Observations on the Visual and Functional Structure of the Voynich Manuscript

[eggyk]

I leave you with these interpretations and I hope they are useful for reasoning and reflections, just as they have been for me.

Plants: clearly represented, often with correct colors. No one can deny that they are plants.

Naked women in water: present in the illustrations. Period. No one can deny ...

Texts: very long and repetitive, no one can deny it.

These interpretations are clearly from an AI. The "here's what I think, no one can deny..." is a very common response from LLMs when asked to defend its observations. 

The redundancy may not be accidental, but structural — a way to ensure precision within a very limited symbol set. 

The content might not be narrative at all. It could be limited to very specific domains, such as plants and their properties.

The images may not exist to document reality, but to explain and transmit knowledge within a closed group — perhaps to teach, to catalog, or to preserve procedures and rules.

In that sense, the manuscript could function more as an internal technical or ritual compendium than as a conventional literary text.

Again, this looks exactly like what you would get if you ask AI for a surface level analysis of the VMS. If you have your own opinions and interpretations, it would be worthwhile hearing them in your own words.  The "—" gives it away.