Issue:
100
Page: 70-75
A Preliminary Analysis of the Botany, Zoology, and Mineralogy of the Voynich Manuscript
by Arthur O. Tucker, Rexford H. Talbert
HerbalGram.
2013; American Botanical Council
ONLINE NOTE: There are numerous usages of the Voynich Typeface/Font throughout this feature. Due to limitations in the online HTML coding these are not present. Please refer to the printed or pageflip versions of HerbalGram.
In addition you can view a PDF of the article here.
Introduction
In
1912, Wilfrid M. Voynich, a Polish-born book collector living in London,
discovered a curious manuscript in Italy. This manuscript, written in an obscure language or, perhaps, code, is now housed at the Beinecke Rare Book and
Manuscript Library at Yale University,1 which acquired it in 1969.
Since 1912, this manuscript has elicited enormous interest, resulting in books
and Internet sites with no sound resolution on the manuscript’s origin. Even the US National
Security Agency has taken an interest in its cryptic contents, and doctoral
theses have been written on attempts to decipher the language of the Voynich
Manuscript (hereinafter abbreviated Ms.). With such voluminous published
information, its history can be easily found elsewhere and need not be repeated
here ad nauseum.1-5
However, what appears to be a reasonably reliable introduction for the
novice is provided at Wikipedia.6
Information
is continually updated on the website of René Zandbergen,7
a long-term researcher of the Voynich Ms., and, along with Gabriel Landini,
PhD, one of the developers of the European Voynich Alphabet (EVA) used to
transcribe the strange alphabet or syllabary in the Voynich Ms. As Zandbergen
relates, past researchers primarily have proposed — because
the Voynich Ms. was discovered in Italy — that
this is a European manuscript, but some also have proposed Asian and North
American origins. As such, almost every language, from Welsh to Chinese, has
been suspected of being hidden in the text. Of course, aliens also have been
implicated in the most bizarre theories. These theories with no solid evidence
have clouded the whole field of study, and many scholars consider research into
the Voynich Ms. to be academic suicide. Recently, however, Marcelo Montemurro,
PhD, and Damián Zanette, PhD, researchers at the University of Manchester
and Centro Atómico Bariloche e Instituto Balseiro, have used information
theory to prove that the Voynich Ms. is compatible with a real language sequence.8
The
Voynich Ms. is numbered with Arabic numerals in an ink and penmanship different
from the work’s
text portions. The pages are in pairs (“folios”),
ordered with the number on the facing page on the right as recto,
the reverse unnumbered on the left as verso (thus folios 1r, 1v, 2r, 2v, etc. to 116v). Fourteen
folios are missing (12, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 74, 91, 92, 97, 98, 109, and
110). By convention of Voynich researchers, the manuscript includes the
following:
“Herbal pages” or
a “botanical section” (pages
with a single type of plant);
“Pharma pages” or
a “pharmaceutical section” (pages
with multiple plants and apothecary jars, sometimes termed “maiolica”);
“Astrological pages” (circular
volvelles with nymphs, folios 70v2-73v);
“Astronomical pages” (other
circular designs, folios 67rl-70r2, etc.);
“Balneological pages” or
“biological section” (nymphs, baths, plumbing, folios 75r-84v);
“Magic Circle page” (folio 57v);
“Fertilization/Seed
page” (folio
86v); and a
“Michiton Olababas
page” (folio 116v).
Our Introduction to
the Voynich Manuscript, Backgrounds, and Pattern of Investigation
While
we had known of the existence of the Voynich Ms., we, like so many others,
probably dismissed it as a fantastic, elaborate hoax. Scattered, intersecting
evidence may trace it back to ca. 1576-1612 to the court of Rudolf II
(1552-1612) in Austria.1-7 Any origin prior to this time is strictly
conjecture, but such spurious claims have channelized scholars’ thinking and have not been
particularly fruitful. We had to face the facts that (so far) there was no
clear, solid chain of evidence of its existence prior to ca. 1576-1612.
Thus,
with our varied backgrounds and viewpoints as a botanist and as an information
technologist with a background in botany and chemistry, the authors of this HerbalGram
article decided to look at the world’s
plants without prejudice as to origin in order to identify the plants in the
Voynich Ms. With the geographical origins of the plants in hand, we can then
explore the history of each region prior to the appearance of the Voynich Ms.
The authors of this article employ abductive reasoning, which consists of
listing of all observations and then forming the best hypothesis. Abductive
reasoning (rather than deductive reasoning normally practiced by scientists in
applying the scientific method) is routinely used by physicians for patient
diagnosis and by forensic scientists and jurors to determine if a crime has or
has not been committed. In abductive reasoning, it is necessary to record all
facts, even those that may seem irrelevant at the time. This is well
illustrated by physicians who have misdiagnosed patients who were not fully
forthcoming with all their symptoms because they interpreted some as trivial,
unrelated, or unnecessary to share with the physician.
We
were both immediately struck by the similarity of xiuhamolli/xiuhhamolli
(soap plant) illustrated on folio 9r in the 1552 Codex Cruz-Badianus9-12 of
Mexico (sometimes known as the “Aztec Herbal”)
to the plant in the illustration on folio 1v of the Voynich Ms. Both depictions
have a large, broad, gray-to-whitish basal woody caudices with ridged bark and
a portrayal of broken coarse roots that resemble toenails. The plant in the
Codex Cruz-Badianus is in both bud and flower with leaves that have a cuneate
(wedge-shaped) base, while the plant in the Voynich Ms. has only one bud with
leaves that have a cordate (heart-shaped) base. The illustration in the Codex
Cruz-Badianus is accepted by numerous commentators9-12 as Ipomoea murucoides Roem. & Schult.
(Convolvulaceae); the illustration in the Voynich Ms. is most certainly the
closely related species I. arborescens (Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd.)
G. Don. However, the portrayals of both of these Mesoamerican species are so
similar that they could have been drawn by the same artist or school of
artists.
This
possible indication of a New World origin set us down a path that diverges from
most previous Voynich researchers. If our identifications of the plants,
animals, and minerals are correct as originating in Mexico and nearby areas,
then our abductive reasoning should be focused upon Nueva España (New Spain) from
1521 (the date of the Conquest) to ca. 1576 (the earliest possible date that
the Voynich Ms. may have appeared in Europe with any documentation). If the
Voynich Ms. is, as one reviewer of this article indicated, “an
invention by somebody in, let’s
say Hungary, who invented it based on images of early printed books,” then
this forger had to have intimate knowledge of the plants, animals, and minerals
of Mexico and surrounding regions, in addition to its history, art, etc. Some
of this knowledge, such as the distinction of Viola bicolor (Violaceae;
which is not illustrated in earlier books to our knowledge) vs. V. tricolor, was
clarified only in the 20th century. A forgery is certainly possible, but
applying the principle of Occam’s
Razor (which says that the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be
selected), attention should be focused upon Nueva España between 1521 and
ca. 1576, not Eurasia, Africa, South America, or Australia (or alien planets).

Names
Names as keys to
decipher lost languages
The
most fruitful, logical approach to initially decipher ancient languages has
been the identification of proper names. Thomas Young (1773-1829) and Jean-François
Champollion (1790-1832) first decrypted Egyptian hieroglyphics with the names
of pharaohs that were found in cartouches, coupled with a study of Coptic (the
later Egyptian language that used primarily Greek script). The initial attempts
by many researchers to decipher Sumerian, Babylonian, and Assyrian cuneiform
were the names of kings, in conjunction with links to ancient Persian. Michael
Ventris (1922-1956) and John Chadwick (1920-1998) initially deciphered Minoan
Linear B as Mycenaean Greek by identifying cities on Crete and finding links of
these names to ancient Greek. Heinrich Berlin (1915-1988) initially deciphered
Mayan logograms by connecting “emblem glyphs” with cities and ruling
dynasties or territories, which allowed the breakthroughs of Yuri Knorosov
(1922-1999), coupled with a study of Mayan dialects. Michael Coe (b. 1929) and
others later found the names of gods in logograms repeated in the Popol Vuh,
the Mayan holy book.13
Plant, Animal, and
Mineral Names in the Voynich Manuscript
None
of the primary folios with plant illustrations (the so-called “herbal
pages”) have a name that can be teased out (yet). However, of the
approximately 179 plants or plant parts or minerals illustrated in the “Pharma
pages,” about
152 are accompanied by names. We were initially drawn to plant No. 8 of the 16
plants on folio 100r; this is obviously a cactus pad or fruit, i.e., Opuntia spp., quite
possibly Opuntia
ficus-indica (L.) Mill. (Cactaceae) or a related
species. Thus, is quite easily transliterated as nashtli, a variant of nochtli, the Nahuatl (Aztec)
name for the fruit of the prickly pear cactus or the cactus itself. Then we
looked at plant No. 4 on folio 100r, which appears to be a pressed specimen of
a young Yucca spp. or Agave spp., quite possibly Agave atrovirens Karw. ex
Salm-Dyck (Agavaceae). Here transliterates
to maguoey,
or maguey. These initial keys of proper names allowed us to uncover
further names, and details are listed in the Appendix of this article.
Not
many of the names beyond nochtli and a few others have
correspondences in the nine manuscripts,14 which include portrayals
and discussions of 16th century Mesoamerican plants, particularly Codex
Cruz-Badianus of 1552,9-12 Hernández
of ca. 1570-1577,15 and Sahagún’s Florentine Codex of ca. 1545-1590.16
It should be remembered that Hernández
and his associates took surveys from all over Mexico, and these works and their
Nahuatl names are not monolilthic, i.e., representing only one ethnic group.12
Thus, it is useful to distinguish the four classes of Nahuatl plant names as
outlined by Clayton, Guerrini, and de Ávila
in the Codex Cruz-Badianus:12
primary ‘folk-generic’ names
that cannot at present be analysed [sic] but which are likely to have been
known widely and to be present as cognates in the modern Nahua languages…
compound ‘folk-generic’ names…
‘folk-specific’ names,
composed of a generic term plus a qualifying epithet (which may be compounded
into the name), a class less likely to be widespread…
descriptive phrases,
which may have been coined by Martin de la Cruz himself (see below) and which
are least likely to have been shared widely and to have been preserved in contemporary
languages….
Thus the Nahuatl nochtli and the Spanish
loan-word maguey fit the primary ‘folk-generic’ names of Number 1 above, but
the use of the Nahuatl tlacanoni ()
— “bat” or “paddle” — for Dioscorea remotiflora
Kunth (Dioscoreaceae) in No. 28 on folio 99r, fits the descriptive phrase of
Number 4.
Further
attempts at identifying the plants and their Nahuatl names, when given, are
presented in the Appendix. Many of the identifications still need refinement.
Also, because we have been trained as botanists and horticulturists, not
linguists, our feeble attempts at a syllabary/alphabet for the language in the
Voynich Ms. must be interpreted merely as a key for future researchers, not a fait accompli. Much, much work remains
to be done, and hypotheses will be advanced for years.

Minerals and
Pigments in the Voynich Manuscript
In 2009, McCrone Associates, a
consulting research laboratory hired by Yale University, filed a report on the
pigments in the Voynich Ms. with analyses done by chemist Alfred Vendl, PhD.
They found the following:17
Black ink = iron gall ink with
potassium lead oxide, potassium hydrogen phosphate, syngenite, calcium sulfate,
calcium carbonate, mercury compound (traces), titanium compound, tin compound
(particle), bone black, gum binder
Green pigment = copper-organic
complex, atacamite (possible to probable), calcium sulfate, calcium carbonate,
tin and iron compounds, azurite and cuprite (traces), gum binder
Blue pigment = azurite, cuprite
(minor)
Red-brown pigment = red ochre, lead
oxide, potassium compounds, iron sulfide, palmierite
White pigment = proteinaceous,
carbohydrate-starch (traces).
This analysis was more thorough than
the analysis done on 16th century maps from Mexico, which did not identify the
chemical nature of the particles.18 These pigments found by McCrone
Associates in the Voynich Ms. differ from those of European manuscripts.19,20
In particular, atacamite is primarily from the New World (it was named after
the Atacama Desert in Chile), and the presence of this New World mineral in a
European manuscript from prior to ca. 1576 would be extremely suspicious.
However,
these analyses remind us that the artist for the Voynich Ms. had a very limited
palette and thus one blue pigment was used for all the hues, tints, and shades
of blue, i.e., colors from blue-to-purple, dark-to-light. Likewise, one
red pigment was used for colors from red-to-coral, dark-to-light, etc.
Folio
102r includes a cubic (isometric) blue mineral (No. 4) resembling a blue
bouillon cube. This might be boleite
(KPb26Ag9Cu24Cl62(OH)48);
the morphology of the primitive drawing certainly matches very closely. The
only sources for large crystals of this quality and quantity are three closely
related mines in Baja California, Mexico, principally the mine at Santa Rosale
(El Boleo).21,22 These crystals, 2-8 mm on the side, typically occur
embedded in atacamite. Copper compounds have been used historically to treat
pulmonary and skin diseases and parasitic infections (e.g., shistosomiasis
and bilharzia).23
The
presence of five drop-like circles on the surface of this blue cube alludes to
the Aztec logogram for water, atl, 9-12,16 and the name
accompanying this, , we transliterate as atlaan, or atlan, “in
or under the water.” Some minerals, e.g., tin
(amochitl)
and lead (temetstli), in the Florentine Codex16 also are
illustrated with the atl logogram in allusion to the color of mist and
foam. The translation of the accompanying text might tell us whether this blue
cube and its name are referring to a mineral, a watery color, water itself, a
technique of preparation, or even a calendar date.
Artistic Style:
Emphasis of Plant Parts and So-Called “Grafted” Plants
The
senior author of this article taught Horticultural Plant Materials at Delaware
State University (DSU) for 36 years. Students had to learn the scientific name,
the common name, a field characteristic, and uses of major horticultural plants
ranging from significant conifers to houseplants (within one semester!). The
class involved frequent field trips to collect living specimens. The students
would inevitably gravitate to a type of plant illustration that is depicted in
the Voynich Ms. For example, when they encountered bird’s nest
spruce (Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. ‘Nidiformis,’ Pinaceae) in every class that
was taught, one student would inevitably remark that the tips of the hooked needles
of this conifer resembled Velcro®.
The students would then start calling the bird’s nest spruce the “Velcro
plant” and
illustrate it in their notebooks with a circular bird’s nest outline and needles that were
far out of proportion with the rest of the plant (a 0.5 inch needle was
portrayed as a colossal one foot grafted onto three-foot plant). That is to
say, the students omitted insignificant parts and enlarged important portions
accordingly, often seemingly grafting them together. From a diversity of
hundreds of students from various ages and ethnic backgrounds at DSU, this
proved to be a common human pattern for notation and memorization, at least
among university students in 20th century North America.
Thus,
on folio 33v of the Voynich Ms., the illustration matches Psacalium peltigerum (B. L. Rob.
& Seaton) Rydb. (Asteraceae) in botanical characters except for the size of
the flowers. This may allude to the importance of the flowers, either for
identification or use.
Also,
following the same avenue of thought, in the case of the so-called “grafted” plants, e.g., Manihot
rubricaulis I. M. Johnst. (Euphorbiaceae) on
folio 93v, the artist may have merely left out the unimportant parts to
condense the drawing to the limits of the paper size. This type of illustration
also occurs in Hernández,15
e.g., tecpatli (unknown, perhaps
a Smallanthus spp., Asteraceae), teptepehoila capitzxochitl (unknown,
probably an Ipomoea
sp., Convolvulaceae) and tlalmatzalin hocxotzincensi (Brazoria
arenaria Lundell, Lamiaceae), and uses the same sort of artistic device to
compress a large plant into a small illustration. However, in Hernández,
the cut portion is skillfully hidden from view, facing the back of the page.
For chimalatl peruina (Helianthus annuus L., Asteraceae) in
Hernandez, the top and bottom are shown side-by-side rather than attached.

Plants, Language,
and Other Evidence of a Post-Conquest Central American Origin
The
plants, animals, and minerals identified so far are primarily distributed from
Texas, west to California, and south to Nicaragua, indicating a botanic garden
somewhere in central Mexico.
Sources of
Calligraphy in the Voynich Ms.
In
1821, Sequoyah (George Gist) created the Cherokee syllabary by modifying
letters from Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic that he had encountered. Following this
example, what was the inspiration for the calligraphy in the Voynich Ms.?
Focusing upon the four most unique symbols ( ) in the Voynich Ms. and perusing
documents from Nueva España
1521-ca. 1576, only one document reveals some calligraphy that might have
served as inspiration for the Voynich Ms.: the Codex Osuna.24 In the
Codex Osuna, there consistently is a broken version of “tl” in
the Nahuatl that matches the same symbol “” in
the Voynich Ms., and on folio 12v of the Codex Osuna, there is an identical
version of “”
on the lower left. Throughout the Codex Osuna (e.g., folio
37v), the “s” in the Nahuatl is often written
as a large, conspicuous, backward version of that from the Voynich Ms. “”.
On folios 13v and 14r of the Codex Osuna, the florid Spanish signatures have
several inspirations for the “” in the Voynich Ms. On folio 39r
of the Codex Osuna, the “z” is
written in a very similar manner to the “” in
the Voynich Ms.
The
Codex Osuna24 was written between 1563-1566 in Mexico City and
actually consists of seven books; it is not a codex in the strict definition.
According to the Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid (Control No. biam00000085605),
where it is listed as Pintura del gobernador, alcades y regidones de México,
the Codex Osuna was:
A 16th century
pictographic manuscript, written in Mexico. It contains the declarations of the
accused and the eye witnesses made in New Spain by Jerónimo de
Valderrama, by order of Philip II between 1563-1566, to investigate the charges
presented against the Viceroy, Luis de Velasco, and the other Spanish
authorities that participated in the government of said Viceroy. These people
and their testimonies are represented by pictographs, followed by an explanation
in the Nahuatl and Castilian languages, as the scribes translated the
declarations of the Indians by means of interpreters or Nahuatlatos.
The
Codex Osuna was donated in 1883 to the Biblioteca Nacional by the estate of Don
Mariano Téllez-Girón y Beaufort-Spontin
(1814-1882), 12th Duke of Osuna and 15th Duke of the Infantado.
The
use of “tl” and “chi” endings
places this dialect of Nahuatl in central or northern Mexico.25,26
The use of Classic Nahuatl, Mixtec, and Spanish loan-words for some plant names
(see Appendix) also indicates an origin in central Mexico.
Other Indications
of a 16th Century Mexican Origin
A
number of other features of the Voynich Ms. also point to a Mesoamerican
origin. For example, a “bird glyph” (folio 1r) as a paragraph
marker is not known by the authors of this paper to exist in European
manuscripts but as common in Post-Conquest Mexican manuscripts, e.g.,
the Codex Osuna24 and the Codex Mendoza27 (among many
others).
A
volcano is pictured on the top left side of folio 86v, within the crease.
Mexico has roughly 43 active or extinct volcanoes, most centered near Mexico
City. The most famous in recent centuries has been Popocatepetl in Morelos,
southeast of Mexico City, a World Heritage Site of 16th century monasteries.
Animals in the
Voynich Ms.
The
fish illustrated on folio 70r are most definitely the alligator gar [Atractosteus
spatula (Lacepède,
1803)]. This fish is very distinctive because of its pointed snout,
length/width ratio, prominent interlocking scales (ganoid scales), and the “primitive” shape
and distribution of the rear fins. The alligator gar is found only in North
America.28 The Nahuatl name accompanying this illustration, otolal,
transliterated to atlacaaca, means someone who is a fishing folk (atlaca,
“fishing folk” + aca,
“someone”). Curiously, there
is an addition with this illustration of what seems to be “Mars” (French
for March, perhaps?) in darker ink and different handwriting.
The
dark-red bull illustrated on folio 71v is the Retinta breed of cattle (Bos taurus taurus Linnaeus, 1758),
while the pale red is an Andalusian Red. Both of these types of cattle are
notable for their upward curved antlers. The Spanish introduced Andalusian,
Corriente, and Retinta cattle to North America as early as 1493 with Ponce de
León in Florida.
Cortés introduced cattle to Mexico some 30 years later. These
breeds were chosen for their ability to survive the long sea voyage and later
to endure grazing on just minimal “scrub
lands.” Descendants
of these cattle in North America, albeit with later interbreeding with dairy
cattle, are Texas Longhorn cattle and Florida Cracker/Scrub/Pineywoods cattle.29
Curiously, on the illustration in the Voynich Ms., there is an addition in a
darker, different ink and handwriting that seems to read “Ma.”
The
crustaceans illustrated on folio 71v match the morphology of the Mexican
crayfish, Cambarellus
montezumae (Saussure,
1857). Acocil (from the Nahuatl cuitzilli)
are found in a broad section across Mexico.28
The
cat illustrated on folio 72r is the ocelot [Leopardus pardalis (Linnaeus,
1758)]. The stripes across the face, the rounded ears, and the gray spotting
(illustrated with the blue pigment) are all characteristic of this cat. This
species ranges from Texas to Argentina.28 Oddly, “angst” is
written in a darker ink and different handwriting.
The sheep on folios 70v and 71r are bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis Shaw, 1804). The hooves (two-cleft and hollow to clasp
rocks) indicate that this might be the desert bighorn sheep (O. canadensis mexicana Merriam, 1901), which are found in deserts in
southwestern North America and across Mexico.28 What seems to be the
word “abime” (French
for chasm or abyss) is attached to this illustration in a different handwriting
and a darker ink.
A black Gulf Coast jaguarundi [Puma yagouaroundi cacomitli (Berlandier,
1859)] is portrayed on folio 73 (with what appears to be “noūba,” French
for spree, written over the original writing with a darker, different ink).
This cat, which has brown and black phases, is very distinctive in profile with
a flatter face than most cats; the overall aspect of the face almost resembles
a monkey. The tail is also notable, very long and particularly bushy at the base.
Additional
tiny animals apparently are used as decorative elements and are difficult to
identify: (1) a chameleon-like lizard (quite possibly inspired by the Texas
horned lizard, Phrynosoma cornutum [Harlan 1825]) nibbling a leaf
on folio 25v, (2) two caecilians [wormlike amphibians, probably inspired by Dermophis
mexicanus (Duméril & Bibron,
1841)] in the roots of the plant on folio 49r, and (3) five animals at the
bottom of folio 79v. Other Evidence of
Mexican Origin: The Influence of the Catholic Church
Besides
Spanish loan-words, other indications of the European influence on
Post-Conquest Mexico are the so-called “maiorica” or
pharmaceutical containers in the “Pharma
pages.” The
sharp edges, filgree, lack of painted decoration, and general design allude to
inspiration by metal objects, not ceramic or glass. The immediate suggestions
for inspiration were the ciboria and oil stocks of 16th century Spanish
Catholic church ceremonies. The former consists of a capped chalice, often on a
highly ornamented stand, which stores the Eucharist. The latter consists of a
cylindrical case comprising three compartments that screw into each other and
hold the holy oils. Using these holy objects as designs for pharmaceutical containers
would have been a mockery of the religion forced upon the conquered natives and
thus another reason for writing in code. A ciborium also appears on folio 67r
of the Codex Aubin.30
Future Avenues for
Research
The
Aztec elite were highly educated and hygienic. Cortéz
reported libraries, called amoxcalli (Nahuatl for book house), complete
with librarians and scribes. The Spanish conquistadors, along with the office
of the Holy Inquisition burnt them all because of their “superstitious
idolatry” (translated
words of Juan de Zumarraga, first Archbishop of Mexico).14
Axiomatically,
the Spanish priests established schools for children of the Aztec elite,
teaching them European writing methods, painting, and Latin. Probably one of
the most famous products of these schools, the Codex Cruz-Badianus, was
completed by two students educated at the College of Santa Cruz in Tlatelolco.
It was written in Nahuatl by Martin de la Cruz — a
native convert and practicing physician at the College of Santa Cruz — and
translated into Latin by Juan Badiano, another native convert and student of
the College. Two versions of this manuscript exist, the original Codex
Cruz-Badianus, formerly in the Vatican, returned in 1990 by Pope Paul II to
Mexico (now at the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropologie e Historia in Mexico
City [F1219 B135 1940]), and a later copy at the Royal Library of Windsor
Castle (RCIN970335).9-12
The
Aztecs also were the first to establish comprehensive botanic gardens, which
later inspired those in Europe. Gardens were in Tenochtitlan, Chapultepec,
Ixtapalapa, el Peñon,
and Texcoco, as well as more distant ones such as Huaztepec (Morelos). Some of
these botanic gardens, such as Huaztepec, included water features for
ritualistic bathing. Coupled with this was the use of the temezcalli,
or sweatbaths.31,32
Besides
outright destruction of the libraries by Spanish invaders, much of this
accumulated indigenous knowledge also was destroyed by diseases, both imported
and endemic. According to epidemiologist Rodolfo Acuña-Soto and colleagues,33
the population collapse in 16th century Mexico — a
period of one of the highest death rates in history — shows
that not only were European diseases devastating, but an indigenous hemorrhagic
fever also may have played a large role in the high mortality rate. On top of
the smallpox epidemic of 1519-1520, when an estimated 5-8 million natives
perished in Mexico, the epidemics of 1545 and 1576 were due primarily to cocoliztli
(“pest” in Nahuatl). These latter
epidemics occurred during moist years following devastating droughts, providing
food for a surge of rodents, which eventually killed an additional estimated
7-17 million people in the highlands of Mexico, roughly 90% of the population.33
This pattern is similar to the sudden, severe epidemics of other zoonoses
(diseases of animal origin that can be transmitted to humans).34
Thus, the author(s) and artist(s) (tlacuilo, the native painter-scribes) of the
Voynich Ms. may have perished in one of these epidemics, along with the
speakers of their particular dialect.
Questions
in the following paragraphs are particularly pertinent to fully establish this
as the work of a 16th century ticitl (Nahuatl for doctor or seer).35,36
Interpretation
of the flora and languages of Mexico is a difficult task even today. Mexico is
extremely diverse in both floristics and ethnic groups, with approximately
20,000 plants and at least 30 extant dialects of Nahuatl.12 We are
confident that our attempts at a preliminary syllabary for the Voynich Ms. can
be refined. What are the linguistic affinities of this dialect to extant
dialects of Nahuatl? Is this dialect truly extinct?
A
six- to eight-pointed star, especially in the latter folios of the Voynich Ms.
(103r-116r, where it often is dotted with red in the center), is used as a
paragraph marker. Is this reminiscent of the eight-pointed Mexica Sun Stone or
Calendar Stone? On the top center of folio 82r, the eight-pointed star is quite
strikingly similar to this stone. This stone was unearthed in 1790 at El Zócalo,
Mexico City, and is now at the capital’s National Museum of Anthropology. One interpretation of
the face in the center of this stone is Tonatiuh, the Aztec deity of the sun.
Another interpretation of the face is Tlatechutli, the Mexica sun or earth
monster. An identical eight-pointed star also appears on folio 60 of the Codex
Aubin.30
What
is the influence of the sibyls in the murals at the Casa del Deán
(Puebla) on the portrayal of the women in the Voynich Ms.? The Casa del Deán
originally belonged to Don Tomás de la Plaza Goes,
who was dean of Puebla from 1553 to 1589 and second in command to the bishop.
The murals were executed by native artists, tlacuilo, whose names are
unknown. Undoubtedly, much was destroyed
through the centuries, and only two restored rooms remain. In La Sala de las Sibilias,
or Room of the Sibyls, female prophets from Greek mythology narrate the passion
of Christ. The women in the murals at the Casa del Deán
have short hair and European features, and the friezes include nude angels and
satyrs.
How
was the parchment, which may date to animals killed in the first half of the
15th century, used over a full century later for this manuscript?37
How did putative medieval German script on folio 166v (the so-called “Michiton
Olababas page”) get integrated into this manuscript? Was this a case of European parchment being
repurposed?
Copal
resins (most commonly used for incense) were often used as binders in
Mesoamerican pigments.18,38 McCrone Associates supposedly documented
the IR spectrum of the resin.17 Is this a copal resin from a
Meso-American species, such as Protium copal (Schltdl.
& Cham.) Engl., Hymenaea courbaril L.
(Fabaceae), or Bursera
bipinnata (Moç. & Sessé ex
DC.) Engl. (Burseraceae)?
What
was the chain of evidence from post-Conquest Mexico to the court of Rudolph II?
The circuitous route of the Codex Mendoza is perhaps illustrative of the fact
that materials did not always flow directly from New Spain (present-day Mexico)
to Spain, and European materials were quite often used for writing (rather than
the native amate paper, amatl in Nahuatl). The Codex Mendoza was
created in Mexico City on European paper about 20 years (ca. 1541) after the
Spanish conquest of Mexico for Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain.
It was sent by ship to Spain, but the fleet was attacked by French corsairs
(privateers), and the Codex, along with the other booty, was taken to France.
From there it came into possession of André Thévet,
cosmographer to Henry II of France. Thévet
wrote his name in five places in the Codex, twice with the date of 1553. It was
later sold to Richard Hakluyt around 1587 for 20 francs (Hakluyt was in France
from 1583-1588 as secretary to Sir Edward Stafford, English Member of Parliament,
courtier and diplomat to France during the time of Queen Elizabeth I). Sometime
near 1616 it was passed to Samuel Purchas, then to his son, and then to John
Selden. The Codex Mendoza has been held at the Bodleian Library at Oxford
University since 1659, five years after Selden’s death.27
Another
question is the involvement of John Dee (1527-1608/1609), if any. Dee — a
Welsh mathematician, astronomer, astrologer, occultist, navigator, imperialist,
and consultant to Queen Elizabeth I — purchased
an Aztec obsidian “shew-stone” (mirror)
in Europe between 1527-1530 (this object was subsequently owned by Horace
Walpole). Dee was in Paris in the 1550s, and a letter dated 1675 quoted Arthur
Dee, son of John Dee, saying that he had seen his father spending much time
over a book “all in
hierolyphicks.” Dee also is suspected of being
the sales agent to Rudolf II, ca. 1584-1588.2-5
Conclusion
We
note that the style of the drawings in the Voynich Ms. is similar to 16th
century codices from Mexico (e.g., Codex Cruz-Badianus). With this prompt, we
have identified a total of 37 of the 303 plants illustrated in the Voynich Ms.
(roughly 12.5% of the total), the six principal animals, and the single
illustrated mineral. The primary geographical distribution of these materials,
identified so far, is from Texas, west to California, south to Nicaragua,
pointing to a botanic garden in central Mexico, quite possibly Huaztepec
(Morelos). A search of surviving codices and manuscripts from Nueva España in the 16th
century, reveals the calligraphy of the Voynich Ms. to be similar to the Codex
Osuna (1563-1566, Mexico City). Loan-words for the plant and animal names have
been identified from Classical Nahuatl, Spanish, Taino, and Mixtec. The main
text, however, seems to be in an extinct dialect of Nahuatl from central
Mexico, possibly Morelos or Puebla.
Appendix: Plants
Identified to Date
Beyond
the approximately 172 plants, plant parts, and minerals in the “pharma
section,” the
“herbal section” includes
about 131 plants. In the following, we have indicated only identifications that
immediately “jumped out” to us with seemingly sound
identifications. We have many more putative identifications, but these still
are questionable, so they have been reserved for later publication. Unless
financing could be procured for a large-scale project with leading scholars in
botany, linguistics, and anthropology, decades of research remain. After all,
we indicate only 37 plant identifications in the following pages (and boleite
mineral) from a total of roughly 303 taxa (a meager 12.5% approximation of the
total). And the text, bathing practices, astrology/astronomy, chain of
evidence, etc., also need explanation.
Throughout
this HerbalGram article, nomenclature and plant distributions follow the
United States Department of Agriculture’s GRIN taxonomic database,39 and/or The Plant
List produced by the Missouri Botanical Garden and Royal Botanic Garden, Kew,40
and/or the Integrated Taxonomic System (ITIS),28 unless otherwise
indicated. The plants are listed below, alphabetically by family.
Apiaceae (Carrot
Family)
Probably
the most phantasmagoric illustration in the Voynich Manuscript is the Eryngium
species portrayed on folio 16v. The inflorescence is colored blue, the leaves
red, and the rhizome ochre, but the features verge on a stylized appearance
rather than the botanical accuracy of the Viola bicolor of folio 9v,
immediately suggesting that more than one tlacuilo (painter, artist)
was involved. This lack of technical attention makes identification beyond
genus difficult, if not impossible. However, a guess might be E. heterophyllum Engelm.41
This species, native to Mexico, Arizona, New Mexico, Louisiana, and Texas, has
similar blue inflorescences, blue involucral bracts (whorl of leaves subtending
the inflorescence), and stout roots, and it also develops rosy coloring on the
stems and basal leaves. However, E. heterophyllum has pinnately compound leaves
(leaflets arranged on each side of a common petiole), not peltate
(umbrella-shaped) leaves. This lack of specificity on the shape of the leaves
also plagues identifications in the Codex Cruz-Badianus.12 Today, E. heterophyllum, Wright’s eryngo or Mexican eryngo, is used
to treat gallstones in Mexico and has been found in in vivo experiments to have
a hypocholesteremic effect.42
Apocynaceae (Dogbane Family)
Plant
No. 14 on folio 100r appears to be the fruit of an asclepiad, possibly the
Mexican species Gonolobus
chloranthus Schltdl. The name transliterates to acamaaya, a variant
of acamaya, “crab” or
“crayfish,” and the fruit of G. chloranthus does have a
resemblance to knobby, ridged crab claws. The tlallayoptli in Hernández,13
with a similar illustration of the fruit (but with smooth ribs), is nominally
accepted as the related species G. erianthus Decne., or Calabaza
silvestre. The roots of G. niger (Cav.) Schult. are used today in
Mexico to treat gonorrhea.43
Araceae (Arum
Family)
Plant
No. 7 on folio 100r appears to be the leaf of an aroid, most likely the Mexican
species Philodendron
goeldii G. M. Barroso. The name
transliterates as macanol, which refers to the wooden sword,
macana (a Taino word, called macuahuitl by some authorities for the Aztec
version), studded with slices of razor-sharp obsidian.
Plant
No. 2 on folio 100r also appears to be a vine of an aroid, ripped from a tree,
most probably Philodendron mexicanum Engl. The name transliterates as namaepi, which may
incorporate a loan-word from Mixtec referring to soap, nama, which is a
plant that produces soap.44
Author
Deni Bown writes of the Araceae in general: “Most
of the species of Araceae which are used internally for bronchial problems
contain saponins, soap-like glycosides which increase the permeability of
membranes to assist in the absorption of minerals but also irritate the mucous
membranes and make it more effective to cough up phlegm and other unwanted
substances in the lungs and bronchial passages.”45
Asparagaceae (the
Asparagus Family, alternatively Agavaceae, the Agave Family)
Plant
No. 4 on folio 100r appears to be a pressed specimen of a young Yucca
species or Agave
species. Here transliterates to maguoey,
or maguey, a name that entered Spanish from the Taino in the middle of
the 16th century,46 rather than the Nahuatl metl. Thus, this
may quite possibly be Agave atrovirens Karw. ex Salm-Dyck, which was a
source for the beverages pulque, mescal, and tequila in 16th century Nueva España.47,48
Mayaguil was the female goddess associated with the maguey plant as outlined in
the Codex Rios of 1547-1566:49
Rios 15 (20v)
Eighth Trecena: Mayaguil (Mayahuel)
They feign that
Mayaguil was a woman with four hundred breasts, and that the gods, on account
of her fruitfulness, changed her into the Maguei (Maguey plant), which is the
vine of that country, from which they make wine. She presided over these
thirteen signs: but whoever chanced to be born on the first sign of the Herb
(Grass), it proved unlucky to him; for they say that it was applied to the
Tlamatzatzguex, who were a race of demons dwelling amongst them, who according
to their account wandered through the air, from whom the ministers of their
temples took their denomination. When this sign arrived, parents enjoined their
children not to leave the house, lest any misfortune or unlucky accident should
befall them. They believed that those who were born in Two Canes (Reed), which
is the second sign, would be long lived, for they say that sign was applied to
Heaven. They manufacture so many things from this plant called the Maguei, and
it is so very useful in that country, that the Devil took occasion to induce
them to believe that it was a god, and to worship and offer sacrifices to it.
Asteraceae (Daisy
Family)
In
1944, the Rev. Hugh O’Neill
at Catholic University wrote that the plant illustrated on folio 93r is
sunflower, Helianthus annuus L. He wrote that six botanists agreed with
him,50 but, in spite of this, non-botanists disagreed. This is most
certainly the sunflower, called chimalatl peruiana in Hernández.15
The difficulty of portraying an exceedingly tall annual is conveyed in Hernández
by having cut stems side-by-side, but in the Voynich Ms. the features are
deeply compressed, possibly confusing non-botanists, but perhaps more difficult
is the admission that the Voynich Ms. may be post-1492 or possibly from the New
World!
The
plant illustrated on folio 13r is probably a Petasites sp. The closest
match might be P. frigidus (L.) Fr. var. palmatus (Aiton) Cronquist,
the western sweet-coltsfoot. This is native to North America, from Canada to
California. Petasites spp. are used in salves or poultices as
antiasthmatics, antispasmodics, and expectorants.51
The
plant illustrated on folio 33v is likely Psacalium peltigerum (B. L. Rob.
& Seaton) Rydb., possibly var. latilobum Pippen.52,53
This is a fairly good match to this New World asterid genus as to its lobed
peltate (umbrella-shaped) leaves, inflorescence, and fleshy subterranean
tubers, except that the flowers are shown in larger size than reality, perhaps
to emphasize the identification or use. Psacalium peltigerum is known
from the Mexican states of Jalisco, Guadalajara, and Guerrero, but the variety P.
latilobum is restricted to Guerrero. Psacalium peltatum (Kunth) Cass. is
used for genito-urinary tract/reproduction treatment and for rheumatism in
Mexico.54
Boraginaceae
(Borage Family, Alternatively Hydrophyllaceae, the Waterleaf Family)
The
plant illustrated folio 56r is almost certainly Phacelia campanularia
A. Gray, the California bluebell. The blue flowers, dentate (toothed) leaves,
scorpioid cyme (inflorescence coiled at the apex), and overlapping leaf-like
basal scales are all good matches. This species is native to California.
Brassicaceae (Mustard Family)
The
plant illustrated on folio 90v is most probably Caulanthus heterophyllus
(Nutt.) Payson, San Diego wild cabbage or San Diego jewelflower. The flowers of
C. heterophyllus
are four-petaled, white with a purple streak down the center, with four
protruding, dark purple anthers. Leaves vary from dentate (toothed) to lobed.
It is native to California and Baja California.

Cactaceae (Cactus
Family)
Plant
No. 8 on folio 100r is obviously a cactus pad or fruit, i.e., Opuntia spp., quite
possibly Opuntia
ficus-indica (L.) Mill. or a related species (e.g.,
O. megacantha Salm-Dyck or O.
streptacantha Lem.).47 Thus, quite easily is transliterated as nashtli, a variant of nochtli, the Nahuatl name
for the fruit of the prickly pear cactus or the cactus itself (the pads are
called nopalli). Opuntia ficus-indica is widely
cultivated but apparently native to central Mexico. Nopalea cochenillifera
(L.) Salm-Dyck also is cultivated widely for the insect that is the source for
cochineal.55
Caryophyllaceae
(Carnation Family)
The
plant illustrated on folio 24r is probably a Silene sp., possibly S.
menziesii Hook., Menzie’s catchfly. This grows natively from
Alaska to California and New Mexico. The flowers are a good match, even showing
the infection with the fungus Microbotryum violaceum (Pers.) G. Deml
& Oberw., anther smut fungus, which turns the anthers purple. However, the
leaves are shown as hastate (arrowhead-shaped), and S. menziesii has
attenuate (gradually narrowing to the base) leaf bases. Is this another case of
disparity of the leaves between reality and portrayal, or is there another Silene
species that is closer to the illustration?
Convolvulaceae (Morning Glory Family)
As
mentioned previously, the plant illustrated on folio 1v is Ipomoea
arborescens (Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd.) G. Don, found from northern to
southern Mexico. It is overwhelmingly similar to the xiuhamolli/xiuhhamolli
(soap plant) in the Codex Cruz-Badianus9-12 of Mexico from 1552.
Both trees have a large, broad, gray-to-whitish basal woody caudex (base) with
ridged bark, portrayed here with broken coarse roots that resemble toenails.
The plant in the Codex Cruz-Badianus is in both bud and flower with leaves that
have a cuneate (wedge-shaped) base, while the plant in the Voynich Ms., has
only one bud with leaves that have a cordate (heart-shaped) base. The
illustration in the Codex Cruz-Badianus is nominally accepted as I.
murucoides Roem. & Schult. by leading commentators.9-12
The
plant illustrated on folio 32v is probably I. pubescens Lam., silky
morning-glory. This vine is native to Arizona as well as New Mexico to
Argentina. The blue flowers, deeply lobed leaves, and tuberous roots are all
characteristic of silky morning-glory.
Species
of Ipomoea are
known for their resin glycosides and use in treating several conditions, such
as diabetes, hypertension, dysentery, constipation, fatigue, arthritis,
rheumatism, hydrocephaly, meningitis, kidney ailments, and inflammation.56-58
In addition, the arborescent Ipomoea species, I. murucoides and I. arborescens,
are used in hair and skin care, especially the ashes, which are used to prepare
soap.55,58 While the bases of both of the arborescent species are
portrayed somewhat accurately, Clayton, Guerrini, and de Ávila12
state that, “The blue patch with small, white ovate glyphs at the base
of the plant is the symbol for flowing water.” This
may be related to the story relayed by Standley for I. arborescens: “In
Morelos there is a popular belief that the tree causes imbecility and other
cerebral affections [sic], and for this it is necessary only to drink
the water running at the foot of the trees.”55
Dioscoreaceae
(Yam Family)
The vine illustrated as No. 28 on folio 99r is likely Dioscorea
remotiflora Kunth, native from northern to southern Mexico. The large root
is paddle- or bat-like, and the name attached to this illustration is , tlacanoni, Nahuatl for paddle or bat.
The vine illustrated on folio 17v may very well be Dioscorea
composita Hemsl., barbasco, native from northern to southern Mexico. The
root quite often is segmented as shown in the Voynich Ms. and is a major source
of diosgenin, a hormone precursor.
The vine illustrated on folio 96v is almost certainly Dioscorea
mexicana Scheidw., Mexican yam. This also is native from northern to
southern Mexico. This is another source of diosgenin.
Euphorbiaceae
(Spurge Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 6v is very likely a Cnidoscolus sp., either C. chayamansa McVaugh or C. aconitifolius (Mill.) I. M. Johnst. Both are called chaya and
are widely cultivated from Mexico to Nicaragua. The characteristic leaves and
spiny fruit are both good fits, but because of the variability in both species
(especially cultivated selections), it is difficult to tell for sure from the
crude illustration that is portrayed.59
The plant illustrated on folio 5v is most probably Jatropha cathartica Terán & Berland., jicamilla.
The palmately dentate (toothed) leaves, red flowers, and tuberous roots are all
good fits for the species. Its native habitats are from Texas to northern
Mexico. As the scientific name implies, this is cathartic and poisonous.
The plant illustrated on folio 93v is most likely Manihot
rubricaulis I. M. Johnst. from northern Mexico. This close relative to the
cassava, M. esculenta Crantz, has
thinner, more deeply lobed leaves. Manihot rubricaulis is illustrated in
Hernández15
as chichimecapatli or yamanquipatlis
(gentle or weak medicine).
Fabaceae
(Bean Family)
Plant No. 11 on folio 88r is almost certainly Lupinus
montanus Humb., Bonpl., & Kunth of Mexico and Central America. This
lupine is noted to contain alkaloids.60 The name attached to this is
, aguocacha, which we
translate as watery calluses. The compound peltate leaves and soft,
callus-like, nitrogen-fixing root nodules (knobs) on one side of the roots are
typical of this species.
Grossulariaceae
(Gooseberry Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 23r is probably Ribes malvaceum Sm., chaparral currant. This woody, stoloniferous shrub
has purple-magenta flowers and palmately (arranged like a hand) lobed leaves
and is endemic to California south to Baja Norte, Mexico.55
Lamiaceae (Mint
Family)
The
plant illustrated on folio 45v is very possibly Hyptis albida Kunth, hierba del burro. The gray leaves,
blue flowers, and stout root all match the characteristics of the species. This
shrub is native to Sonora and Chihuahua to San Luis Potosí, Guanajuato, and Guerrero.
Standley55 relates that “the
leaves are sometimes used for flavoring food. In Sinaloa they are employed as a
remedy for ear-ache, and in Guerrero a decoction of the plant is used in
fomentations to relieve rheumatic pains.”
The
plant illustrated on folio 32r is most likely Ocimum campechianum Mill.
(O. micranthum Willd.). This suffrutescent (low-shrubby) annual basil
grows indigenously from Florida to Argentina; in Mexico it is found from
Sinaloa to Tamaulipas, Yucatán, and Colima.55
The inflorescence and leaves are both good matches. Standley55
relates, “In El Salvador bunches of the leaves of this plant are put
in the ears as a remedy for earache.”
Plant
No. 5 on folio 100r has three flowers that match Salazaria mexicana
Torr., or bladdersage. This species also
seems to match the description of tenamaznanapoloa (carrying triplets?)
of Hernández15 (alias tenamazton
or tlalamatl). This shrub, native from Utah to Mexico (Baja California,
Chihuahua, and Coahuila), exhibits inflated bladder-like calyces that vary in
color, depending upon maturity, from green to white to magenta, with a dark
blue-and-white corolla emerging from it.55 We have transliterated
the name accompanying these three flowers,
as noe, moe-choll-chi.
The name choll-chi we translate as skull-owl (Spanish cholla plus Nahuatl root chi),
and, indeed, the flowers do bear an uncanny resemblance to the white skull and
black beak of the great horned owl (Bubo virginianus Gmelin 1788).
The
plant on folio 45r most likely is Salvia cacaliifolia Benth., endemic to
Mexico (Chiapas), Guatemala, and Honduras. The blue flowers in a tripartite
inflorescence (branching in threes) with distantly dentate (toothed)
deltoid-hastate (triangular-arrowhead-shaped) leaves are quite characteristic
of this species.61
Marantaceae (Prayer
Plant Family)
The
plant illustrated on folio 42v is a crude representation of a Calathea
spp., probably allied to C. loeseneri J. F. Macbr., which yields a blue
dye. The crudeness of the illustration, coupled with inadequate surveys of the
genus Calathea in Mexico, impede an easy identification at this time.
Menyanthaceae
(Buckbean Family)
The
obviously aquatic plant illustrated on folio 2v is undoubtedly Nymphoides aquatica (J. F.
Gmel.) Kuntze, the so-called banana plant or banana lily. This is native to
North America, from New Jersey to Texas.
Moraceae
(Mulberry Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 36v is probably a Dorstenia sp., likely the variable D. contrajerva L.,
tusilla. The inflorescence is quite distinct and is genus-appropriate. Leaves
for this species vary “in spirals, rosulate (in the form of a rosette) or
spaced; lamina broadly ovate (egg-shaped) to cordiform (heart-shaped) to
subhastate (tending towards arrowhead-shaped), pinnately (arranged on opposite
sides of a petiole) to subpalmately (tending to be arranged as a hand) or
subpedately (tending to be two-cleft), variously lobed to parted with
three-to-eight lobes at each side or subentire (tending to have a smooth edge).”62
Passifloraceae
(Passionflower Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 23v is definitely a Passiflora
sp. of the subgenus Decaloba. This is primarily a New World genus (some
species occur in Asia and Australia) and cannot be confused with any other
genus. The paired petiolar glands in the upper third of the leaf, blue tints in the flower, and dentate (toothed) leaves that are deeply cordate (heart-shaped)
seem to match only the variability of P. morifolia Mast. in Mart.,63
although the artist has made the leaves slightly more orbicular (round) than
they normally occur in mature foliage (young plants such as root suckers
sometimes exhibit orbicular, entire leaves in cultivation).

Penthoraceae (Ditch-Stonecrop Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 30v is easily identifiable
as Penthorum sedoides L., the ditch stonecrop, a New World species that
grows indigenously from Canada to Texas. The cymose inflorescence (convex
flower cluster), dentate leaves, and stolons (trailing shoots) are
characteristic of the species. The artist, though, apparently has illustrated
this in very early bud (or glossed over the details of the flowers) because the
prominent pistils emerge later, and are very obvious in fruit, often turning
rosy.
Polemoniaceae (Phlox Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 4v is quite definitely a Cobaea
sp., a New World genus. The best match is C. biaurita Standl., which is
closely related to the cultivated C. scandens
Cav., the cup and saucer vine. This vine is native to Chiapas, Mexico, and
possesses acute (tapering to the apex, sides straight or nearly so) to
acuminate (tapering to the apex, sides more-or-less pinched) leaflets and
flowers that emerge cream-colored but later mature to purple.64,65
Ranunculaceae
(Buttercup Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 95r is quite definitely an
Actaea sp., probably the white-fruited Actaea rubra (Aiton) Willd. f. neglecta (Gillman) B. L. Rob. Actaea rubra is native to
Eurasia, and in North America from Canada to New Mexico.66 As the
common name baneberry indicates, this species is poisonous.
Urticaceae
(Nettle Family)
As first postulated by the Rev. Hugh O’Neill,
the plant on folio 25r is clearly a member of the Urticaceae, or nettle family.50
The best match, because of the dentate, lanceolate (lance-shaped) leaves and
reddish inflorescences, seems to be Urtica chamaedryoides Pursh, commonly known as heart-leaf nettle. This is
native in North America from Canada to Mexico (Sonora). Urtica and the
closely related genus Urera also
occur in the Codex Cruz-Badianus9-12
and Hernández.15
Valerianaceae
(Valerian Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 65r is probably Valeriana
albonervata B. L. Rob. The palmately or cleft-lobed leaves, inflorescence,
and napiform (turnip-shaped) to fusiform (spindle-shaped), often forked
taproots, are a good match. This is native to the Sierra Madre of Mexico.67
Violaceae
(Violet Family)
The plant illustrated on folio 9v has been identified
previously as Viola tricolor of Eurasia,68
but we claim that it is not this species. If the illustration in the Voynich
Ms. is correct (and the illustration is actually quite decent), the terminal
stipular lobes are linear (narrow and flat with parallel sides), as
characteristic of the North American native V. bicolor Pursh (V. rafinesquei Greene), not spatulate (spatula-shaped) as in V.
tricolor. Also, the flowers of V. bicolor are uniformly cream to
blue, while the flowers of V. tricolor
usually have two purple upper petals, three cream-to-yellow lower petals. Viola bicolor, American field pansy, is native to the present-day United
States from New Jersey to Texas, west to Arizona, although Russell mysteriously
says “originally
derived from Mexico” even though its center of diversity seems to be eastern
Texas.69,70

Arthur O. Tucker, PhD, is emeritus professor and co-director of the Claude E.
Phillips Herbarium at Delaware State University in Dover, an upper-medium-sized
herbarium and the only functional herbarium at an historically Black college or
university, graced with a few type specimens of Mexican plants collected by
Ynes Mexia, Edward Palmer, et al.71 He has had a special interest in
identifying plants from period illustrations utilizing flora and herbarium
specimens, e.g., the “Blue Bird Fresco” at Knossos.72
Because of his expertise, he was hired by CPHST/PPQ/APHIS/USDA (Center for
Plant Health Science Technology/Plant Protection & Quarantine) to identify
botanicals imported to the United States and to construct a Lucid key.73
The latter research was particularly challenging because these botanicals
encompass parts of everything “botanical” — from fungi (though not truly botanical), to mosses and lichens, to gymnosperms and
angiosperms that had been greatly modified (bleached and/or dyed, scented, and
sometimes reconstructed into new botanicals) — collected
in India, China, Southeast Asia, Australia, Brazil, etc. Dr. Tucker also has
published widely on the systematics and chemistry of herbs in both scientific
and popular journals and is the co-author of The Encyclopedia of Herbs (Timber Press, 2009),
which attempts to summarize the latest scientific information on herbs of
flavor and fragrance for the average reader.74
Rexford
H. Talbert, a retired Senior Information
Technology Research Scientist from the United States Department of Defense and
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, is an autodidact, writer,
and lecturer in botany, plant taxonomy, and plant chemistry with a keen
interest in ethnic plants.
Acknowledgements
The
authors gratefully appreciate the discussion and proofing by Arthur O. Tucker,
IV; Sharon S. Tucker, PhD; and Susan Yost, PhD.
References
1. Beinecke Rare
Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University. Voynich
Manuscript. Available at:
http://beinecke.library.yale.edu/digitallibrary/voynich.html. Accessed December
29, 2012.
2. Brumbaugh RS.
The Most Mysterious Manuscript.
Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press; 1978.
3. D’Imperio ME. The Voynich Manuscript: An Elegant
Enigma. Fort George G. Meade, MD: National Security Agency/Central
Security Service; 1978. Available at:
www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA070618 and
http://www.nsa.gov/about/_files/cryptologic_heritage/publications/misc/voynich_manuscript.pdf.
Accessed December 29, 2012.
4. Kennedy G,
Churchill R. The Voynich Manuscript. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions; 2006.
5. Kircher F,
Becker D. Le Manuscrit Voynich Décodé.
Agnières, France: SARL
JMG editions; 2012.
6. Wikipedia. Voynich
Manuscript. Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voynich_manuscript. Accessed December 29, 2012.
7. Zandbergen R.
The Voynich Manuscript. Available
at: www.voynich.nu/index.html. Accessed December 29, 2012.
8. Montemurro
MA, Zanette DH. Keywords and co-occurrence patterns in the Voynich Manuscript:
An information-theoretic analysis. PLoS ONE 2013;8(6):e66344. Doi:10.371/hournal.pone.0066344.
9. Gates W. An
Aztec Herbal. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications;
2000 (originally published in Baltimore, MD: Maya Society; 1939).
10. Emmart EW. The Badianus
Manuscript. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press;
1940.
11. Cruz M de la, Badiano J. Libellus de Medicinalibus Indorum Herbis.
México: Fondo de
Cultiura Económica; 1991.
12. Clayton
M, Guerrini L, de Ávila A. Flora:
The Aztec Herbal. London:
Royal Collections Enterprises; 2009.
13. Cottrell L. Reading the Past:
The Story of Deciphering Ancient Languages. London: J. M. Dent & Sons; 1972.
14. Williams
DE. A review of sources for the study of Náhuatl plant classification. Adv Econ Bot. 1990;8:249-270.
15. Hernández F et al. Rerum Medicarum Novae Hispaniae Thesaurus, seu, Plantarum animalium,
Mineralium Mexicanorum Historia. Rome: Vitale
Mascardi; 1651. Available at:
http://archive.org/details/rerummedicarumno00hern. Accessed December 29, 2012.
16. Sahagún
B de. Florentine Codex. General History of the Things of New Spain. Book 11 – Earthly
Things. Transl. Dibble C E and Anderson A J A. Salt Lake City, UT:
University of Utah Press; 1963.
17. McCrone
Associates, Inc. Materials Analysis of the Voynich Manuscript, McCrone
Associates Project MA47613. Westmont, IL: McCrone Associates; 2009. Available at: http://beinecke.library.yale.edu/digitallibrary/manuscript/voynich_analysis.pdf.
Accessed December 30, 2012.
18. Haude ME. Identification of the colorants on maps from the Early Colonial Period of
New Spain (Mexico). J Amer
Inst Conserv. 1998;37:240-270.
19. Burgio
L, Ciomartin DA, Clark RJH. Pigment identification on medieval manuscripts,
paintings and other artefacts by Raman microscopy: applications to the study of
three German manuscripts. J Mol Struc. 1997;405:1-11.
20. Special
Collections Conservation Unit, Preservation Department. Medieval
Manuscripts: Some Ink & Pigment Recipes. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Library; 2012. Available at:
http://travelingscriptorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/scopa-recipes-booklet_web.pdf.
Accessed August 16, 2013.
21. Mallard E, Cumenge E. Sur une nouvelle espèce minérale, la Boléite.
Bull Soc Fr Minér
Crystallogr. 1891;14:283-293.
22. Cooper
MA, Hawthorne FC. Boleite: Resolution of the formula KPb26Ag9Cu24Cl62(OH)48. Can
Miner. 2000;38:801-808.
23. Copper
Development Association. Uses of Copper Compounds. CDA Technical Note
TN11. Hemel Hempstead, England: Copper Development Association; 1972. Available at:
www.copperinfo.co.uk/copper-compounds/downloads/tn11-uses-of-copper-compounds.pdf.
Accessed December 29, 2012.
24. Valerrama
J de. Pintura del
gobernador, alcaldes y regidores de México, Osuna Codex.
1600. Available at:
www.theeuropeanlibrary.org/exhibition-reading-europe/detail.html?id=108151.
Accessed January 4, 2013.
25. Canger
U. Nahuatl dialectology: A survey and some suggestions. Intern J Amer Linguist.
1988;54:28-72.
26. Lacadena
A. Regional scribal traditions: Methodological implications for the
decipherment of Nahuatl writing. PARI J. 2008;8:1-22.
27. Berdan FF, Anawalt PR. The
Essential Codex Mendoza. Berkeley, CA: Univ.
California;1997.
28. Integrated
Taxonomic Information System on-line database. Available at: www.itis.gov/.
Accessed January 16, 2013.
29. McTavish
EJ, Decker JE, Schnabel RD, Taylor JF, Hillis DM. New World cattle show
ancestry from multiple independent domestication events. Proc Natl Acad Sci.
2013;110(15):E1398-1406.
30. Codex Aubin/Códice Aubin 1576/Códice de 1576/Historia de la nación
mexicana/Histoire mexicaine. Available at:
www.britishmuseum.org/research/search_the_collection_database/search_object_details.aspx?objectid=3008812&partid=1&searchText=Aubin+Codex¤tPage=1.
Accessed January 28, 2013.
31. Nuttall
Z. The gardens of ancient Mexico. Ann Rep Smithsonian Inst.
1925;1923:453-464.
32. Granziera
P. Huaxtepec: The sacred garden of an Aztec emperor. Landscape Res. 2005;30:81-107.
33. Acuna-Soto
R, Stahle DW, Cleaveland MK, Therell MD. Megadrought and megadeath in 16th
century Mexico. Emerg Infect Dis. 2002;8:360-362.
34. Quammen D. Spillover. New York:
W. W. Norton & Co.; 2012.
35. Alcarón
HR de. Treatise on the Heathen Superstitions That Today Live Among the
Indians Native to This New Spain, 1629. Transl. & ed. Andrews J R,
Hassig R. Norman: Univ. Oklahoma Press; 1987.
36. Varey S, ed. The
Mexican Treasury: The Writings of Dr.Francisco Hernández.
Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ Press;
2000.
37. Sherwood E. Analysis of
Radiocarbon Dating Statistics in Reference to the Voynich Manuscript.
2010. Available at:
www.edithsherwood.com/radiocarbon_dating_statistics/radiocarbon_dating_statistics.pdf.
Accessed December 30, 2012.
38. Case
R, Tucker AO, Maciarello MJ, Wheeler KA. Chemistry and ethnobotany of
commercial incense copals, copal blanco, copal oro, and copal negro of North
America. Econ Bot.
2003;57:189-202.
39. USDA,
Agriculture Research Service, National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm
Resources Information Network (GRIN). Beltsville, MD: National Germplasm
Resources Laboratory. Available at:
www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxgenform.pl. Accessed December 31, 2012.
40. Kew et al. The Plant List.
Available at: www.theplantlist.org/. Accessed December 31, 2012.
41. Mathias
ME, Constance L. A synopsis of North American species of Eryngium. Amer
Midl Nat. 1941;24:361-387.
42. Navarrete
A, Nino D, Reyes B, Sixtos C, Aguirre E, Estrada E. On the hypocholesteremic
effect of Eryngium
heterophyllum. Fitoterapia.
1990;61:183-184.
43. Stuart
AG. Plants Used in Mexican Traditional Medicine. Available at:
www.herbalsafety.utep.edu/presentations/pptpresentations/Plants%20Used%20in%20Mexican%20Traditional%20Medicine-July%2004.pdf.
Accessed December 31, 2012.
44. Arana
E, Swadesh M. Los
Elementos del Mixteco Antiguo. México: Inst Nac Indigenista e INAH; 1965.
45. Bown
D. Aroids, Plants of the Arum Family. Portland, OR: Timber Press; 1988.
46. Harper D. Online Etymology
Dictionary. Available:
www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=maguey. Accessed December 31, 2012.
47. Dressler
RL. The Pre-Columbian cultivated plants of Mexico. Bot Mus Leafl Havard
Univ. 1953;16:115-172.
48. Hough
W. The pulque of Mexico. Proc US Natl Mus. 1908:33:577-592.
49. Foundation
for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc. (FAMSI), Los Angeles County
Museum of Art. Ancient Books: Borgia
Group Codex. A Colonial Era Decipherment of Codex Rios, (Borgia Group).
Available at: www.famsi.org/research/pohl/jpcodices/rios/index.html. Accessed
December 31, 2012.
50. O’Neill H. Botanical observations on
the Voynich MS. Speculum. 1944;19:126.
51. Bayer
RJ., Bogle AL, Cherniawsky DM. Petasites. Flora of North America.
20:541-543, 635-637. Available at: www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=124686.
Accessed December 31, 2012.
52. Pippin
RW. Mexican “Cacalioid” genera allied to Senecio
(Compositae). Contrib Natl Herb. 1968;34:365-447.
53. Robinson
H, Brettell RD. Studies in the Senecioneae (Asteraceae). III. The genus Psacalium.
Phytologia.
1973;27:254-264.
54. Manzanero-Medina GI, Flores-Martínez
A, Sandoval-Zapotitla E, Bye-Boettler R. Etnobotánica de siete raíces medicinales en el Mercado de
Sonora de la Ciudad de México. Polibotánica.
2009;27:191-228.
55. Standley
PC. Trees and shrubs of Mexico. Contrib. US Herb. 1920-1926;23:1-1721.
56. Pereda-Miranda R, Rosas-Ramírez
D, Castañeda-Gómez
J. Resin glycosides from the morning glory family. Fort Chem Org Naturst.
2010;92:77-153.
57. Meira
M, Silva EP da, David JM, David JP. Review of the genus Ipomoea: traditional uses,
chemistry and biological activities. Rev Bras Farmacogn. 2012;22:682-713.
58. Batres
LDP de, Alfaro CAB, Ghaemghami J. Mesoamerica aesthetics: Horticultural plants
in hair and skin care. Chron Hort. 2012;50(2):12-15.
59. Ross-Ibarra
J, Molina-Cruz A. The ethnobotany of chaya (Cnidoscolus aconitifolius
ssp. aconitifolius Breckon): A nutritious Maya vegetable. Econ Bot.
2002;56:350-365.
60. Dunn
DB, Harmon WE. The Lupinus montanus complex of Mexico and Central
America. Ann Missouri Bot
Gard. 1977;64:340-365.
61. Standley
PC, and Williams LO. Labiatae, Mint family. In: Standley P C, Williams L O
(eds.). Flora of Guatemala. Part IX, No. 3. Fieldiana.
1973;24:237-317.
62. Berg
CC. Moreae, Artocarpeae, and Dorstenia (Moraceae). Fl Neotropica.
2001:83:1-346.
63. Killip
EP. The American species of Passifloraceae. Fieldiana 1938;19:1-613.
64. Standley
PC. A revision of the genus Cobaea. Contr US Natl Herb.
1914;17:448-458.
65. Prather
A. Systematics of Cobaea (Polemoniaceae). Syst Bot Monogr. 1999;57:1-81.
66. Compton
JA, Culham A, Jury SL. Reclassification of Actaea to include Cimicifuga and Souliea (Ranunculaceae):
Phylogeny inferred from morphology, nrDNA ITS, and cpDNA trnL-F sequence
variation. Taxon. 1998;47:593-634.
67. Meyer
FC. Valeriana in North America and the West Indies (Valerianaceae). Ann Missouri Bot Gard.
1951;38:377-503.
68. Han
P. Discussion of the plant illustrated in folio f9v of the Voynich manuscript.
Available at: www.as.up.krakow.pl/jvs/library/2-7-2011-05-25/pansyvm.pdf.
Accessed January 1, 2013.
69. Shinners
LH. Viola
rafinesquii: Nomenclature and native status. Rhodora.
1961;63:327-335.
70. Russell
N H. Violets (Viola) of Central and Eastern United states: an
introductory survey. Sida. 1965;2:1-113.
71. Claude
E. Phillips Herbarium, Delaware State University. Available at:
http://herbarium.desu.edu/. Accessed December 29, 2012.
72. Tucker
AO. Identification of the rose, sage, iris, and lily in the ‘‘Blue
Bird Fresco’’ from
Knossos, Crete (ca. 1450 B.C.E.). Econ Bot. 2004;58:733-736.
73. Tucker AO, Redford AJ, Scher J, Trice MD. Dried
Botanical ID. Delaware State University,
Identification Technology Program, CPHST, PPQ, APHIS, USDA; Fort Collins, CO.
Available at: http://idtools.org/id/dried_botanical. Accessed December 29,
2012.
74. Tucker AO, DeBaggio T. The
Encyclopedia of Herbs. Portland, OR: Timber Press; 2009.
|