The Voynich Ninja

The way the stem is drawn, slender and slightly undulating is one of the constants in the botanical section and appears always to denote a vine, not usually considered distinct from a creeper as we would do.  If a true vine is meant, then tendrils are shown.

The leaves and petiole are always perfectly true to type. In this case we see the leaves are opposite and the leaves have entire margins etc.  That can be taken as literally true as it would be in a modern botanical drawing, in my experience.

The red line appears to begin from the lower part of the stem, so I'm just guessing now, but I'd be looking for a plant of that sort which was either irritating to the eyes, or which gave a substance useful as a kind of 'red khol' if any existed, or again which was especially good for eye-problems.  Eye troubles are an unusually large proportion of the ills listed in the Egyptian and the Nestorian books of remedies.

About the later bit of marginalia - I can't guess how it might relate to the plant.  If I find time in the next week or so, Koen, I'll see if I can offer an i.d. to add to the others.

Quote:Also, that line over the c and "z" shape means it's an abbrevation (letters are left out). The "z" shape (it's probably not a "z" even though it looks very much like one) is usually written exactly like this in Gothic Cursive and usually stands for -rum or -orem or -orum (and sometimes other things) depending on context.

Given these considerations and the fact that the word begins with "lu", what reading would you propose?

"lucrum" means "profit, benefit" in Latin
"lucorum" is plural genitive for "wood" (not material, but an assembly of growing trees)

Maybe it is supposed to represent eyes, but in that case the interpretation of the first word as "mullier" is still relevant. Both Velinska and I independently saw it as representing female parts, so it does look like it.

Maybe the marginalia just read something like (I paraphrase):

"Guys, are these eyes supposed to look like women's parts?"
"Woman parts or eyes? Plz help thx"
"Vag-eye-nas. Hurr durr."

Okay not the last one. But the ambiguity might be exactly what prompted the writing of the marginalia, that's what I mean.

I'd say that it would be methodologically risky to assume beforehand that marginalia are related to the main content. It is not certain and just introduces bias. First of all, we need to discern at least a part of a cohesive phrase in any language, and only then should we look at whether it corresponds to the  main content or not.

In the case of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. we have at least "pox leber" and "so rim/nim gas mich" which both make sense, although can bear not a single meaning. In the case of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. we don't have any phrase yet which would be compliant with orthography and grammar of any language.

(27-03-2016, 10:56 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Herba Oculus Domini ("eye of God" plant) from "alchemical" herbal You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (XV Century, Northern Italy, with Hebraic annotations), mentioned and linked You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (number 54).
Segre Rutz tentatively identifies the plant as You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

Hi Marco, nice one! Thanks!

Quote:Both Velinska and I independently saw it as representing female parts, so it does look like it.

But there are two of them, side by side. Historically, this has always been interpreted as a pair of eyes. Of course, it may be that some past owner inked in the red lines for x reason, and the Scribe had no intention of marking out this feature in such a way.

In 2014, on the site of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., I attempted a transcription of the marginal annotation.

Quote:1) malhor grind (Latin “molare”, see also the English “to mill” and the Portuguese “malhar”. But what language is this?)
2) allor laurel (Latin “laurus”, Italian “alloro”, Arabic “al ghar”?)
3) luc[oru]m of the groves (Cappelli, 4.2831, mentions c3 as an abbreviation for “-corum”, “lucorum” is Latin)
4) her[ba] herb (abbreviation of Latin “herba”?)
5) vullamina balsamine? (in Spanish it’s “balsamina”) valeriana?. This could be the unreadable name of a herb. Is it the same as You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.?

Looking at these words now:

1) could also be "mallior" [Edited:typo corrected] possibly derived from the latin "melior" ("better"). I agree that "mullier" (for "mulier", "woman") makes sense as well.

2) "allor" is closer to the Latin "allium" (garlic) than to "laurus"; on the contrary it is closer to the Italian "alloro" than "aglio"

3) "lucorum" still seems to me the most reliable reading, basically equivalent to "silvestris"; so it could be "wild laurel" or "wild garlic"

4) no new ideas;

5) the first letter could also be a "p" - "pullaminis" would be the genitive of "You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view." (foal) or "pullamina" could be an adjective derived from pullamen (like equina derives from equus); this "foal's plant" (herba pullamina) could possibly be pes pulli ("foal's foot"), one of the names of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

As I pointed out back in 2014 in regard to f116v, the marginalia author was not particularly careful about spaces, for whatever reason. If we look at "gas mich" in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. closely, we will see that it is not "gas mich", but actually "gasmich".

So when interpreting the marginalia, it is reasonable to leave the room for spaces where we actually don't observe them. E.g., the possibility should be considered of "mal lier" as well as of "mallier", and so on.

Quote:1) could also be "mallor" possibly derived from the latin "melior" ("better"). I agree that "mullier" (for "mulier", "woman") makes sense as well.

You then miss the "i" before the "o".

Quote:4) her[ba] herb (abbreviation of Latin “herba”?)

The third letter does not look like "r" (compare with "mallier" and "allor"). Rather an "u" or possibly an "y" (is the tail there?)

david - you are definitely right that there being two, and their relative position, is a strong argument in favor of "eyes". The only reason why I could see two vaginas being depicted is like EV suggests, that the plant is supposed to induce a change. The bottom one is larger and "swollen" while the top one appears to be bleeding up the stem of the plant. The blood, interestingly, comes from what would be the eye's pupil. You know...

My main problem with eyes is that especially the pupils aren't drawn like circles at all. I see in those much more an evocation of the female anatomy than an eye. I still see both as possibilities.

Marco - I agree with the "Latin" direction of interpretation, which, to me, seems much more likely than German. "Mellior" is definitely a possibility as well, especially since some correcting has clearly been done on the first vowel. It's also a word one might expect there.

Anton - I agree that marginalia don't have to match the text, but it doesn't seem methodologically wrong to me to assume some connection. This doesn't look like as much like a You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as some other marginalia. I think in Voynich studies, the assumption that the marginalia don't match the rest of the text is relatively strong since well, it's the Voynich manuscript.

(27-03-2016, 07:20 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As I pointed out back in 2014 in regard to f116v, the marginalia author was not particularly careful about spaces, for whatever reason. If we look at "gas mich" in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. closely, we will see that it is not "gas mich", but actually "gasmich".

So when interpreting the marginalia, it is reasonable to leave the room for spaces where we actually don't observe them. E.g., the possibility should be considered of "mal lier" as well as of "mallier", and so on.

Quote:1) could also be "mallor" possibly derived from the latin "melior" ("better"). I agree that "mullier" (for "mulier", "woman") makes sense as well.

You then miss the "i" before the "o".

Thank you Anton, I am sorry for the typo. I meant "mallior" (not "mallor") for "melior".

Quote:

Quote:4) her[ba] herb (abbreviation of Latin “herba”?)

The third letter does not look like "r" (compare with "mallier" and "allor"). Rather an "u" or possibly an "y" (is the tail there?)

I agree. I am not happy with "herba" either.