The Voynich Ninja
What is special about Voynich plants? - Printable Version

+- 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: What is special about Voynich plants? (/thread-528.html)

Pages: 1 2

What is special about Voynich plants? - MarcoP - 09-04-2016

How are the images in the first section of the Voynich manuscript different from other ancient herbals?
I would be interested in other people's opinions.

I attach visual comparisons between the Voynich ms and other manuscripts. I used four of the identifications listed by Derek Vogt on the site of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

The plants are:

Betonica (Voynich You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)
Malva officinalis, marsh mallow (Voynich You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)
Papaver, poppies (Voynich You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)
Plantago (Voynich You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)

The intent is not to comment on these specific identification hypotheses, but only to compare images between different manuscripts. 

Manuscripts, left to right:
  • You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Pseudo-Apuleius Platonicus, England, 2nd half of the 12th century
  • You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Tractatus de herbis, Southern Italy, between c. 1280 and c. 1310
  • You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Manfredus de Monte Imperiali, Liber de herbis et plantis, Southern Italy, first half of the XIV Century
  • The Voynich ms, first half of the XV Century
  • You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., Herbal of Giovanni Cadamosto, Veneto, 3rd quarter of the XV Century (before 1472)

Of course, you don't need to comment on these specific plants and manuscripts. Different comparisons are definitely welcome!

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - Koen G - 09-04-2016

Hi Marco, 
I like this question, it's open and may lead to some new insights. I'll do my best to see with an unbiased eye. Let's see.

First image: 
1) The Voynich plant has been given prominent, strange roots while the other plants have smaller and more natural looking roots.
2) The Voynich plant appears to be inspired by a similar symmetrical design, but doesn't seem too concerned with actual symmetry. Some of the other plants are more symmetrical.

Second image:
1) More variation in the roots here, but the VM still has the weirdest one.
2) If you look at the flowers in the top middle, you see that the VM has the stalks splitting and rejoining. I may be mistaken, but I don't see such a trait in the other plants. Does this happen in nature?
3) VM appears to show more variation in the color of the leaves.

Third image:
1) VM roots have again been given a twist: they are drawn in four "braided" pairs.
2) In this one, it is clearly visible that the VM does something special to the place where the roots join the rest of the plant.

Fourth image:
1) VM plant is shown in a different perspective ("from the top"), while the other manuscripts use the same side view.
2) VM plant omits the "flowers" (?), which all other MSs do depict.

Conclusions from this sample alone:
- VM adds more unnatural elements, mostly in the roots but perhaps also in other parts.
- VM design appears inspired by similar sources at some times.
- VM design is completely different at other times, showing a plant or plant part from an unusual angle.

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - EllieV - 09-04-2016

(09-04-2016, 05:39 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.How are the images in the first section of the Voynich manuscript different from other ancient herbals?
My personal opinion is that the plant illustrations are consistent with ones found in 14-15th century herbals. There are graphics similarities and content similarities. In short - not that different.

My favorite for VMs fol. 6r is Reseda  - the root in the VMs is colored yellow (now faded yellow) - the Reseda roots were used since ancient times to produce weld - organic yellow dye (which famously fades in time in manuscripts).
   

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - ReneZ - 10-04-2016

My two cents worth:

I am not so sure that the Voynich MS illustrations of the same herbs as in the other MSs, but let's not look at that aspect.

Where the Voynich MS stands out immediately is the inaccurate painting compared to the other four.

The illustrations from the first and last herbal in each case are more 'schematic' than the Voynich MS illustrations.
The level of 'detail' (amount of drawing) of the Voynich MS is more similar to nrs. 2 and 3.

Symmetry and lack of 3-D features are strongest in the oldest herbal, and are seen to reduces as time progresses.

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - Koen G - 10-04-2016

(09-04-2016, 07:15 PM)EllieV Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.My personal opinion is that the plant illustrations are consistent with ones found in 14-15th century herbals. There are graphics similarities and content similarities. In short - not that different.

My favorite for VMs fol. 6r is Reseda.

Ellie, that plant does look similar to the VM one. Did you find illustrations of it in other manuscripts? It would be interesting here to compare them.

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - MarcoP - 10-04-2016

Thanks everybody for your great comments! I hope to collect some more ideas, then I will attempt a synthesis. 
Ellie, I agree with what you write about the Voynich manuscript being consistent with the other sources. Yet it has its peculiar traits (as all manuscripts do). Since I know you have seen many, I would appreciate if you could share the details of some of the differences you find relevant, if there are any.

I attach an example of Plantago with an accompanying animal (quite frequent, but absent from the four manuscripts I chose from comparison). This is from BNF Lat 17844 (Italian "alchemical herbal", 1440-1460).

I have updated the attachments in the first post, adding plant names for easier reference and using a slightly higher resolution.

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - -JKP- - 10-04-2016

(10-04-2016, 11:41 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thanks everybody for your great comments! I hope to collect some more ideas, then I will attempt a synthesis. 
Ellie, I agree with what you write about the Voynich manuscript being consistent with the other sources. Yet it has its peculiar traits (as all manuscripts do). Since I know you have seen many, I would appreciate if you could share the details of some of the differences you find relevant, if there are any.

I attach an example of Plantago with an accompanying animal (quite frequent, but absent from the four manuscripts I chose from comparison). This is from BNF Lat 17844 (Italian "alchemical herbal", 1440-1460).

I have updated the attachments in the first post, adding plant names for easier reference and using a slightly higher resolution.

Consider that in relation to Plant 25v (the one some have identified as Mandragora), a plant with parallel veins, a basal whorl and a dragony/lizardy critterr included.

Rather than repeating them here, I might as well provide a link to some of my thoughts on 25v:

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

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - Diane - 10-04-2016

Marco,

I'll be frank. I see no purpose to this exercise, which appears to me to be verging on the intellectually dishonest.

First, you have included no "ancient" herbals, only medieval and late medieval ones.

Secondly, what you appear to be doing is begging the question of whether any of those identifications for the Voynich botanical folios are correct (adding some indication of which person proposed each would also be a good idea), and by begging that absolutely fundamental question, inviting people to presume the identification not only reasonable but actually correct, so that then the very details which indicate that the Voynich botanical folios *do not* derive from the Latin herbal traditions can be spuriously 'explained away' as superficial stylistic differences which - in my opinion - would be a mistake.


I don't say that you are necessarily aware of the logical fallacy in this proposed exercise, or of the potential waste of time for newbies, cryptanalysts and linguists by falsely representing the Voynich botanical id's as if they were unarguable, but I do not think it can serve any interests save those attempting to create a theoretical history for the manuscript, one which denies all the very obvious internal evidence of non-Latin derivation, style, character and.. botany.

Not that I expect these things to deter you - so rock on.  Smile

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - EllieV - 10-04-2016

(10-04-2016, 10:36 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Ellie, that plant does look similar to the VM one. Did you find illustrations of it in other manuscripts? It would be interesting here to compare them.

I found it in the Russian Library Platearius - it is a late 15th century French manuscript - the Ricinus drawing in the same manuscript is similar to the one in the VMs.
   
(10-04-2016, 11:41 AM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thanks everybody for your great comments! I hope to collect some more ideas, then I will attempt a synthesis. 
Ellie, I agree with what you write about the Voynich manuscript being consistent with the other sources. Yet it has its peculiar traits (as all manuscripts do). Since I know you have seen many, I would appreciate if you could share the details of some of the differences you find relevant, if there are any.

I attach an example of Plantago with an accompanying animal (quite frequent, but absent from the four manuscripts I chose from comparison). This is from BNF Lat 17844 (Italian "alchemical herbal", 1440-1460).

I have updated the attachments in the first post, adding plant names for easier reference and using a slightly higher resolution.

Hi Marco, honestly, I found examples in the medieval herbals for about every "strange" feature of the plants in the VMs. There are some with worst paint job than the VMs (we have to keep in mind that the VMs is pretty small book and I think it is just a perception problem that the paint job is very bad because we keep zooming-in the pages. In actual size the paint is not as badly out of line. Of course, the quality is not at the level of the Book of Hours etc. fancy works). I've seen herbals that include both realistically drawn plants and highly symbolic ones. I've seen roots that show the use of the plant and drawings that are simple word plays (houseleek for example is often drawn coming out of actual house in some old herbals). I think the "balneao" section is more interesting - I think it shows curious level of human anatomy knowledge, but the plants and the calendar (as you've demonstrated) seem to me to be just fine in the context of 15th century. This is all just personal opinion - not a fact in any way.
Thanks for the plantago find. I havn't noticed this one before. I don't have this one in my plant id list because I've seen few suggestions about it that I like - including plantago (I think Steve D really likes the plantago), Dana Scott's dracaena etc.  I personally like the plantago lanceolata best, but I haven't made my mind completely. Here is funny one - maybe the dragon is just a badly drawn mouse - check out the mouse ears herb Smile
   
(10-04-2016, 12:06 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Rather than repeating them here, I might as well provide a link to some of my thoughts on 25v:

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

Thanks JKP, this is a nice summery on fol. 25v.

RE: What is special about Voynich plants? - Sam G - 10-04-2016

I haven't studied medieval herbals to the extent that many others here have, but here are some observations:

- The plants in the VMS always have a root, and the root is generally as distinctive and detailed as the rest of the plant.  So, the root itself is important as is the fact that we have an entire plant, and not just the above-ground portion of it.

- The plant illustrations in the VMS, or at least some of them, seem to emphasize how the parts of the plants are connected - how the leaf connects to the branch, how the shoot system and root system connect, etc.  We can see that it is important because the illustrator does it differently on each plant, and the interconnections often look unnatural or mechanical.  Connectivity seems to be a theme in the illustrations in the other sections as well.

- VMS plants often have entire parts that look mechanical or schematic, such as the cross-sectional root on 23r, or the "socket and gasket" root on 3v (using a motif that also shows up in the Bio section).

- You have red lines in parts of the plants (mostly in Herbal A), and also dotted and dashed lines in some places.  If these features show up in other herbals I would like to see them.  It seems to me that these features are intended to convey something other than an accurate visual depiction of a real plant.


In general, I would say that while the VMS plant illustrations display artistic conventions similar to those in known European herbals, there seems to be a sort of "botanical theory", or at least a way of thinking about plants in general, implicit in the VMS illustrations that is different from what we see in these other manuscripts.