The Voynich Ninja

See
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Quote: Es handelt sich um eine Teilabschrift des Erstdrucks von Peter Schöffer aus dem Jahr 1485 (Nr. 70.3.a.). Die Angabe bei Schneider (S. 162), die Abbildungen der Handschrift seien seitenverkehrt zum Druck Hain 8949 [Nr. 70.3.b.] unterstreicht, dass die unmittelbare Vorlage der Schöffer-Druck war, eben weil der Schönsperger-Druck seitenverkehrt ist. Abgeschrieben wurden die Pflanzen aus dem A-Bereich (Arthemisia bis Astrens) und im unmittelbaren Anschluss die Pflanzen aus dem M-Bereich (Menta bis Morsus diaboli); dabei wurden die 36 Kapitel durchlaufend von 1 bis 36 gezählt. Die Handschrift weist keine Erweiterungen oder Kürzungen zum Bildprogramm des Erstdruckes auf. Die Text-Bild-Anordnung wurde so eingerichtet, dass im Gegensatz zum Druck jedes Kapitel mit der Abbildung auf einer Versoseite beginnt. Der Zeichner hat relativ exakt seine Vorlage übernommen, während die Kolorierung sehr flüchtig und großflächig durchgeführt wurde. Dabei hat man sich nicht immer an die Bildanweisungen gehalten, welche die Farbgebung (z. B. rot, grün, gelfar, wis) festlegten. In etwa der Hälfte der Illustrationen fehlt insbesondere bei den Blüten oder bei den Wurzeln die Kolorierung. Die beiden Darstellungen der Alraune (Mann und Frau) sind unkoloriert.

TL;DR
The first print of Gart der Gesundheit by Schöffer (1485) had the same orientation as Cgm 728. The later print was mirrored. So the source was the early Schöffer print.
Still a puzzling manuscript. We know it must have been created later than 1485 and was copied from a printed book, yet it shows a lot of parallels to the VM.

It also contains a charm to be written on paper as remedy on p.277
[attachment=16362]

There are some kabbalistic? symbols on p. 293.
[attachment=16361]

On p.344 several recipes end with ...heilt palt... (heals soon) followed by a word I can't read. It has some similarity to the 2 words before 'so nim gas mich' on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. but that is probably a coincidence. It would still be interesting to check the recipes for similarities with the VM marginalia.
[attachment=16363]
[attachment=16360]

The first spell is about getting rid of worms by writing the spell on a piece of paper.
P, B, probably the Lord’s Prayer.
‘tue’ = to do.

This manuscript reallly has a strong Voynich vibe!

[attachment=16364]
If I got it correcltly the left page shows garlic (allium = knoblauch) and the labels seem to say "grün" (green) and "gelfau":  maybe yellowish, modern standard German word is "gelblich" and Bavarian variant is "geiblat" according to Gemini.

It is too late to be a direct inspiration for VM but they may share the same ancestors.

Maybe the plants aren't the same (after all VM has imaginary plants, it's a mainstream view I guess) but some similarities like vertical "rot" text are striking.

(06-07-2026, 09:50 AM)Bernd Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.On p.344 several recipes end with ...heilt palt... (heals soon) followed by a word I can't read

It could be latin related to benedico (to be bless, to praise).
Something like the following:
per ben(edictio) et 
per ben(edic)t(io) e(t)

(06-07-2026, 09:48 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(05-07-2026, 07:18 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This root has something like "rot fa...", maybe some variant on "vahl", maybe a faded red?  

 

Did you just find the manuscript that was the Scribe's "inspiration" for page f4r? 

I mean this:
[attachment=16366][attachment=16367]
All the best, --stolfi

Yeah, that's what drew my eye to it, this plant was in eggyk's opening post. 

Note that the letters are rotated differently: in the VM they are standing up and stacked, while in Cgm 728, the whole word is rotated 90°CW.
In Cgm 728, another word is added, the unclear word starting "fa..." that's also added to yellow, resulting in a brown. So "yellow fa..." and "red fa..." are both brown shades.

In Cgm 728, just "rot" results in proper red. If "rot fa..." means some reddish brown, then the color we see makes sense. In the VM, however, it simply says "red" in a yellow stem above a brown root.

One hypothesis may be that the VM artist drew from a MS that already had color annotations and just took them on board, initially. These were then not followed in the painting stage [whenever that may have been, let's not turn this into another later painter debate]. If this hypothesis is correct, it would mean that the VM relied on a MS that was itself a copy with color annotations, which may or may not have been fully painted.

(06-07-2026, 02:39 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.One hypothesis may be that the VM artist drew from a MS that already had color annotations and just took them on board, initially. ... If this hypothesis is correct, it would mean that the VM relied on a MS that was itself a copy with color annotations, which may or may not have been fully painted.

That is my guess too.

IIRC, those few "color keys" are all near the beginning of the Herbal section.  If that is indeed the case, it could mean that the VMS Scribe at first did not know what those letters were, but eventually figured it out, or had it explained to him .
All the best, --stolfi

Isn't fa just short for farbe?

Why would you write 'color' in a color annotation?
OT question: Do we have a spreadsheet or graph where in the VM which color annotations are? Are they clustered in bifolios?

I think it's worth looking into other copies of Peter Schöffer's print of Gart der Gesundheit from 1485.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Obviously, the print has no color annotations

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Couldn't find a digitized version

Strasbourg, Bibliothèque nationale et universitaire, ms. 2152 (olim L germ. 221.kl.2º)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Similar plants, also absolutely horrible paint job, but much more orderly text, not flowing around illustrations. Few color annotations, mostly at the beginning. Apparently both in German and Latin. Some were not honored. No vertical in-stem annotations.

So what to make of this?
BSB Cgm 728 by far is the most 'voynichy' of those Gart der Gesundheit copies so far. Maybe there are more.
The authors of those hand-copies of prints added a few (when and why?) color annotations that were not present in the source. Someone did an abysmal paint job and sometimes didn't even honor those few annotations. Both apparently wasn't uncommon and isn't unique to the VM. The question is when this workflow started. Was it something typical for the very late 15th century or did the same happen much earlier?

rot fä[rben] ?