30-01-2016, 07:53 PM
(28-06-2015, 07:51 PM)david Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I have written a rather long post about whether or not it is worthwhile trying to work out the plants in the Voynich.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I would be interested in what people think.
I think if you accept that the document isn't a fake then yes, it's actually possible to label them. This is true since a few of them seem to have labels, albeit not in a text I can read.
As to whether it's helpful to know what each plant is I think any information will improve the possibility of a translation. Not only does it provide context, but it gives sieve words for a brute force approach. But your other assumptions will determine how useful the knowledge of the plants is.
If you assume it's, for example, a nature guide, identifying the plants isn't helpful at all. Any plant could be in a nature guide the question becomes why these 30 or so. I didn't count, that's just an estimate -- and even if I had counted I can't be sure the same plant isn't illustrated more than once. My point is that unless you can show a geographic relationship between the plants or a similarity in habitat or some other commonality of nature then nature guide fails as a working hypothesis. Similarly if you assume a herbal and identify a dozen plants and half of them have no medicinal properties at all then the herbal is less likely.
Say that you're like me and your initial assumption is that VMS is an alchemical text of some sort. Page one is "Hey dudes, here's the secret to turning gold in to lead" or "Life extension for Dummies" or whatever, with a description of how the book breaks down. Part two is the ingredient list. Part three is the process. Part four theory. The rest is footnotes. I have to dig through manuscripts to see what alchemists put in their matresses and see if any of of the plant matter looks like anything in VMS. Fortunately for my theory alchemists were pretty out there anyway so they would probably use any plant as long as it had unusual properties or features.
So if I flip to You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and look at the plant pictured there I note that the leaves are hairy. My initial impression is Drosea or Pinguicula; Sundew or Butterwort. The minimal root systems supports the idea of this being a carivorous plant. I assert the blue spots are insects stuck on the leaves (and I know there are lots of them, but seriously, I think the colorist was kind of a slob in places so maybe he just lacked restraint). If I could positively identify the plant as Pinguicula nevadensis (I don't think it is, this is just an example) it would restrict the author to someone who had knowledge of a very limited area in Spain. So knowing the plant would help a great deal in understanding the manuscripts possible purpose and origin.
That said, I don't think identification of all the plants will be possible without a translation and maybe not even then. The label may say something like Flemish Butterwort on a plant that has a label or it may just say it's found in the Frankish Alps or the Poggogan Alps. If we had a translation that wouldn't help because we don't have a modern equivalent. And if the plant ever existed it may have already been extinct by the time VMS was written. Rare plants with real or presumed medical value are foraged past sustainable levels. Ginseng became a commercial crop because the natural supply couldn't keep up with demand. Something that couldn't be cultivated wouldn't be as lucky.
You made the point that herbals were copied and recopied. The Dark Ages stifled most innovation and tradition stifled it long after they were over. The problem for us is that once innovation started up again the traditions weren't maintained. Few people today could tell you what adderwort is and even fewer could tell you it needs to be drawn with three snakes wrapped around the roots if it's in an herbal. But if we can figure out which tradition VMS fits into it would be a big help because text as well as images were copied and recopied, sometimes partially, sometimes in big chunks. (Maybe it's an alchemical tradition since Hermes had two serpents on his caduceus. Although I think a belief in spontaneous generation is more likely than Hermes.)
More generally on the images I'm not sure I trust that the colors are useful for identifying the plants. If I were searching the text for possible colors I wouldn't limit myself to just red, blue and green. And it seems unlikely that all blooms and berries are in these colors. I also wouldn't mind some CAT scans of the pages to see if there is detail under that color wash. See the blue on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. for what I mean.
Final comment. Having people work on identifying the plants doesn't hurt anything. If you think it's a distraction, just don't let it distract you. There are going to be lots of theories expressed, rejected or modified before a generally accepted solution. Every person looking at the pictures is one more person who might eventually start working on the words too.
[url=https://www.jasondavies.com/voynich/#f44r/0.5/0.5/2.50]https://www.jasondavies.com/voynich/#f44r/0.5/0.5/2.50