(26-09-2023, 10:20 AM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (25-09-2023, 10:49 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If the top part of VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is costmary, otherwise known as the 'Herb of the Virgin' [Mary], and if the bottom part is a representation of Saint Michael...
Moreover, the fact that parts (flowers, foliage, roots) can often be matched separately (including very good matches with unusual features) is strong evidence for hybrids, symbolic interpretations, and an obsession for pairing: all the important stuff that is not covered by a whole plant ID.
Very true. And while we were cognizant of it, it was a pragmatic move to just create a site aiming at the whole plant.
But it would be great to at least partially accommodate this aspect of the illustrations.
Here is a suggestion. (I'd love some feedback or suggestions.)
We could add an additional attribute called 'Portion' that one could complete when filling out a proposal form. This attribute would involve selecting one or more of the following
- Whole Plant [W]
- Flower [F]
- Leaves [L]
- Stem [S]
- Root [R]
The default would be Whole Plant, which would be mutually exclusive to the rest. The Portion would be included int the proposal table as an extra column listing the letter indicators. For examples:
* W
* F, L, S
* R
(These kinds of enhancements have implications for other existing features, which is why it's best to let the idea ferment for a bit before jumping into implementing it.)
Thanks.
We have now added to You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view., the ability to view tables of all the plant illustrations and all the plant identification proposals.
These are available on two separate pages through the two new menu options that have been added to the top menu line ("Proposals" and "Folos")
You can sort these tables by any of several attributes (by clicking on the column headers) and you can also search and filter the tables for specific proposers, scores, proposed plant names, etc.
(Thanks to Lisa Fagin Davis for her suggestion that prompted this enhancement.)
Many thanks for this great web site!
As I wrote elsewhere, I am a bit handicapped - equipment-wise - for the moment, but I will be happy to add some thoughts starting next week.
I came here to also announce this wonderful new site. I think it is a great tool, which will be very useful to so many, in so many ways.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I didn't take it the way many here have, that is, as a collection of plant I.D. opinions for a tally, a "vote", in order to come to a consensus as to what any particular plant was actually meant to be. I mean, of course any person can use it that way, think of it that way, but I don't see it as a means to "solve" the plant I.D. problem: But rather as a terrific way to look at all the known possible plant I.D.'s, all in one place. This can (will) then help in so many ways in helping to determine the age of the ms., the possible influences on it, possible influences on other mss., the plausible geography of it, and most importantly as a potential "crib" to the meaning of the Voynich writing.
But however one wants to use this, or view this, I see it as a refreshing new addition to the Voynich field of research, and heartily thank Andrew and Noah Steckley for putting it together. I am going to add the link to all my lists, it should be well-known and available to everyone remotely interested in this problem.
Rich.
F50r is a daisy.
Why? It has a flower and leaves and it looks funny.
That is not a prerequisite for assigning the plant.
There are several criteria needed to assign a plant.
One of the criteria is the C-14 analysis. Even if plants look like this, American plants do not belong to it.
Old assignments made before 2010 to America are wrong. But early researchers could not have known that. Nevertheless, they no longer have any significance. Just to show examples gives a wrong picture.
[attachment=7702]
Example:
Eight different classical medicinal plants that look similar. I have added the name.
Even if they all look the same, in a VM example only one plant fulfils all the criteria.
[
attachment=7703]
Example meadowsweet, classical medicinal plant, Europe, proof. (We have had it all before)
This one fulfils all criteria.
[
attachment=7704]
Sometimes others meet the criteria, you just have to find them. Many look similar, but only a few have a tuber.
I have not listed them because I do not have a medical reference yet.
The idea of the VM garden is certainly a good one, and the presentation is super.
But it should be done right and set new standards.
(29-09-2023, 07:35 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.One of the criteria is the C-14 analysis. Even if plants look like this, American plants do not belong to it.
Old assignments made before 2010 to America are wrong.
You have a lot of good stuff there. Thanks for posting.
I agree that the C-14 evidence is some of the most certain that there is regarding the manuscript (although it is not absolutely certain by any means -- the radiocarbon dating process is neither simple nor definitive).
But if something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it might just turn out to be a duck ... even if it isn't near a pond.
Certainly, any final theory on the overall manuscript would have to reconcile the issue of C-14 dating.
But assuming that the C-14 evidence itself is not only certain but that one's assumptions about what that evidence implies regarding the origin and history of the manuscript are also certain, can be a mistake.
I'm not arguing for the Meso-American theory by any means. Only pointing out that discarding what one sees before them on one aspect of the problem (i.e. identifying drawings of plants) because of one's firmly held assumptions regarding some other aspect (that is not directly connected) is reminiscent of how physicists could not accept the experimental evidence on the speed of light because of their resolute, but erroneous assumption regarding the existence and necessity of the aether.
If I want to collect plants like stamps, that is certainly a nice thing to do. But this way I can't draw any conclusions about the text.
Here, the most precise assignment of the plant is just good enough to be able to say something about the text.
The plant says nothing about the text, but with the text I know all the plants afterwards.
So I take the duck and don't think about pigeons and crows.
(29-09-2023, 09:20 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If I want to collect plants like stamps, that is certainly a nice thing to do. But this way I can't draw any conclusions about the text.
Here, the most precise assignment of the plant is just good enough to be able to say something about the text.
The plant says nothing about the text, but with the text I know all the plants afterwards.
So I take the duck and don't think about pigeons and crows.
I truly wish I could say I follow your reasoning. No offense, but I'm afraid I really don't understand what you are saying. So I don't know if I agree or disagree.
Why do I see swallow-tailed battlements, European architecture in houses and churches, clothing, German text, as well as possible Romanesque text.
How do I reconcile plants with this information.
The C-14 analysis is secondary right now.
If I now take the safest plants, I can make comparisons in other books of the time. If several books about the plant write the same thing, I have a good starting point about what could be written in the VM about the same plant, even if I can't read the text, but a good starting point.
Now I have a way of encoding.
The meadowsweet has no text, but a few words. Name, special characteristic? What makes the plant so interesting that the author didn't write anything about it?
Where is the special feature?
Don't just think about plants, try to see the whole.
[
attachment=7705]
And to be able to process all this, the plant has to be as close to the VM as possible.
The following example could be all 8 possibilities.
But if I look at the fan-like leaves, it is aniseed.
Classic, European, well-known.