I was perusing the voynich the other day when I came across what I call the folio, "Garden of Eden" you know the snake folio. It's You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.. I'm so wish washy on the Voynich, I know, does it have meaning, maybe not? Anyway it suddenly dawned on me when I looked at the flowers coming from one the Calyx's and I saw 3 and the Calyx had one stem. I looked this up and its impossible unless I'm mistaken. It does attempt to have what looks like 3 red, but no stems, except one for 3 flowers on a Calyx. The main Calyx has the stem with one flower, that's how it supposed to work.
I understand if this was a secret code with instructions for prohibited information and valuable information of the time; I do think the author or authors was involved with the pictures would at least maintain this accuracy. So why would there be fake flowers in there for a medicinal, in a mix among what looks like genuine plants? The telling feature I think is that well this is rushed and it might not be a medicinal? Could the text be rushed too? Am I implying that it does not mean anything if the text is rushed, no. However, if you are making up plants, could you make up text, yes. Does that have meaning to the person it could, but would it be common to the public maybe not.
The fact that this flower is made up, could mean the text is made up. Yes the script is invented, but what I'm saying is that this might not follow a language, it could be an invented language. It does have structure and by now humans should have found a language for the Voynich. So if it is an invented language how does one interpret the grammar and try to at least substitute a language as a model to make any sense from it. The voynich grammar from vord positions should show the model language. If this cannot be found then we may very well have something that only has meaning to the author or authors. This means the public was never meant to see the Voynich.
This is a question I posed online. Are flowers really important to a medicinal document?
Apparently flowers are highly important to medicinal remedies and play a vital role bioactive compounds. The main consensus is that the Voynich is a medicinal. I feel its a medicinal too, yet could it be the artist being the author was not so good with depictions. Maybe the snake was the reminder of what the plant was for. I find it troubling that if flowers are so important that this little discrepancy in You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. for a medicinal is too obvious for someone who practiced medicine. Yet it is not so little. I was out looking at flowers today and did a double take, but each calyx had its own stem. The author schooled in remedies would know his flowers and should never depict a flower like that.
I conclude that the artist was an amateur.
(25-03-2026, 10:33 PM)oeesordy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
So why would there be fake flowers in there for a medicinal, in a mix among what looks like genuine plants? The telling feature I think is that well
The fact that this flower is made up, could mean the text is made up.
As Shakespeare says: Truth is usually simple"
The You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. flower which you discuss is some beans from pea family- a climber with a lot of shoots on its main stem and flowers on them. Some of the flowers are blooming , others are not yet open.
The snakes - I suppose show that it had been used against their poison.
The text is not made up, but very useful and explaiining the medicinal uses of the herbs. It may have secret meanings - especially with roots representation, but I do not know either.
BessAgritianin,
Maybe I was being vague or the explanation seemed to run into the answer about the flower.
What I was trying to state in a medicinal business it's not quite so simple. Flowers are the central ingredient of a medicinal and their compounds is what makes their unique remedies. I think the manuscript pretends to be a medicinal. Who would make this mistake and I do believe the author of the script, was the artist. Stolfi says 20% of the script could be mistakes, but I don't know his thoughts if the voynich has meaning.
F49r shows [url=https://www.voynichese.com/#/exa:shed-:crimson/exa:ched-:royal-blue/f49r/545.4545288085938][/url]3 flowers extending from a calyx with one stem.
In the real world where Truth is reality not a pretense like you suggest and flowers don't grow like that. I just don't think that someone who knows about the nature of flowers medicinally would portray a flower like that.
(26-03-2026, 06:01 AM)oeesordy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[..]
In the real world where Truth is reality not a pretense like you suggest and flowers don't grow like that. I just don't think that someone who knows about the nature of flowers medicinally would portray a flower like that.
That‘s quite the point: even within accepted, proved and acknowledged medieval herbals are drawings which have little to do with „reality“, do not look like real plants, just are not drawn foto-realistic or naturalistic. You will find many plants that appear nearly abstract or symbolic — that may have said something to medieval readers, but keeps looking very strange for us today. So we can‘t recognize the most of it.
(26-03-2026, 12:20 AM)oeesordy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Apparently flowers are highly important to medicinal remedies and play a vital role bioactive compounds.
Not in the early 15th century. The logic why a certain medicament 'worked' had nothing to do with chemistry, and at best with 'experience' from the past.
(26-03-2026, 06:01 AM)oeesordy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.BessAgritianin,
Maybe I was being vague or the explanation seemed to run into the answer about the flower.
What I was trying to state in a medicinal business it's not quite so simple. Flowers are the central ingredient of a medicinal and their compounds is what makes their unique remedies. I think the manuscript pretends to be a medicinal. Who would make this mistake and I do believe the author of the script, was the artist. Stolfi says 20% of the script could be mistakes, but I don't know his thoughts if the voynich has meaning.
F49r shows [url=https://www.voynichese.com/#/exa:shed-:crimson/exa:ched-:royal-blue/f49r/545.4545288085938][/url]3 flowers extending from a calyx with one stem.
In the real world where Truth is reality not a pretense like you suggest and flowers don't grow like that. I just don't think that someone who knows about the nature of flowers medicinally would portray a flower like that.
I believe You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. is showing 3 blue "petals" extending from 1 flower per calyx, each on a single stem.
[
attachment=14897]
I think ...........
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
(26-03-2026, 08:26 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (26-03-2026, 12:20 AM)oeesordy Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Apparently flowers are highly important to medicinal remedies and play a vital role bioactive compounds.
Not in the early 15th century. The logic why a certain medicament 'worked' had nothing to do with chemistry, and at best with 'experience' from the past.
The experience from obtaining certain flowers would be needed for the treatment of different ailments, thus the knowledge of compounds. Maybe not in the sense of today's chemistry, but in apothecary. Are we dabbling in semantics? A true medicinal text would in my opinion not make light of a flower. Notice in the image stem, calyx, flower. I venture to pose that You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. does not exist in nature.
Violet, miniature from You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. at the appropriate angle
[
attachment=14904]
On the point Rene highlighted, I think plants (less so just "flowers") had a very big part of cures for various things (as they still do) but the knowledge of why was not really known (to our standard of "known"). As an example, I told people when I was younger that if they got stung while going through the overgrowth to our fishing spot, they should rub a "doc leaf" on it and showed them what a doc leaf was. This is what my grandparents had shown me, and it worked for me. As with me, my friends nettle stings stopped being sore and itchy right away when a doc leaf was rubbed on the stung area.
Google says "scientific evidence is weak, and its effectiveness is likely due to the cooling sap or a placebo effect."
They (and I..) didn't know any of this then, just "doc leaves cure nettle stings", knowledge passed down or tried and verified by experience. I don't think they had a clue about any chemical mixtures by our understanding, just this thing sooths this, and that thing makes red marks less red, and so this thing I mixed up from both makes "sore and red" better.