• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Theories & Solutions
  • Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?
• Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?

• Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?

  ololololo > 13-07-2026, 07:10 PM

  I read an article by Layfield and Davis about how the creators of the manuscript did not intend for the folios to be bound. As I understand it, the binding is a major mistake by one of the owners (and we can see this, for example, in the confusion of the beginning of the sections). The manuscript was supposed to be read as a set of four folios (so are these the Voynich folios or the Voynich scrolls?)
  It is possible that this was done by someoneYou are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
  This led me to believe that the manuscript was originally more cohesive in terms of its sections.
  Couldn't the pharmaceuticals be located near the Botany? This could explain the "Small Herbal" (images of herbs f90r1-f96v), which is located "inside" the pharmaceutical section. It also makes sense - there's no need to separate these two essentially identical topics...

• RE: Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?

  ololololo > 13-07-2026, 07:26 PM

  I think I understand how the "unscrupulous" bookbinder worked. 
  Apparently, his priority was to make a standard book with normal pages out of folios. He put the folding folios away at the end, as he probably did not want them to be at the beginning, otherwise the book would be inconvenient to read (in his opinion).
  By the same principle, he could have placed the Rosettes after Balneology, although they should probably be located in the astronomy area.
  He probably couldn't find a place for the recipe section, so he put it at the end.
  But these are just guesses...

• RE: Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?

  denty > 13-07-2026, 09:39 PM

  i think the owner probably died, and the person acting as his executor took care of his belongings, but did not understand the writings, they just bound it up in the best order they could. (luckily they did so that it survived the passage of time so that we could see it) they probably thought it had value, even though they may not have been able to read it.

• RE: Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?

  ololololo > 14-07-2026, 11:13 AM

  (13-07-2026, 09:39 PM)denty Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.i think the owner probably died, and the person acting as his executor took care of his belongings, but did not understand the writings, they just bound it up in the best order they could. (luckily they did so that it survived the passage of time so that we could see it) they probably thought it had value, even though they may not have been able to read it.

  Yes, that's true, but that's not the point.
  Logically, Pharmacy should indeed be near Botany. This is consistent with the fact that Pharmacy has a trace of Scribe A, who worked on Botany.

• RE: Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?

  Jorge_Stolfi > 14-07-2026, 02:00 PM

  (14-07-2026, 11:13 AM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Logically, Pharmacy should indeed be near Botany. This is consistent with the fact that Pharmacy has a trace of Scribe A, who worked on Botany.

  
  Not to mention that You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -- not just the same plant, but the same drawing (viewpoint, details, etc.)
  
  All the best, --stolfi

• RE: Could Botany and Pharmacy have been one department?

  ololololo > 14-07-2026, 02:13 PM

  (14-07-2026, 02:00 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (14-07-2026, 11:13 AM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Logically, Pharmacy should indeed be near Botany. This is consistent with the fact that Pharmacy has a trace of Scribe A, who worked on Botany.

  
  Not to mention that You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -- not just the same plant, but the same drawing (viewpoint, details, etc.)
  
  All the best, --stolfi

  All right. But, as I think, in pharmaceuticals, not only herbs are considered (and not only herbs from Botany). There, attention is apparently paid to parts of plants. For example, the drawing of a fruit on f102v2, which resembles a turnip. In general, this is possible, because we use only the ginger root, not the entire ginger plant. If another part of the plant is not interesting, there is probably no point in showing it.
  This also suggests that the barrels in the Pharmacy represent the type of medicine, such as infusions, decoctions, potions, balms, etc.
• Next Oldest Next Newest