hollow eye (circle) in the lady  (not a point and not a blob!), then why can not he draw a 5 times bigger object (tadpole)?
 However, many people are not able to see these details in the manuscript on a natural scale without the use of glasses. How did the painter do it, if at the time of writing the manuscript, the loupe (officially) did not yet exist?
PS / You can qualify this tadpole and as a symbol of "YIN-YAN" on plant f38r.
[attachment=2032]

In the crook of that pipe, in the light area, there might be three or four blobs of erased text.

Also on the pipe, in the amber area on the right. You have to tilt your head a bit to the right.

On the scans of 2014, an additional plant appeared next to the frog from the fold of the leaf, which was not taken into account You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Apparently, it is this plant that is associated with (tag) - a frog.
René, many researchers use your site as a VMS encyclopedia. Make an addition to the “Other Information” section of page f102r2.
Figure: 205 is analogous to f47v, and 206 is f32v.

(14-10-2020, 09:33 AM)Wladimir D Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.On the scans of 2014, an additional plant appeared next to the frog from the fold of the leaf

Heh, I never noticed this before. The frog seems to belong closer to whatever this is than to the large plant on its right.

What is it though? It's green, and there appear to be lines coming out of the underside. Is it a root or a leaf? Or maybe even something else entirely, like a leech?

[attachment=4890]

Thanks Vladimir, when I am at home I will check a few things. Note that the numbers were assigned in the 1930's by Theodore Petersen, and he didn't give this a number.

I mentioned that detail You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. a few weeks ago. I thought it could be a leaf or maybe an insect, with many legs on the left side of the illustration. Then I noticed that it appears to be connected to the root and I now believe it is a leaf or a sprout. The ink is almost invisible and maybe the stalk I see is imaginary, but I find this interpretation convincing enough.

I have no idea what that thing is, but this plant has a leaf on the upper stalk that is star shaped and it would be unusual for a differently-shaped leaf to be growing from the lower rhizome.



I really can't guess what it is. It's painted green.  Big shrug, scratch head? I dunno.

(14-10-2020, 12:35 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I mentioned that detail You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. a few weeks ago. I thought it could be a leaf or maybe an insect, with many legs on the left side of the illustration. Then I noticed that it appears to be connected to the root and I now believe it is a leaf or a sprout. The ink is almost invisible and maybe the stalk I see is imaginary, but I find this interpretation convincing enough.

I tink you are right, the stalk is visible  very well and a sprout just growing  out of the root would look like that

I just had a look at three other sources of Voynich MS images, and they seem to be consistent. There is no connection between this 'thing' either up to the plant or down to the root. The most instructive was the Petersen hand transcription, and I attach my camera picture of the relevant page.

Petersen suggests the name 'morsus ranae' or German 'Froschbiss', due to the presence of the frog, and whatever that other beast (no plant) is.

[attachment=4895]

Very interesting. An additional critter in the VM and nobody knew. At least if Petersen's interpretation is correct, which depends on what is hidden under the fold.