Fabrizio Salani, I sincerely apologize that it has taken me so long to reply to you. I have been away from my blog for almost two years, involved with important business concerning our national elections and have not had an opportunity to read comments until today.

I have not had even one hour to work on the Voynich Manuscript for far too long, but I have a great deal of research on your Voynich drawing and I think you will be excited to see what I have found.

Thank you for dropping by my blog. I would be very happy to see high resolution scans and the results of the research and also to share with you what I have found, which is important to the timeline of your drawing and Voynich research in general.

Let me know how we can communicate. Email is best for me since I have files I need to transmit to show you what I have uncovered.

I did wonder whether the A G seal impression, with G centered in the middle of the A, might be a stylized or personalized Masonic symbol, so have asked the Freemason museum just to rule it out. Don’t know if they’ll reply.

I’m sure this has nothing to do with it, but I do find it weird the copyist has used some of the weird conventions the original Voynich illustrator possibly used: the addition of the leaf and the different roots.

For instance, regarding extra or less components: on the Rosettes page, we have 37 moons when there should be 36, 13 spokes for the zodiac when there should be 12, 15 words for the spiral when there should, I think, be 14 , whereas below, if the cosmos is the cosmos, it has 6 temples, but the number should be 7 to represent the meeting of heaven and earth, and in the vegetabilis frame middle bottom, there should be 6 not 7 petals/spokes, as plants had an established number of parts, just as the zodiac did. The VMS author, to me, messes with the numerical symbolism by either adding or subtracting a “1”. It happens too often, always with “1” as the difference, to be a coincidence.

Re the roots, someone has already said somewhere that roots on the Voynich don’t match the plants. But this too might be a repeating motif in my interpretation. The bottom row of the Rosettes is cthonic, based on Greek myth, whereas the top row is Judeo-Christian. A dysjunction between top and bottom, “flowers” and “roots”. And there’s an illustration in the bath section that seems to explicitly show an evolution, or progression of religious ‘bodies’, from pantheistic Egyptian animal gods, to Greek, to Jewish to Christian. Once again, the “roots” don’t match the stems and “flowers”.

Regardless if you accept my interpretation, which I would have to exhaustively detail so won’t, and likely frame in apophatic theology and/or the Aristotelian empymeme, I find it very interesting that these two recurring motifs I have identified have been used by this illustrator when making his/her own copy.

It implies he or she was aware of them, when I’ve never seen them mentioned as a recurring motif (though that means nothing, as I’ve never read early interpretations, just D’Imperio’s selection), and for some reason has deliberately used them when copying from one to another.

Anyway, throwing that out in case somewhere along the line it contributes to your research, which I still have no idea about! But the idea you could find another, concrete piece of the puzzle is incredibly exciting! Well done, and best of luck writing it up!