@ Aga Tentakulus et al. I appreciate all the work you have done on trying to identify the plants from your point of view and experience. Your contrasting identifications of the plants (along with alternatives others have provided), shows how debatable the field has been regarding the identity of the plants in the Voynich manuscript.
The reason I became interested in those two pages in particular, in light of the fact that in my earlier post I noted how the images could have become unrealistic over time across manuscript copying, was partly due to the associated “columned” listing with them as previously noted, and partly in relation to the question of their medicinal significance, a topic I have not seen engaged with as much as it deserves, in my view, when efforts have been made in identifying the plants.
Not being able to read the text, my sense is that the sheer number of plants gives the impression that the VM author was treating the collection as a catalog of medicinally helpful source for herself. So, it would be unreasonable to think that all the hundreds of plants are there for one specific ailment or medicinal value. That makes sense to me. She was helping herself and loved ones by gathering as best as she could the information she needed for medical needs.
But the two specific You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. are unique in terms of the lists associated with them, as if the author was focusing on them in particular for some reason, and even operationalizing them, given the coded letters, which I think have something to do also with the third circle of the chart on You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. (just my speculation, given some rare letters are found there as well).
So, I asked myself in what way the focus on those two plants can be meaningful in the context of the VM as a whole, and a question that came to mind regarding their medicinal value (both benefit and/or harm) was in relation to fertility and pregnancy.
Before Aga Tentakulus’s response, based on the general identifications offered by others I noted, I thought if one is Chamomile and the other Water Lily, interestingly what I was finding online was that they were regarded negatively (or not, depending on intention) even in those times, for matters of fertility and pregnancy.
Water Lily, for instance, could be used to quell sexual appetite, as an anaphrodisiac (usable by monks or nuns, it seems). Chamomile could be risky for pregnancy and discharge if misused.
I don’t want to go into details as they can be researched online, but my point was, depending on those identifications, we may find that those plants can be risky, but the risk may be relative. If you don’t desire fertility, or you want abortion of a dead fetus, they may be found helpful (disclaimer: I have no idea if these are true or not, but found the information online, so please don’t try!!).
Now, what Aga Tentakulus offered as the plant identities, turned the whole game around. From what I could fine online the two plants (he identified) had opposite medicinal value, which seemed very interesting, if he is correct. They help with fertility and pregnancy.
This led me wondering about which may be more reasonable in the context of the VM, and this morning, I realized something I had not considered before.
I thought perhaps a both/and answer may be even more interesting to consider. Since we don’t know what the text says, I thought it is possible that the handbook is itself trying to offer a composite instruction about plants that look like A and B, but may be C and D, so it may be trying to warn the reader to be careful and this may explain the ambiguity of the pictures as well.
Whoever makes a mistake between the two options, let’s say, can pay a heavy price in terms of fertility and pregnancy. You may think you are taking something to increase desire but end up losing it. You may think you want to help with pregnancy but result in liver damage or abortion. Conversely, you may want to lose the desire but gain it. You may want to induce a pregnancy termination but fail to do so.
So, the fact that you are all finding different identifications may be itself interpretively significant for the purpose for which the plants have been drawn as ambiguously, since the point is to explain matters in a way that may prevent a risky outcome.
Another way to look at it, is that the ambiguity evoked may be sociologically and even politically significant. If you want your rival’s legacy to discontinue in terms of not having heirs, you give them A for tea!! If you want to complicate a pregnancy, give them B for supper. Or, in Aga Tentakulus’s interpretation, if you want to help with both, give them the Venusnabel (Umbilicus veneris) or Lein (Liuum) for lunch.
Poisoning was a very common way of getting rid of enemies then as well, so we should always consider that the instructions in the VM could be deemed helpful or not, depending on the purpose for which they could be intended. An author trying to understand what is happening to her life, and is very serious about it, must also deal seriously with ambiguities of finding what plant is being used. A wrong choice can be deadly, physically, or in terms of a legacy.
The above are just some speculations, of course, but I think it can broaden the scope of why identifying the plants can be helpful. For me, it was not about just identifying them per se, but understanding their medicinal significance particularly in relation to matters of fertility and pregnancy.
I still think that those two plants on You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. (and f66v) that are treated with a list that later becomes operationalized in the manuscript to be very interesting. If the plants end up being entirely different plants, who knows, I think the above line of inquiry can still prove helpful.