The Voynich Ninja

(13-01-2019, 08:31 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. teasel?

The early ID's in Rene's list go with polygonum, but I find this a strange match since the leaves are more like teasel and other VM drawings are more like polygonum.

I think even the root is a good match

As to the alleged cannabis on 16r, to me it looks more like some kind of unusual plant I forget the name of that's used for landscaping (not japanese maple).

I think the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - Prunella - selfheal is an interesting possibility, based on the illustration - and it grows here. Have there been any early historical examples that match with the illustration and might also match with the VMs text?

@byatan:  Aralia var.??

(04-08-2021, 09:48 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - Prunella - selfheal is an interesting possibility, based on the illustration - and it grows here. Have there been any early historical examples that match with the illustration and might also match with the VMs text?

But I think this is Lantana camara. Also after asking my botanist friend, it was said that the figure could be Celosia cristata. Now by adding Prunella, this is getting more interesting. I don't think the manuscript will give a clear answer for this particular plant.

)

Celosia cristata makes me think of this one. I realize it is problematic, only single points on the leaves, but perhaps it highlights the nature of the leaves to be grouped together, hence giving a look of multiple leaf tips, rather than multiple tips on leaves. I could see the top as described by crescent shapes formed by the fasciation effect. I think it being compared to beetroot, i have my theories on that involving plant families. Also if the plants shown are as i think, those which would quickly provide food sources and or medicines or soil stabilization effects, or all those and more, Celosia is edible and has lots of seeds, very much like like Amaranth, with many tiny flowers that look like the one drawn in the middle, although comparatively much maller, more like the dots also drawn in the middle of the flowerhead. The colour of all of these, especially the one seemingly highlighted in the roots and the flower is also common to them, and some other plant families as well. They all seem to share several traits that make them useful plants. 

I like R Sale's Prunella identification. The first comparison pic i saw showed one of the traits portrayed, roots off the stem, making it easy to propogate, another trait useful to humans. Again this one is edible, medicinal, etc. It grows beautifully in a garden, looks so different than its lawn version, i have it here too, another trait, can forage for it almost anywhere.



The Lantana camara i can see some similarities but it does not call to me that the flower would be drawn that way to invoke this plant.

Those Celosia cristata images you selected do show a similar cone shape as f32r. However, the most notable feature of this variety (hence the name "crested") is the ruffled top, those undulations. The top of the VM plant appears open (?) or at least neatly oval, with multi-colored petals around it. 


Prunella is tricky. I agree that it is a good match for the plant, but at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. I saw that early researchers tended to identify it as some kind of mint, which looks equally similar to the plant. Is there a way to decide between the two?

I have lots of mint types too. None of them were called to mind with this pic, the flowers just dont look right somehow. However the trait of growing roots from the stem is certainly analogous.  I have lost my own plant files temporarily so i don't know what i had down for it but i like Prunella vulgaris because it looks so much like it, flowers too, especially the interspersed use of colour, the trick is the white areas have colour too just not anything like blue. But i could see drawing it that way and being close enough mnemonically to remember what you were thinking about. i see the tops of the flowers denoting the dried colouration, and gives more definition to the flower than the blue blobs at least. 



Re the Celosia, i actually posted more wavy versions than i intended. This variation of the plant is a fasciated version of the spicata ones, hence the curly edges. As it fasciates more, the curlier it gets. That is not what is drawn, you are right. I think maybe something more like this:



The second one shows some spicata and hints at plumosa forms too. It depends where the fasciation occurs. Some fasciated dandedions have one big head, some have multiple heads. So i could see one with the middle between the curly edges being similar to the fasciated stem section.

Ever since i read that beetroots developed around the time of the vms, the inclusion in a bunch of drawings of plants including something that looks like beetroot seems completely understandable. Evidently parsnips were what borscht was made of before that, it was the leaves were eaten for millenia.  Hmm... What if the roots fasciated? So i could see more of an earlier version of Celosia being depicted. Are there any early paintings or drawings of the curly celosia? Naked ladies... i was going to say maybe someone had colchesine, and made these new forms with it. Could be why they had naked ladies on their minds all the time.

f6v and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. are the same plant: ricinus. Acording to You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. the leaves alternate and palmate with five to twelve deep lobes.
The leaves in the f6v have 7 lobes and the lonely leaf of the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has 8 lobes.

[attachment=6728]

The leaves are good, but more convincing are the seed pods? or flower buds? with all those spikes. There have been several, fairly comprehensive surveys of VMs botany over the years. Isn't there some sort of collation for these identifications?

The identification of 46v as costmary might also be considered to be supported by the associated interpretation of Saint Michael's wings and the Assumption as per your investigations. 

The problem with these illustrative identifications is the text. Does the text correspond to the illustration in some meaningful way? Or is the illustration just a decoration? Is there meaningful text in the VMs? And if so. where was it hidden, before it was cut out?  Is it hidden by Stolfi's markers?