02-05-2026, 05:11 PM
Images speak, conveying ideas to those who know how to interpret them. There's no need to wait for the Voynich script to be deciphered (if it ever is) to shed light on this codex.
Some images are difficult to decipher, but knowing what others say is more a matter of common sense. It is springtime (northern hemisphere), the time when most plants bloom. In the Voynich, almost all the herbs we see have flowers. It doesn't matter whether they are real or imagined. The fact is that the authors painted them in bloom.
If we see that the zodiacal section begins in Pisces (March), something rare to see, it is because it is a clear indication of the time when nature begins to revive after winter. And the strongest evidence that this relationship exists between these two sections of the Voynich (herbal and zodiacal) is that the peak spring months, corresponding to the signs of Aries and Taurus, are duplicated. The authors wanted to highlight the importance of these signs in the flourishing. I can't think of any other plausible explanation.
There are other clear indications that all parts of the Voynich manuscript are related. Therefore, arguing that this codex is a kind of encyclopedia of unrelated topics is a major mistake.
Some images are difficult to decipher, but knowing what others say is more a matter of common sense. It is springtime (northern hemisphere), the time when most plants bloom. In the Voynich, almost all the herbs we see have flowers. It doesn't matter whether they are real or imagined. The fact is that the authors painted them in bloom.
If we see that the zodiacal section begins in Pisces (March), something rare to see, it is because it is a clear indication of the time when nature begins to revive after winter. And the strongest evidence that this relationship exists between these two sections of the Voynich (herbal and zodiacal) is that the peak spring months, corresponding to the signs of Aries and Taurus, are duplicated. The authors wanted to highlight the importance of these signs in the flourishing. I can't think of any other plausible explanation.
There are other clear indications that all parts of the Voynich manuscript are related. Therefore, arguing that this codex is a kind of encyclopedia of unrelated topics is a major mistake.

