If you have ever found yourself asking “Where can I found out about XYZ’s moderately-loopy-but-eerily-hard-to-disprove Voynich Manuscript theory?“, then you’ve come to the right place. Here’s very probably the longest list of such theories on the Internet…
- Tim Ackerson is quite sure that the VMs was written in Early Welsh / Old Cornish from the 7th to 8th century AD.
- Zbigniew Banasik claimed that the VMs is written in the Manchu language (summary and links by Jorge Stolfi).
- Robert S. Brumbaugh came to various conclusions about the VMs (many of which hinged on his interpretations of the short number columns on f49r), such as that it was a 16th century cipher, or (later) a 16th century fake of a 15th century cipher. Either way, Brumbaugh thought the alphabet was a lossy number cipher, with each glyph basically standing in for an Arabic numeral. See D’Imperio’s “Elegant Enigma”, section 5.4.
- Dan Burisch claims that the VMs was written down in enciphered Hebrew by Roger Bacon, and that it describes some kind of alien technology from the future for creating DNA with sound. [See this Cipher Mysteries blog entry.]
- Jim Child, an Indo-European linguist who has been studying the VMS since the late 1970s, sees Voynichese as a pronounceable early German language.
- Jim Comegys believes that the VMs was a medical book written in Nahuatl (the language of the Aztec) possibly by Francisco Hernandez, and has written a book describing his claim.
- Erich von Däniken covers the Voynich Manuscript in his (2009) book “History Is Wrong”, linking it with the Book of Enoch and a whole load of other things.
- Karel Dudek tries to argue that the VMs was created by Georg Handsch of Limuz.
- Steve Ekwall posted two webpages on the Voynich as revealed to him by an “Excitant Spirit” in October 2000. Most of it is covered by his main web-page, but there is an additional “Folding KEY 101″ page here. Note: some broken links.
- Joseph Martin Feely constructed what he believed to be a partial decipherment of page f78r, but his claimed “clews” and his mangled Latin failed to convince any cryptologist. See Mary D’Imperio’s “Elegant Enigma” [section 5.2] for more, and a fuller account in Kennedy & Churchill pp.109-115.
- James Finn (“Big Jim”)‘s theory that the VMs is written in Hebrew, and warns of a coming end-time.
- William Friedmann proposed that the manuscript is written in an artificial language, not unlike Dalgarno’s Real Character. [see D'Imperio's "An Elegant Enigma", sections 6.5, 6.6, 9.3]
- Jacques Guy on the enduring life of his Chinese Hypothesis.
- Beatrice Gwynn from Dublin thinks it’s a sixteenth-century hygiene manual, written in left-right mirrored Middle High German. [Kennedy & Churchill, p.242]
- Wayne Herschel is certain that the star disk on page f68r3 of the Voynich Manuscript is a hidden record of a golden plate with secret writing given to Judas by Jesus Christ.
- George Hoschel Jr thinks that the VMs is a strange kind of recipe book in “Old Latin” (where f80v says “SAVED CRUMBLED DRIED TO HOOPOE KIDNEY”, etc)
- Volkhard Huth concludes that the VMs came from around Germany, and dates it to around 1480-1500.
- Miguel Lahunkun (a notorious Internet poster) claimed to have decrypted the VMs in a Google Groups post.
- Erhard Landmann posted up his theories on the VMs in German here [pdf], and in French here [pdf], and in English here [pdf].
- Leo Levitov‘s Cathar Theory (as summarized & criticized by Dennis Stallings).
- Jody Maat believes that the VMs is readable as a (vaguely polyglot) Old Dutch.
- Claude Martin‘s assertion that the VMs is not only number-encoded (rather like Brumbaugh), but also meaningless.
- Adam D. Morris suspects that the VMs might have something to do with Hieronymus Reusner‘s Pandora (a version of the ‘Buch der heiligen Dreifaltigkeit’).
- William Romaine Newbold sensationally claimed that the VMs was written by Roger Bacon in a multi-layered micrographic cipher, and described using telescopes to view galaxies.
- Ursula Papke has a kind of NLP-like transcendental interpretation of the Voynich glyphs, wherein each glyph gets decomposed into constituent strokes, and the kind of “stroke harmonies” that implicitly make up individual words are interpreted to tell a kind of rising/falling/looping narrative.
- Chris Parry‘s assertion that the VMs is a-pretend-foreign-language-fake.
- Nick Pelling‘s theory that Antonio Averlino was the author of the VMs [book site]
- Rolando Hernandez Rivero posted that the Voynich Manuscript was written in “Old Spanish” (but with bits of Latin and English thrown in).
- Richard Rogers claims that the VMs is an ultra-terse Renaissance drawing language, to describe (presumably) heretical symbols without actually drawing them.
- Gordon Rugg‘s hoax-is-a-possibility theory, which makes use of a modified Cardan Grille to simulate some (but not all) of the oddly-structured nature of the Voynichese text.
- Richard SantaColoma claims that the VMs was probably written by Cornelius Drebbel, or perhaps was a stage prop constructed by Francis (not Roger) Bacon.
- Dirk Schröder has his own Kabbalistic / numerological take on the VMs [in German], which probably won’t prove very convincing to you unless you are already certain of the power of numerology.
- Edith Sherwood believes the VMs was created by a very young Leonardo da Vinci (even though he was left-handed)
- John Stojko‘s vowel-less Ukrainian theory: “Letter to God’s Eye“
- Dr Leonell Strong believed that he had deciphered the two pages of the VMs he had reasonable reproductions of, using a base alphabet local to a section of ciphertext but with an offset cycling through the set [0]135797531474. More recently taken up by long term Voynich researcher Glen Claston, but still doubted by more traditional cryptologists (such as Jim Gillogly). Mentioned in Mary D’Imperio’s “Elegant Enigma” [section 5.3].
- Mark Sullivan thinks that the number column on page f66r holds the key to deciphering the VMs (and that the underlying language is Latin).
- Mandy Tonks asserts that not only was the VMS faked, but that Wilfrid Voynich also hoaxed the Marci letter that he claimed to have found with it.
- Wilfrid Voynich was convinced – apparently even before he read the Marci letter – that it was Roger Bacon who had created the object we now call “The Voynich Manuscript” (but which Voynich himself called “The Roger Bacon Manuscript”).
And finally, Voynich theorists who wish to remain (at least partially) anonymous…
- An anonymous Greek individual has proposed a Jewish Arabic Voynich theory, which claims to map Voynich letters to Hebrew equivalents, to produce an Arabic text.
- “Michael the friend of D” (who is apparently from the Ukraine) suggests that text may be hidden across multiple lines (or if not, Trithemius-style in alternate words).
- Despairing of finding a book publisher, an anonymous German industrial technician has put his/her “De Aqua” Voynich theory up on YouTube.
- Here’s a Spanish “fountain of youth” Voynich theory (also on YouTube), focusing on possible links with Juan Ponce de León.
Landmann says
They believe (through a wrong letter assignment) to read the word “oladabas.” Then they put to the level of the word “olazabel” and deem the VMS to be catalane. “Olazabel” is Basque.
I wonder if that was ever tested more?
I would have liked to read Ackerson’s ideas, but the link seems long gone.
I let them know that the code, is based on u8n code used by the kings of the world to communicate secretly, but the bigger problem is that this code behind, I met since I was 7a, there are other codes, that could only be decode, if someone had the table where there are over 784 simulated codes, right, 784 codes, to the left, 784 down codes, and 784 codes up, meaning that there are more than 3136 combinations, but I think just used the code 9, these tables may still be in the hands of some other king, he is satisfied of their ancestors, was the most common form of communication of their reigns and the decisions they had to do, I have a notion , some of the symbols, but these are artificial, and to decode them, must be obtained in order such as decoding, the plants are similar to each other, that we still have, but mostly, these plants seem familiar, are seen in Guatemala, Ecuador. I’m working on artificial remember those codes, I doubt that the words of 2, 3, and more letters, may be giving other codes, indicating that only the codes are fake or artificial, any communication, may do so by writing to rolandohernandezrivero @ gmail.com.
quiero hacerles saber, que el código, está basado en u8n código que usaban los reyes del mundo para comunicarse secretamente, pero el problema mayor, es que detrás de este código, que conocí desde que tenía 7a, hay otros códigos, que solo se podrían decodificar, si alguien tuviera la tabla en donde hay más de 784 códigos simulados, hacia la derecha, 784 códigos, hacia la izquierda, 784 códigos hacia abajo, y 784 códigos hacia arriba, ósea que hay más de 3136 combinaciones, pero, creo que solo usaba el código 9, estas tablas, podrían estar aun, en manos de algún otro rey, que tenga constancia de sus ancestros, era la forma más común de la comunicación de sus reinados y las decisiones que tenían que hacer, creo tener, noción, de algunos de los símbolos, pero estos son artificiales, y para decodificarlos, hay que obtener en su orden dicha forma de decodificarlo, las plantas, tienen parecidos a otras, que aun tenemos, pero mayormente, estas plantas aparentemente familiares, son vistas en Guatemala, Ecuador.
Estoy trabajando en recordar dichos códigos artificiales, dudo, que las palabras, de 2, 3, y más letras, puedan estar dando otros códigos, esto solamente están indicando a los códigos falsos, o artificiales, cualquier comunicación, pueden hacerlo escribiendo a rolandohernandezrivero@gmail.com.
Dear all, In my opinion, the cipher substitution is consistent and constant, i.e. a “backward swirly S” is an S throughout the VM. An important proviso however is that not all those swirly S’s are created equal. For example, some represent embedded scribal abbreviations, a right paren “)” atop a “c” null, at first glance looks like that backward swirly S but is made with two strokes of the pen and indicates truncation follows. Here is the nux of why the decoding of the VM is problematic. I think a consistent system of cipher substitution can be achieved but then another layer of the onion is met and that is the use of invented scribal abbreviations as well as incorporation of known abbreviations, such as the Tironian notation that Nick has commented on. We have layered atop a cipher substitution, the use of deletions and truncations that are indicated by what appear at first glance, simple scribal flourishes but are, I think, embedded macrons. Cheers, Tom S.
Michael: it is indeed possible to tie very complicated (and random-looking) cryptographic knots with a relatively small amount of creative effort. Yet that’s [k]not what we see in the Voynich Manuscript: there, we see a strong patterning system, with even tighter letter-to-letter binding than in English or Latin. There are even strong statistical patterns in places you wouldn’t necessarily expect, like the first letter of a paragraph, two-thirds of the way along the top line of a paragraph, the end of a line, the start of a word, etc.
So, the challenge here isn’t explaining away too much randomness, it’s explaining away too little randomness. Hope this is a help!
http://www.nickpelling.com/
nickpelling: I guess that is where my knowledge on the subject of ciphers and cryptology ends. I know very little.
Now I could be very wrong, but would it be so hard to make up your own script and ways of transcoding that would be impossible for anyone to mathematically deduce based on the sheer randomness of the encoding methods?
Say every letter has more than one character, actual spaces are random, deciphered spaces are indicated using a number of encrypted characters. Encoded character order shifts on a set order with the introduction of new sentences on a given page. Letter order for any given word could shift based on position in a sentence. etc. etc. etc.
Could something that complex and thought out really be decoded by a person who knows nothing of the encoding methods? This subject is starting to fascinate me, I think I’m going to read more on it.
Michael: all fair enough deductions… but the big question is how. Specifically, how that person managed to achieve that before anything as complex as polyalphabetic ciphers were invented.
http://www.nickpelling.com/
After a brief study of the VMs, I came to a possibly insignificant conclusion to describe the plant drawings with no real life counterpart. Someone who would go to such great lengths to hide the meaning of the text would also find a way to hide the identity of the botanical plants referenced in the text.
I believe the VM to be nothing more than an early 15th century physician or herbalist going to great depths to hide the secrets of his practice. After all, there was a lot of money to be made by reputable physicians from the noble class during this age. This author in the process just also happened to create an indecipherable text, probably due to his own paranoia of the subject matter becoming public, thus rendering his knowledge unprofitable.
Dear all, a “ps” to my last post. One very important point, recognized by most, is that the word lengths in the VM are arbitary but made to resemble real word lengths. Words have been taken apart and put back together in odd ways. There seem no really reliable markers for word endings although my view is that the tipped “?” which is “ch” in Armenian may serve often as the end of a word. The ampersand, “&” occurs here and there but often at the start of a word, sometimes isolated and sometimes at the end of a word. It can mean just the letters “et” but also Latin for “and” or part of “etc”. Its use in Latin, either medieval or renaissance, is a puzzle at the moment.
There are many Tironian notes (Nick first pointed this out) and other scribal abbreviations which complicate life as often the usual indicators like the “overbar” are missing. Cheers, Tom
Dear all, I think most Voynichers will agree to the following:
1) the end product is Latin but likely a Latin style, loaded with scribal abbreviations, that is older than the early 15C vellum date of the VM.
2)Most think it is a cipher substitution code
3)I doubt personally that many, maybe none, of the plants depicted in the herbal section are accurate depictions of real plants but have been altered to feature likely medicinal uses. Some are totally fanciful with mouse- or beetle- shaped leaves. Leaves are often joined and indicate, I think, the plant’s use for healing breaks in the skin. If green, then fresh leaves are used. If brown, dried leaves can be used. If plant stems join, the leaves or roots can be used as an aid in healing bone breaks. If the roots are untinted, they are not used. Hidden writing is in some roots.
3) Certain glyphs resemble those used in Armenian but have other meanings (my idea, not generally accepted).
4)Two scribes are at work but both seem to use the same abbreviations and cipher substitutions so are likely working from an enciphered plain text. The VM is definitely a copy as has been shown by codicology studies of Nick Pelling and others.
5)the tinting or coloration is of two types: original, very faint in most drawings or done later and perhaps several times by tinters of varying skills. Some water color is used, some crayon and apparently some goache is used. The original was evidently colored ink.
5) The vellum has been fairly precisely dated by C-14/C-12 isotope ratios but the date at which the ink was applied remains uncertain. It likely also originates from the early 15C.
Cheers, Tom
Hello! I started to publish my first attempts at translation of the Voynich manuscript on my blog. I would be honored to your review at the work. Best regards
Ruby
http://readingvoynich.wordpress.com
Mary, I think you are right on many points, or at least they tend to agree with my prejudices. I believe it is in Latin cursive, maybe of the Czech flavor (no Q. W and the incorporation of what I think are “ch”s. I think the language overlaid is not Hebrew but Armenian which has a number of glyphs used in the VM: the 4, the 8 and 9, the mirrored “&”, the tipped “?” the “o” sometimes appearing as “a” and the backward swirly “S”.The key to a decrypt is the 8 and 9 which use letters (Roman e and t respectively) so that 89 becomes et (and). The 4, “mirrored &”, tipped ? are “c”. “f” and “ch” respectively. The herbs are deliberately fanciful and have medical uses embedded in them. They are reasonably well drawn but very poorly tinted and retinted. Orignal ink can be found in every one by careful inspection.I think the substituted ciphers (the c-c combinations and the gallows glyphs) were designed to resemble Arabic. Nick pelling on his pages points out the use of Latin scribal abbreviations for omitted letters and truncations. These abound in the VM. We may never know the purpose of this thing and the extreme care used in copying from some coded plaintext, likely in Latin but with a lot of English, German and Italian may as you indicate be intended for initiates or intimates of the scribes. I don’t think there is a “colophon” or if there were one, it was scraped off. The sentences on the last page were not by either of the scribal hands involved in the creation of the VM. Any normal colophon is in the hand of the vellum maker and scribe, not a sloppy thing like we see in the VM. Best wishes. Tom Spande
This is indeed a difficult book to break down, I have taken a look at it thoroughly, perhaps because it seems like it is a copy of another book and hence why it is scribed without fault in penmanship, with the exception of a repeated word here and there (which is often the case when someone is copying text from another book). Things that add more to my suspicion that this is a copy are the crude drawings, from someone with no drawing ability trying to re-draw a depiction by someone else as well as some of the drawings appearing somewhat similar to the botanical pharmaceutical portion of the Harleian Manuscripts. Perhaps both had access to the original and decided to “re-write” them by their own conclusions and perceptions. I don’t quite agree with the Manchu suggestion and many others as I had tried those languages. Problem with it lays in that it’s in the stylized writing of the era, almost as a Latin cursiva but with variations of what seem to be some sort of ancient language combination which meant the original writer was adept in linguistics as well as ancient languages. There’s a colophon, and there might be indeed the phonetic form of writing which adds even more difficulty in translation. If indeed some of the researchers suggesting that the writing is ancient Hebrew, because then there seems to be some mix match of Aramaic along with a few ancient Greek letters then that would mean that either it’s a copy of something from somewhere slightly before (or around) 300 BCE Mesopotamia or someone with a good knowledge base of the languages of the era. I don’t agree that this was something someone wrote to make a book seem to have more value, since I myself had made in the past some private journals written in a mix match of ancient languages or made up runes (like Tolkien’s Uruk) so no one could read my journals. But for the invented runs I do have a puzzle (a table or legend) to help break down the alphabet of those fictional runes if I were to give the journal to someone else. Meaning this was something secretive of the time in which only a selected few were meant to read it (ie apprentice). This is just my opinion from a mere observer, nonetheless despite everything it is a beautiful “journal” of sorts.
I am missing my development here:
voynich2arabic.wordpress.com
http://voynich2arabic.wordpress.com
Upon viewing the Voynich Book page by page, IMMEDIATLY
understood the language, and why no one in the past times have not deciphered.
This language is ” The Heavenly Language”.
No one has before has understood this language, It is a gift given. Man did not write this, it was penned by man, but the language was given from our heavens.
Know that these plants were in the Garden, Long past.
For Healing and Knowledge purpose. Look and see, understand.