+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Imagery (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-43.html)
+--- Thread: Plant 52r (/thread-2892.html)
RE: Plant 52r - arca_libraria - 15-08-2019
Back when I used to hope that understanding the VMS plant section might be as simple as matching a plant to an illustration in another herbal, I always used to think that the bottom part of that plant reminded me of the illustrations of coral in some of the later medieval herbals. The unusual shape, the opacity of the reddish pigment, and the limited tapering of the individual limbs of the root all seemed to make coral a moderately plausible candidate. Of course, the top half of the plant is nothing like a red coral, but for those of you seeing something crown-shaped, do you think that it is possible that the illustration is a mnemonic referring to corallus/coronam or even (heavens forbid!) a pun?
Some coral illustrations attached for reference.
RE: Plant 52r - Common_Man - 15-08-2019
The flower in close up looks like the guy was trying to draw 4 human figures.. But theres nothing more about the image that I'm noticing..
It seems like some kind of "placeholder-real" set of plant images were drawn interspersed with those having biblical imagery, to maybe hide them in plain sight (for god knows what), and this maybe one of them.. Maybe the guy was a Christian Missionary disguised as a traveling medicine seller ?
RE: Plant 52r - Helmut Winkler - 15-08-2019
Helmut: what about the faces in the roots and the clear animal shapes then?
[/quote]
Koen,
I don't think there is anything special in faces in roots, you find things like that in lots of mss. and I think most of it is ordinary doodling or having fun. And, no offence meant, but I think there is some pareidolia. The Voynich scribe ws not a 'modern' person, I think he had a foot in 'modern' science, in this case the 'Kräuterbücher' and the biology of the early 16th c., but he was late medieval as well. It is what I meant in another thread by ahistorical, many researchers tend to see the ms. seperated from his historical background.
RE: Plant 52r - Koen G - 15-08-2019
(15-08-2019, 05:46 PM)Common_Man Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It seems like some kind of "placeholder-real" set of plant images were drawn interspersed with those having biblical imagery, to maybe hide them in plain sight (for god knows what), and this maybe one of them..
Maybe, but the wooden part (whether it's roots or stems) is deliberately unnaturalistic in my opinion. Let me put a few examples together. f2r f14v You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
All of these are similarly weird. Understanding what's going on in one might help with the rest, maybe.
RE: Plant 52r - ReneZ - 15-08-2019
(15-08-2019, 05:27 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(15-08-2019, 04:35 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I don't think anyone would accidentally draw the root like that. Roots don't grow up out of the ground, curl together and reattach themselves in a very symmetric way under normal circumstances. At the very least, it is stylized or it is an attempt to show something that the illustrator can't quite visualize in 3d.
Exactly. Rene, if we're both talking about the same thing (i.e. the dark brown part, whatever that may be, root or branches or both), I don't understand how you can call this stylized arrangement of connected stumps "not exceptional"
I'm not sure what is meant by 'accidentally draw', but what we see is not out of place, in my opinion, in a 15th century drawing of a plant. The Voynich MS puts a bit more emphasis on the roots than most other manuscripts, but this is also not unique. The "impossible loop" in the roots might not be found in nature, but it is not a problem to draw it.
When I was in Burgos a few years ago, we walked along an avenue with at least 20 trees that had all been grown together, by cutting and connecting the braches. Perhaps a modern thing? I don't know.
A great number of crocodiles in medieval bestiaries have a loop in their tail. I don't think that real crocodiles can do this, but they were often drawn that way...
RE: Plant 25r - Linda - 15-08-2019
(15-08-2019, 08:54 AM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I don't know about the rest of it, but the flowers look clearly like an ecclesiastical crown. See, ie, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. (Can't find a photo to post here at the moment, sorry).
Why not royal? AFAIK, most Royal crowns were circlets at the time. It was the high ecclesiastical crowns that were "hats" were covered tops and a top decoration. Some Royal houses did have Coronation crowns, which covered the head with a peak, but they were highly decorative with jewels, AFAIK.
You can clearly see in the VM three (can't think of the word . the spiky bits) with a fourth repeated at the top. The little lines may depict fabric, or they may depict a halo.
There does seem to be a likeness. Here are some crowns from the Council of Constance
![[Image: 548px-Meister_der_Chronik_des_Konzils_vo...nz_001.jpg]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Meister_der_Chronik_des_Konzils_von_Konstanz_001.jpg/548px-Meister_der_Chronik_des_Konzils_von_Konstanz_001.jpg)
RE: Plant 52r - ReneZ - 15-08-2019
I tried to find why this looked so familiar, and from what I have seen just briefly, I believe that this is a reasonable illustration of ginger.
This is how it was illustrated in the early 14th century herbal manusccript Egerton 747:
This doesn't show the leaves or the flowers. There are some suggestions in wikipedia:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
but I am sure that more googling can return better examples.
RE: Plant 52r - Koen G - 15-08-2019
Rene, I do think the VM drawing had something "real" at its base, and ginger is a fine suggestion for the root. But on top of that, the VM roots I posted above appear neatly arranged into an apparently less random shape.
When there are faces or animal shapes in the roots, we recognize them right away. Is it so unreasonable then, that there may be other hidden shapes, ones that aren't as in-your-face obvious to the modern eye?
RE: Plant 52r - ReneZ - 15-08-2019
(15-08-2019, 08:20 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.When there are faces or animal shapes in the roots, we recognize them right away. Is it so unreasonable then, that there may be other hidden shapes, ones that aren't as in-your-face obvious to the modern eye?
I am sorry but it is not all that clear what you mean, and it certainly has little (nothing) to do with what I wrote.
RE: Plant 52r - Linda - 15-08-2019
I can see a resemblance with the supporting image but the circular aspect is still missing. I certainly would never have equated the vms root with real ginger root though, nor with three-pronged leaves.