No text, but a visual code

[-JKP-]

 3º It has been impossible to identify plants in years and years of research, ergo the authors of the book did not want to draw known herbs.

This kind of argument doesn't work.

The fact that it has been impossible to identify SOME of the plants might mean that some of them are not plants in the botanical sense, but Koen had given some good examples of other possible interpretations. And those interpretations have nothing to do with astronomy and might not have anything to do with the text.

There's no guarantee the text is related to the drawings. The text might have been added by another person at another time for another purpose. I am hoping they were added at the same time (and I suspect they were), but there's nothing to prove that yet.

 9º I've seen very rare glyphs called gallows that sometimes stretch and sometimes straddle other glyphs, like they're a graphic representation, ergo the script it's something that seems to move, not an alphabet

This argument doesn't work either. These kinds of straddles, combined glyphs, and embellished scripts are found in Greek and Latin manuscripts. I have dozens of screensnaps to document that they are not unusual. What is unusual is the specific choice of shape for the gallows. The fact that some of them cross over others is not unusual (at least not in Greek script).

 8º There is in the script another glyph that I have seen in the images of the VM: the inclined line. And this inclined line I have seen it also in manuscripts and astrolabes as marks in the ecliptic, ergo it must also be an astronomical symbol.

This is not enough to prove anything. If you can find some rationale for the glyphs just before and after an inclined line, if you can suggest an interpretation for the entire token (or preferably a few in a row), then maybe this is important. But if you can't, then maybe the inclined line is a coincidence. There are a number of Latin scripts that have inclined letters (especially r and i). But, finding it in drawings might mean that the drawings have some astrological or astronomical significance but proves nothing about the text unless you can directly relate them.