20-01-2026, 12:47 AM
In the Voynich manuscript’s plants section, there are two that stand out from others, because to them a listed text is associated.
The first is F49v, where the listed items is on its own page, and the second F65v, whose text continues (in my view) to the following page F66r, with a long list as well, on the bottom left corner of which the apparently ill person is drawn with a text next to it. I strongly believe that 66r is a continuation of text for You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (and if it is, it may challenge the view that the bifolia were separately usable, but a pagination were intended, from the start, but this is a different question).
For now, I was wondering what is the latest consensus (or close to one) on the identity of those two plants (images on the bottom of this post):
For F49v, Edith Sherwood identifies it as Water Lily (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) and
(ReneZ You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) is listing it (following their researcher name abbreviations) as
“ELV: Lunaria. ThP: lunaria, cyclamen (Holm), alpenveilchen." Koen G., based on others’s views and likely consensus, has identified another plant You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as Water Lily (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), but You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. can also be a blue Walter Lily, it seems (large leaves, smaller flowers, which were blue in European context, and long thin stem, suggesting aquatic nature).
For f65v, Koen G. lists (based on others' views generally) it as being Chamomile, which seems acceptable to me. ReneZ also gives the following (ELV: anthemis, some kind of chamomila. ThP: chamomile. st.jacobskraut) (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ). But JKP disputed it on that thread (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), and I am not sure about that myself. Edith Sherwood identified it as Cornflower (Centaurea cyanus) (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
I realize there is no absolute consensus on any of the above, and there are many experts not named above that have expressed their views about the plants' identities. But if anyone (especially the plant experts) can update and share their latest identifications of the two plants, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks.
This is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
This is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The first is F49v, where the listed items is on its own page, and the second F65v, whose text continues (in my view) to the following page F66r, with a long list as well, on the bottom left corner of which the apparently ill person is drawn with a text next to it. I strongly believe that 66r is a continuation of text for You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (and if it is, it may challenge the view that the bifolia were separately usable, but a pagination were intended, from the start, but this is a different question).
For now, I was wondering what is the latest consensus (or close to one) on the identity of those two plants (images on the bottom of this post):
For F49v, Edith Sherwood identifies it as Water Lily (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) and
(ReneZ You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) is listing it (following their researcher name abbreviations) as
“ELV: Lunaria. ThP: lunaria, cyclamen (Holm), alpenveilchen." Koen G., based on others’s views and likely consensus, has identified another plant You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as Water Lily (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), but You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. can also be a blue Walter Lily, it seems (large leaves, smaller flowers, which were blue in European context, and long thin stem, suggesting aquatic nature).
For f65v, Koen G. lists (based on others' views generally) it as being Chamomile, which seems acceptable to me. ReneZ also gives the following (ELV: anthemis, some kind of chamomila. ThP: chamomile. st.jacobskraut) (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ). But JKP disputed it on that thread (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), and I am not sure about that myself. Edith Sherwood identified it as Cornflower (Centaurea cyanus) (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
I realize there is no absolute consensus on any of the above, and there are many experts not named above that have expressed their views about the plants' identities. But if anyone (especially the plant experts) can update and share their latest identifications of the two plants, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks.
This is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
This is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.