02-02-2026, 08:24 PM
It seems more complicated than I thought.
My logic was - if you draw a person, animal or plant then you usually want to draw it complete. You don't for example cut off part of the head like in my fake example below:
So in my theory roots should be drawn to their tips (is it a proper word?). If they aren't then they were cut.
But I checked better quality manuscripts than Voynich and it looks like the roots sometimes aren't drawn to their tips too, yet the page wasn't probably cut. Seems that they simply didn't fit:
It is much rarer than in Voynich Manuscript but it happens.
So maybe after all Voynich artist was just a bad planner. He started drawing roots (maybe copying them from some source) and then didn't have enough space to draw them completely.
Yet somehow I feel the pages were cut
There are too many of these cases. But I am unable to prove it.
My logic was - if you draw a person, animal or plant then you usually want to draw it complete. You don't for example cut off part of the head like in my fake example below:
So in my theory roots should be drawn to their tips (is it a proper word?). If they aren't then they were cut.
But I checked better quality manuscripts than Voynich and it looks like the roots sometimes aren't drawn to their tips too, yet the page wasn't probably cut. Seems that they simply didn't fit:
It is much rarer than in Voynich Manuscript but it happens.
So maybe after all Voynich artist was just a bad planner. He started drawing roots (maybe copying them from some source) and then didn't have enough space to draw them completely.
Yet somehow I feel the pages were cut
There are too many of these cases. But I am unable to prove it.


![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)