Text in Latin at f9v

[Jorge_Stolfi]

voynich nu has a table of these along with some observations, voynich.nu / writing / Overview of additional or extraneous writing
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

My guess is that most of those letters in flowers and leaves are indeed color annotations, but they were present in whatever herbal the original VMS Scribe copied those parts of those plants from (as in that example that Rene cites via Towaide).  And the capital F on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. could have been a label, tying the flower to the text near it. The Scribe copied those letters without understanding what they were. 

As noted by Rene, those "color annotations" occur only in folios 1-32.  Maybe it was only at that point that the Author checked the Scribe's work and told him to omit those annotations.  Or maybe the Scribe switched to another source book.

If that is the explanation, then why didn't the Scribe figure out what those letters were, and omit them, on his own?  

Maybe he was not the brightest candle in the candelabrum.

Maybe he was not familiar with herbals and color annotations.

Maybe he had turned the both source book and the VMS bifolio updside down in order top copy the flowers, and did not realize that those squiggles were writing. (This would explain why the letters seem malformed.)

Maybe he did not understand enough of German or Latin to guess that "rot" meant "red" and "pur" meant "purpura"

All the best, --stolfi