Memorandum

Date: February 6, 2015

To: Dr. Grinnell

From: Sarah Dantin

Subject: Voynich Manuscript

Dr. Claudia Grinnell, professor for professional writing at the University of Louisiana at Monroe, has asked for the research of the mysterious Voynich Manuscript. This piece of writing has can be considered a world wonder from how little is truly known about what it contains and where it is from. Many professionals have tried to crack the code surrounding this document, but there has still been no luck resulting in many questions to be answered. This memo describes who has owned the manuscript, the attempts to crack the code, what is known about each section, and the belief that it is a hoax.

Background

In the article what we know about the Voynich Manuscript written by Sravana Reddy and Kevin Knight, the University of Arizona performed carbon dating on the paper of the manuscript and dated it to being made in the 15th century. Along with this the McCrone Research Institute looked at the ink and concluded that it was added to the paper shortly after it was made.

Wilfried Voynich found the manuscript in an Italian Jesuit college (Schmeh, 2011). When Voynich received the book there was a letter in closed that was dated 1666, the

information in this letter led him to believe that a monk by the name of Roger Bacon is the writer but that has still yet to be proven.

This letter was addressed to the scholar Athanasius Kircher who received the book from a man named Johannes Marcus Marci. Marci stated that the book was once owned by Emperor Rudolf II who purchased it for 600 gold ducats.

Emperor Rudolf passed the book onto Jacobus Horcicky de Tapenecz.

The manuscript is now housed at the Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Yale University, which acquired it in 1969 from H.P. Kraus(Talbert, 2013).

Many people have devoted their life to trying to figure out the origin and meaning of the Voynich manuscript leading to many websites where pictures of the document can be found, for those without access to the true document.

Figure 1:Carbon dating on the Voynich Manuscript

Courtesy of uanews.org

Key Points

Many questions surround the Voynich manuscript but there are many things that can be answered.

The manuscript was written during the 15th century; however the author is still unknown.

Many people have tried to decode the manuscript but no one has been able to do so, leading too many peoples believes that the manuscript is a hoax.

The only clues as to what the book can be about are from the hand drawn pictures which make up each section.

Mystery behind the text and pictures

The Voynich manuscript contains crudely hand drawn pictures and is written in a language that no one has been able to decipher. The manuscript is organized and set up like a scholarly document which is the reason that many have said it is not a hoax.

The manuscript is divided into quires-sections made out of folded parchment, each of which consists of folios, with writing on both sided of each folio (Reeds 2002).

The text is written from left to right and the letters are from an alphabet of 40 symbols arranged into word.

Lacks punctuation marks but spaces and paragraphs are present ( Montemurro, 2013). Almost 220 of the 246 pages are illustrated; these illustrations are what help identify the

sections of the manuscript (Schmech 2011). There are six sections: herbal, Astronomical, Biological, Cosmological, Pharmaceutical,

and stars. Handwriting analysis shows that there was more than one person who wrote the

manuscript (fictive art).

Many believe that the writing in the manuscript can be made from a coding of a known language such as Chinese, Welsh, or German. Some even say that it could have been written by a special needs person who created their own language out of nowhere. Many of these ideas are considered controversial and have researchers constantly back and forth about the topic.

Decoding the manuscript isn’t the only thing that is controversial but also the pictures. One would think that a hand drawn picture would be easy to tell what it is and the story behind it but the pictures in the manuscript are just as mysterious as the text.

The herbal section contains pictures of plants that look nothing like anything today. “Colorful illustrations depict fantastical plants, astronomical diagrams, and groups of naked women in bathtubs” ( Graham, 2014).

.

There are over 126 illustrations of plants. No plant illustrations can be linked to a plant today. Some show similarities but at most could be called a

cousin.

A botanist named Hugh O’Neill claimed that two of the plants could be identified ( Schmech 2011).

One as a red sunflower The second a capsicum

The women that are drawn are not anymore helpful than the plants.

They lack clothing which does not help in determining what time period the manuscript was created

They also do not give any real insight onto what that section is about.

Figure 2.Women in what is described as a

bathtub.Provided by csicop.org