Voynich Manuscript

1. Memorandum
Date: February 6, 2015
Subject: The Voynich Manuscript: The Unreadable Document
To: Dr. Claudia Grinnell
From: Courtney Leehy
Introduction
The origins of the Voynich Manuscript have for a while been questioned. The language within
the manuscript doesn’t match any from the time or any language found on earth period. The
plants and things drawn in the manuscript have an almost alien like appearance as well as the
figures drawn that resemble humans. The manuscript has tried to be decoded for centuries and
there are arguments over the accuracy of such translations. It seems doubtful that this manuscript
could ever be decoded. Perhaps one day the mystery of the document will be unraveled.
Background
 There was an expert in the field that particularly stood out. Her name is Rene
Zandbergen. She actually created a website dedicated to the Voynich manuscript. Her
research is very extensive and covers an
array of topics on the Voynich Manuscript
with an unbiased point of view. The pages
of the manuscript are printed on calf skin
and the cover is made of goat skin
(Zandbergen, 2014).
 The manuscript has no distinct
author. It seems it would be impossible to
track down the actual author of the
manuscript.
 Roger Bacon (Zandbergen, 2014), a
young Leonardo Di Vinci (Sherwood,
2008), and a religious cult (Zandbergen,
2014) are among rumored authors. None
of which can be proven.
 The Voynich Manuscript has been passed from owner to owner. Many of these owners
have tried in vain to decipher the mysterious document.
 Many believe that this document has botanical, pharmaceutical, and astrological
significance.
Figure 1 A page of the Voynich Manuscript

2. The Story of How the Voynich Manuscript Got its Name
 The name Voynich Manuscript came about because a man named Wilfrid
Voynich obtained the manuscript and kept ownership of it for many year before
his death in 1930. Then it was passed to his wife, Ethel Voynich (Zandbergen,
2014).
 How Voynich actually got the manuscript is also a mystery.
According to Zandbergen, his wife was the only person he told.
Ethel wrote a letter explaining how the manuscript was obtained
and it was only to be opened after her death.
 After Ethel died, Voynich’s secretary Anne Nill opened
the letter to discover that the manuscript was supposedly found
in a mysterious castle in Frascati. Anne Nill also acquired the
manuscript after Ethel Voynich passed away.
 The manuscript was eventually purchased by Hans P. Klaus
on July 12, 1961 in the hopes that the document would hold
great significance. He tried to sell it and was unsuccessful.
 He eventually donated it to Yale University in 1969 (Yale
University). Today the document is kept there for others to study
its mystery (Zandbergen, 2014).
Key Ideas of the Manuscript
 Although there is no universally agreed upon translation for the manuscript, there are
many who believe that they have
decoded the manuscript.
 The key to understanding the
document is to break it down page by
page to try to decipher it.
 Because the document has
failed to be decoded after centuries, it
has been said that this manuscript
could be an elaborate hoax (Bax,
2014). That is one suggested theory
behind this mysterious document.
 Some theories to approach the
mysterious manuscripts include that it
could be a recipe book, a book written in old Latin, a medicinal book written in Aztec,
and many other seemingly off the wall theories (Bax, 2014). Translations include:
recipes, astrological symbols and figures, astronomical significance, herbs and botany,
pharmacology, and some other translations which are mostly conspiracy theories (Tucker
& Rexford).
 It is also suggested that the manuscript holds all of these possible theories in different
sections of the manuscript. This is most likely the case as the drawings in each section of
Figure 2Wilfred Voynich
Figure 3Voynich Manuscript: Botony

3. Figure 6 Edith Sherwood: Possible Identification
the manuscript vary and are similar to each idea presented (excluding the conspiracy
ideas of course). With this being said, what kind of document was this manuscript? Why
were there different subjects in the manuscript? What was the significance of the
manuscript to the author or audience of the manuscript? These questions may never be
answered but that doesn’t stop some people from trying to understand the manuscript.
 One possible idea of the manuscript only deals with one section which is the botany
section. With the pictures of all the plants in it, some people believe that this was some
sort of field guide to botany.
The Voynich Manuscript: Possiblya Botanist’s Field Guide or a
PharmacologyHandbook?
 One of the biggest sections of the manuscript is the section with many plants drawn and
possible descriptions written under it. It is easy to see how one would assume that this
section is about botany and it likely was for botany.
 One thing that is very unusual about this
section however is that the pictures drawn have
not been identified plants. Over one hundred and
thirteen drawings are in the manuscript and have
yet to be identified (Yale University). There is
also a section for pharmacology with over one
hundred different herbs drawn in. Edith Sherwood
thinks that she may have identified some plants in
the manuscript. The validity of those
identifications may or may not be correct. Perhaps
some of them are correct. Figure 4 provides an
example of one of her identifications of plant
species in the manuscript.
 On her website she goes into detail
about how she thinks that each
drawing has a possible explanation.
Some of these explanations seem
very plausible. Along with plant
drawings, there are also herbs drawn
which lead many people to believe
that this document could also have
pharmaceutical significance. Again, it seems a strange combination for all these things to
be incorporated into this single document.
Figure 4 Botony Example
Figure 5An Example of Edith Sherwood's explanation

4. Patterns in Language in the Voynich Manuscript
 Some suggest that the patterns in the manuscript could help decode the mysterious
document once and for all. The pattern of language are interesting and seem to have some
kind of significance according to Montemurro. He studied the manuscript and discovered
patterns in the text as he was studying it. He’s not the only one who discovered patterns
while studying the manuscript.
 Many agree that there is something to the pattern and it suggests that it was written in a
legitimate language. Others argue and say that the document is an elaborate hoax
suggested by the varying patterns in the manuscript.
 Others, like Edith Sherwood claim that the document could be written in a broken
language such as broken Italian (Sherwood, 2008).
 Montemurro noticed that there are repeating words in the manuscript and he documents
each one in his abstract that he wrote. He also employs different laws and theories to
explain the manuscript’s legitimacy (Zipf’s law for example). This proved that the
manuscript had a distinct pattern that followed that of a legitimate language
(Montemurro, 2013). Zandbergen suggests that the manuscript had an alphabet and on
her website she has the chart of the alphabet.
The manuscript itself doesn’t resemble any language from Europe at the time (Schmeh, 2011).
People such as Schmeh also suggest that the manuscript doesn’t match any language patterns at
all. So there are some discrepancies in views on the language of the manuscript itself.
 Some people also believe in the “A/B
Language” idea. One such person is Captain
Prescott Currier. In his studies, he suggests that
the manuscript was written by different people
in two possible languages (Currier, 1976). This
is incredible to believe that not only two people
wrote it but it could also be in two different
languages. That is not too hard to image considering how the manuscript varies in topic.
Yet another suggestion is that the manuscript potientially has syntax and morphology
(Reddy & Knight, 2011).
 The language structure to them suggests that it may be possible for the author to pay
attention to content as well as grammar. Its hard to say what the manuscript is actually
written about. The only things we really have to rely on in this case are the written texts
in the manuscript as well as the languages of the time to compare the manuscript with.
ConspiracyTheories Involving the Voynich Manuscript
As with every mystery out there, there is always a conspiracy theorist. There are many
conspiracy theories revolving around the Voynich Manuscript. There are a few that stand out
significantly. One conspiracy theory that could very well be true is that the whole Voynich
Manuscript is an elaborate hoax created to vex and confuse historians (Schmeh, 2011).
Figure 6 Possible Alphabet for the VM

5.  Another theory suggests such crazy things like that the manuscript could have come from
a “higher knowledge” (Daniken). The manuscript has far too much information about
astrology to be written by someone common according to Daniken.
 Another suggestion connected to that is that the manuscript could have an alien origin
which if you think about it, it is completely ridiculous.
 The alien theory stems from one
particular image in the
manuscript which is supposedly
our galaxy drawn out (Finn,
2001). It would be impossible for
someone in that time to be able to
see our galaxy so understandably
this is strange.
 Perhaps the drawing isn’t our
galaxy but something else
entirely. We may never know,
but it is very unlikely that the
drawing would be of our galaxy.
 Below is the picture of our galaxy on
top of the drawing from the Voynich Manuscript.
In Conclusion
The origins and meaning of the Voynich Manuscript may
never truly be discovered. This document has been
shrouded in mystery ever since its discovery. It seems
doubtful that we will ever decipher that document fully.
Then again, all it may take is a fresh pair of eyes to look at
it and make a correct guess about it. However, there is no
way to know for sure any answers to the many questions
there are about the Voynich Manuscript. Maybe this
document will forever be the unreadable document.
Figure 7 Strange Illustrations appear through VM
Figure 8 A mysterious drawing with
an overlay of the galaxy in the VM

6. References
Bax, S. (2014, January). A proposed partial decoding of the Voynich Manuscript. Pp 5-9,
Retrieved January 28, 2015, from Google Scholar database.
Beineke Library, Folio 78r. [photograph]. Retrieved February 4, 2015 from
https://www.google.com/search?q=the+voynich+manuscript&biw=1366&bih=667&sour
ce=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=6QTVVKLWA8qnNuiag_gD&sqi=2&ved=0CAYQ_AU
oAQ
Currier, Captain P. H. (1976, November 30). Papers on the Voynich Manuscript. Pp 3-4,
Retrieved January 28, 2015, from Google Scholar database.
Daniken, E. von. (2007) History Is Wrong. Franklin Lake, New Jersey: Career Press Inc.
Finn, J. E. (2001, January). The Voynich Manuscript: Extraterrestrial Contact During the
Middle Ages?. Retrieved February 4, 2014, from
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/esp_ciencia_manuscrito02.htm
Google Images (2015). [photograph: figure 3]. Retrieved February 4, 2015 from
http://images.google.com
Googel Images (2015). [photograph: figure 4]. Retrieved February 4, 2015 from
http://images.google.com
Google Images (2015). [photograph: figure 6]. Retrieved February 4, 2015 from
http://images.google.com
Google Images (2015). [photograph: figure 7] Retrieved February 4, 2015 from
http://images.google.com
Google Images (2015). [photograph: figure 8] Retrieved February 4, 2015 from
http://images.google.com
Google Images. (2015) Wilfrid Voynich. [photograph]. Retrieved February 4, 2015 from
https://www.google.com/search?q=wilfrid+voynich&biw=1366&bih=667&source=lnms
&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=CwbVVJfBKcimNpK9gWA&sqi=2&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ
Montemurro, M. A. (2013, June). Keywords and co-occurrence patterns in the Voynich
Manuscript: an information theoretic analysis. Volume 8 Issue 6. Pp 1-9. Retrieved
January 28, 2015, from Ebscohost database.
Reddy, S & Knight, K. (2011, June). What we know about the Voynich Manuscript. Pp 82-83
Retrieved January 28, 2015, from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2107647.
Schmeh, K. (2011, Jan./Feb.) The Voynich Manuscript: the book nobody can read. Volume 35.1
Retrieved January 28, 2015, from

7. http://www.csicop.org/si/show/the_voynich_manuscript_the_book_nobody_can_read?ut
m_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Sherwood, E. (2008). Articles by Edith Sherwood. Retrieved January 28, 2015 from
http://www.edithsherwood.com/voynich_decoded/index.php
Sherwood, E. (2008) Folio 95r: Elderberry. [photograph] Retrieved February 4, 2015 from
http://images.google.com
Tucker, A. O. & Talbert, R. H. (2013-2014). A preliminary analysis of the botany, zoology, and
mineralogy of the Voynich Manuscript. Issue 100, pp 70-85. Retrieved January 28, 2015
from Ebscohost database.
Yale University. (2013). The Voynich Manuscript. Retrieved January 28, 2015 from
http://beinecke.library.yale.edu/collections/highlights/voynich-manuscript
Zandbergen, R. (2015). The Voynich Manuscript. Retrieved January 28, 2015 from
http://www.voynich.nu/index.html