+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: [split] Color annotations? (/thread-2364.html)
RE: [split] Color annotations? - Monica Yokubinas - 13-08-2019
(13-08-2019, 06:50 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(13-08-2019, 02:23 PM)Monica Yokubinas Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If the letters in the root of 4r are 'rot' German for red, then since these letters are also shone separately, on page You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. then this would suggest that you can plug in the rest of the German alphabet and solve the entire book...
No, I don't see the logic in this.
Putting annotations in German doesn't mean the language of the main text is German. Annotations can be in German and the manuscript might be in Italian or Latin. The scribe and the painter were usually different people, and it's even possible that an annotator might be someone different, as well (like the medieval version of a botanist brought in as an advisor).
Then we should also be finding the words: Blau, grun, and braun for blue, green and brown in annotated notes.
My point was that these same letters match the Voynich ones. I do not believe them to be the German word rot.
RE: [split] Color annotations? - -JKP- - 13-08-2019
Monica, there are German words on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. so the presence of German annotations would not be especially surprising.
I have seen German notations in an Italian manuscript and there were only a few of them. They do not always annotate numerous colors. Sometimes it's only one or two. Sometimes there is only one annotation for one color on one plant.
It would be extremely unusual to see a manuscript where someone has gone through and annotated everything. I've never seen it.
There is also the possibility of "por" on the Viola folio, which stands for purple in several languages. Rot is not necessarily German, but it is common in Germanic languages and it is mostly likely to be German. The g for "green" on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. could be many languages.
German is not contradictory to your idea that the VMS is in Hebrew. There were many Ashkenaz at the time, before the purges and the holocaust, so Hebrew and German/Yiddish together would not be strange.
I'm not saying they are German, only that they mostly appear to be German. There aren't very many of them, so it's hard to be sure.
RE: [split] Color annotations? - Monica Yokubinas - 13-08-2019
(13-08-2019, 07:08 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Monica, there are German words on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. so the presence of German annotations would not be especially surprising.
I have seen German notations in an Italian manuscript and there were only a few of them. They do not always annotate numerous colors. Sometimes it's only one or two. Sometimes there is only one annotation for one color on one plant.
It would be extremely unusual to see a manuscript where someone has gone through and annotated everything. I've never seen it.
There is also the possibility of "por" on the Viola folio, which stands for purple in several languages. Rot is not necessarily German, but it is common in Germanic languages and it is mostly likely to be German. The g for "green" on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. could be many languages.
German is not contradictory to your idea that the VMS is in Hebrew. There were many Ashkenaz at the time, before the purges and the holocaust, so Hebrew and German/Yiddish together would not be strange.
I'm not saying they are German, only that they mostly appear to be German. There aren't very many of them, so it's hard to be sure.
Look closely at the symbol on 1v, it is not a G but the alchemical symbol for lead.
is my guess.
RE: [split] Color annotations? - -JKP- - 13-08-2019
I'm pretty sure it is a "g". I have found many examples just like it in 15th-century manuscripts, ones with the curled descender and the same particular shape to the upper part with the right-hand serif slightly lower than the top.
RE: [split] Color annotations? - davidjackson - 13-08-2019
Would the scarcity of initials somehow indicate that those colours were especially significant?
IE, really make sure that this is red because otherwise we've cocked it all up?
RE: [split] Color annotations? - MarcoP - 14-02-2020
I noticed these annotations in De Plantis, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Milan, 1396-7. The symbol could be G for "giallo" (Italian "yellow"). The plant appears to be Saliuncha: Saliunca in Manfredus You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., but there the illustration is totally different. I guess that the Milanese plant must have been copied from an older herbal, but I could not identify it.
We discussed other cases of annotations where leaves have two different colours e.g. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (pointed out by Rene) and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
RE: [split] Color annotations? - -JKP- - 14-02-2020
In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., the drawing under the name Saliunca is the plant Bruscus (Ruscus)—probably Ruscus aculeatus or Ruscus hypoglossom.
The one to the right of the Saliunca paragraph is Solomon's Seal (Sigillum Salamonis).
Saliunca is a disputed name, a very old one. I can't remember if I ever resolved it on my own.
Some relate it to Celtic nard, but it looks nothing like this plant. Others say Punicea roseta (thought to maybe be punic rose, but it's a completely different plant from Celtic nard), but I don't think this was ever resolved either. Many of the ancient descriptions had only brief mentions of leaf and root and no drawings.
If I were forced to go by the drawing alone, with no text, I would guess the drawing at the top of the Canastense looks like Tithymalus (Euphorbia). Some species have leaves at the top that go yellow (they look like petals, but they aren't really flowers, they are modified leaves, a bit like the pointsettia). Here are two different species of Euphorbia. It's quite a variable plant:
"Tree euphorbia" is quite often included in medieval herbals, as are some of the smaller species of Tithymalus.
RE: [split] Color annotations? - Tobias - 13-05-2020
Could one see a colour annotation here as well? Or is it just the way the paint was applied? What do you think?
![[Image: image.jpg?q=f1v-703.8333129882812-207.16...97-270-138]](https://voynich.ninja/extractor/image.jpg?q=f1v-703.8333129882812-207.1666717529297-270-138)
Edit: I just read the thread about this (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), so it seems to be more than a single letter/short annotation. For clarity: I initially meant the (supposed) symbols right to the cross-like shape.
RE: [split] Color annotations? - -JKP- - 03-07-2020
I'm not quite sure what is going on here, and you probably have to go to the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. to see this, but there might be something in these root sections.
I didn't mark the one in the upper right very well. It might be two lines of text. It looks like VMS chars rather than plaintext, but it's hard to tell.
The second one on the left looks like it might end in EVA-d.
But... I can't tell if this is simply scrapes in the parchment that filled in with slightly darker pigment and they look like text, or if there is actually text.
RE: [split] Color annotations? - Wladimir D - 28-08-2020
Is it microtext R2 (?), Or dirt? You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.