Re: VMs: Smithsonian Botanical Symposium, 6th-8th May 2004

[William Edmondson <w.h.edmondson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Rene

I looked at herbal drawings from 15thC in Wellcome.  Some are accurate enough
to be readily recognized.  Clearly the poor quality drawings are less likely
to have survived (they could have caused death).

But VMs 22 as per you link is wrong on so many points, and is schematic to
a weird degree (it is difficult to imagine what was being conveyed by rows
of overlapping 'leaves' - even allowing for problems of perspective known
to have cropped up in relation to, say, drawings of buildings).

It could more plausibly be peony, but only just!

Cheers

William

Rene Zandbergen wrote:
> --- William Edmondson <w.h.edmondson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > But also of note is that the VMs conatins nothing
> > which looks like a rose, or does it?
> >   
>
> It depends how much fantasy one has :-)
> Keeping in mind what has been said about the
> accuracy of ME botanical drawings (I think I read
> it in Toresella's article), where elements that
> belong to a flower are occasionally drawn as
> tubers or v.v. (plants have even been drawn upside
> down), then, with the right amount of fantasy,
> f22v could be a rose.
>
> http://www.voynichinfo.com/microfilm/f22v.jpg
>
> I am sure this can be challenged :-)
>
> Cheers, Rene
>
>
> 	
> 		
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list

-- 
Dr William H Edmondson
School of Computer Science
University of Birmingham
Edgbaston B15 2TT
United Kingdom

Voice  -  +44-121-414-4763
email  -  w.h.edmondson@xxxxxxxxxx