Some time ago I went through all the plant drawings in the herbal and botanical sections to try to match up illustrations. I made about 108 matches. I have split them up over the following posts.

What I have yet to finish is producing a spreadsheet that lists each pair of images matched to each other with the various pages and locations they are on, which would included the rows and columns within the page for botanical drawings. And against each pair of the match the associated label or other text.

These are Matches 1 to 10


[edit KG: I add the link to the Drive file here for easy retrieval: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ]

Attached Files

Thumbnail(s)
                       
               

I am looking to directly contact any of the historical researchers whose proposals are presented in The Voynich Garden application (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). Well, just those who are still with us, obviously.
And any other researchers who have published possible VMS plant identifications that I have not yet gotten to include in the application. I would like to ensure that their plant identifications have been completely and correctly represented.
If anyone has contact info for any of them, please PM me (or just ask them to email me).

Thanks in advance!

Abstract 

The Voynich Manuscript is definitely not the only encrypted book known to crypto historians. 
The authors of this submission are aware of over 100 other tomes that are written completely or to a considerable part in cipher. 
This paper provides an overview on these with a focus on their properties and the reasons why they were created. 

The main goal of this paper is to compare the Voynich Manuscript with other encrypted books in order to draw conclusions and make educated guesses with respect to some of the unanswered questions surrounding this famous cryptogram. 

Most of all, after we categorize the other known encrypted books, then based on the Voynich Manuscript’s similarities with books in various categories, the purpose of the manuscript can be narrowed down with some certainty to two categories: the knowledge book category and the hoax category

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

It seems like there hasn't been much going on in Voynich research in recent months.

It feels like Nick Pelling's interests have drifted away from the Voynich.

There don't seem to have been many "it is written in" **HISTORIC LANGUAGE** theories presented recently, which I am sure many would suggest is a good thing.

And there don't seem to have been any other discoveries recently.

I have my own research ideas and lines of enquiry; though unfortunately I have been busy with other things of late.

I wonder if there are other research ideas or plans afoot or that others are embarking on.

I think there is plenty of research out there that could be done, though I think that involves specialising on a specific area of Voynich research.

All,
I would like to announce the Beta-launch of a new crowd-based research online application dedicated to into the numerous plant illustrations in the Voynich Manuscript.
This web application is called "The Voynich Garden" and you can find it at: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The site is in beta mode, but as we formally release it, we will carry over any data you enter in the meantime.

I would suggest reading through the application's About page (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) since it describes --after first giving basic background about the Voynich Manuscript itself-- the application, its purpose, and some of its unique features.

We are still performing QA testing, so please excuse any remaining bugs. In fact,  please let us know if you do encounter any issues, and we
would welcome any other feedback as well, positive or negative. (Please post any comments in this thread, or email us directly at curator@cryptobotany.org)

--Andrew Steckley
P.S. I apologize if this is the incorrect place (or prefix label) to make this announcement.

There's already You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. on this topic, 
but I think it would be nice to compare all plants of all similar manuscripts to
that of the VMS and each other. 

Perhaps this is a good way to ID plants, 
because all of these flowers of all of these manuscripts are terribly drawn,  
so perhaps by comparing the manuscripts, we might be able to find
some patterns in the madness.  

I've so far only found one comparison that I'm willing to make.


## List of Manuscripts

### Cambridge Trinity College MS O.2.48 -- date: 1200-1400, language ..., origin: likely Southern Italy

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

### Voynich Manuscript - ca. 1420 -- language ???, origin Italy?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

### University of Vermont MS 2 -- date: ca. 1475, language: Italian, origin: Tuscany

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

### ??

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


## Comparison of plants

### You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - White affodil (instead of Edith Sherwood's starflower)

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

#### Argument for You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. - White affodil

My argument of this being the white affodil is that I was simply looking 
for a plant that had big leaves shaped into a star. 
They both have a white flower in the middle of the star leaves, 
but in the Vermont Manuscript they're tiny, 
so the Voynich Manuscript image would then actually be 
the better drawing of the two.

The UoV MS flower description clearly reads "Astula reggia" and by
websearching you can find "Asphodelus Albus"  
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I have had the following words referred to me as being unusual:

yshealkair
saiichor
cthoepain
aldalosam
olfsheoral
ataseos
etolctheol
ainarals
cfarasr
ychopordg
lkshykchy
arorochees
oraryteop
qekeochor
doiisaly
lcheolshedy
aiiikhedy
ochepalain
rfchykchey
lkarshar
oinysarx
oloeorain
airorlchy
soefchocphy
qoshocphy
dolchsyckheol
dlocta
efaloir
sykeeeochy
deeamshol
dylchsody
qoekeeykeody
oesearees
cthachcthy
olsheeosol
ycheeytydaiin
eeoseeos
oraroekeol
scseykcheol
aiisockhy
qochoithy
sochorcfhy
dorkcheky
rchealcham
sydarary
iiincheom
salshcthdy
orarorchy
qocpheeckhy
lkarchees
ycheealkaiin
ctheockhosho
cthaichar
odeeeeodl
cthdaoto
samchorly
oqoeeosain
oepchksheey
ydaraishy
cpholrory
oshyteed
qosheckhhy
arolsas
ysarasod
dalaldam
oschotshl
etodaithey
olkchokeedy
ararchodaiin
aithchr
socfchees

These may not be a particularly good collection of unusual words.

I tend to be more interested in words with unusual glyph sequence rather than those words that are unusually long.

I think to be an unusual word it is not necessary that the word occurs only once in the text, but rather that it is more dissimilar from other words.

I am inclined to ignore the first words of paragraph as they tend to seem to start with gallows characters.

I would like to express here my view of the Voynich text and why I consider many works to be wrong from my point of view.
This work was actually intended for the Malta Congress, but like many it was never finished. I now thought I could publish at least part of it here as a PDF file.

I look at it from the point of view of my work:
Contributions based on EVA alphabet or code are wrong.
Statistics with other transcription files as questionable and in some cases unusable.
Attempts to create a text using far-fetched explanations just to make sense of characters that seem to repeat.

I may now offend some people and not appreciate their work. This is the result of research. Therefore, do not expect any apology from me.


Ich möchte hier einmal meine Ansicht über den Voynich-Text zum Ausdruck bringen und warum ich viele Arbeiten aus meiner Warte als falsch betrachte.
Diese Arbeit war eigentlich für den Malta Kongress gedacht, ist aber wie viele nie fertig geworden. Ich habe mir jetzt gedacht ich könnte zumindest einen Teil davon hier als PDF Datei veröffentlichen.

Ich betrachte anhand meiner Arbeit:
Beiträge wo auf Basis von EVA-Alphabet oder Code erstellt wurden als falsch.
Statistiken mit anderen Transkriptionsdateien als Fragwürdig und in manchen Fällen als unbrauchbar.
Versuche einen Text zu erstellen mit Hilfe von weit hergeholten Erklärungen, nur um einzelne Zeichen wo sich zu wiederholen scheinen, eine Sinn zu geben.

Ich möge jetzt manchen Leuten vor den Kopf stossen, und deren Arbeiten nicht würdigen. Dies ist das Ergebnis auf Grund einer Forschung. Daher erwartet keine Entschuldigung von mir.


  Zwilling und Krypto en.pdf (Size: 1.08 MB / Downloads: 111)
  Zwilling und Krypto.pdf (Size: 847.34 KB / Downloads: 93)

First of all, greetings to all Voynich manuscript enthusiasts.

I expose in this article uploaded in ResearchGate:  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The method of decoding the manuscript, as well as my logical process that has led me to a series of hypotheses and conclusions that turn radically all the research efforts to decrypt the manuscript that have been attempted until now.


I believe that this discovery will open up new lines of research in various areas of knowledge: Linguistics, Botany, History, Astronomy, etc.

Your feedback is always welcome.