# Voynich manuscript finally deciphered? **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 10, 2018, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113 "2018-09-10T17:54:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/61 "2019-05-16T20:03:40Z")
> [@Scumpup](#): > > No matter how many frauds have claimed to have translated the manuscript, it is an error to automatically roll one’s eyes and conclude every claim is a fraud. Ancient languages were untranslated until they were. Coded messages were untranslated until they were. Unthinkingly dismissing every claim as a fraud is intellectual laziness. If you are too lazy or too busy to seriously evaluate every claim, it is better to just ignore the claims. And this guys has actually translated some parts and the translations make sense. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/62 "2019-05-16T20:07:57Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And this guys has actually translated some parts and the translations make sense. [No](https://ciphermysteries.com/2017/11/10/gerard-cheshire-vulgar-latin-siren-call-polyglot). ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/63 "2019-05-16T20:11:49Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And this guys has actually translated some parts and the translations make sense. Perhaps a reference to [Facilitated Communication](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facilitated_communication) is appropriate here. FCers “translate” what a severely handicapped person supposedly says, and it makes sense. But unbiased tests strongly suggest that the facilitator is the one doing the actual talking, not the handicapped person. I submit that the “translator” in this case, in the absence of corroborating evidence, may be making the translation up, just to make sense. I’m willing to be proven wrong. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/64 "2019-05-16T20:18:25Z")
> [@Darren\_Garrison](#): > > [No](https://ciphermysteries.com/2017/11/10/gerard-cheshire-vulgar-latin-siren-call-polyglot). What does a article from 2017 have to do with a theory published in 2019? Yes, Cheshire released a draft of one idea on how to translate, but that doesnt have much to do with his paper two years later, where he actually published translations. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/65 "2019-05-16T20:39:30Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And this guys has actually translated some parts and the translations make sense. No he hasn’t, and no they don’t. He has made some claims as to what some isolated words and phrases mean, without corroboration. That’s not translation. And here’s an example of one of his extended “translations,” which looks like you passed a passage through Google Translate from Polish to Swahili to Chinese to Korean to English. > [@](#): > > people and ship in unity take charge mothers/babies of ship to protect life-force pots [he says this is pregnant bellies] yet in he/she at inauspicious/unfavourable he/she is in a/one omen to look it is man not mouse epousee and embrace an opening thus you go but carefully to the queen to facilitate not getting wet with seawater Please provide an example of an extended passage you think “makes sense.” ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/66 "2019-05-16T20:41:59Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > What does a article from 2017 have to do with a theory published in 2019? > > Yes, Cheshire released a draft of one idea on how to translate, but that doesnt have much to do with his paper two years later, where he actually published translations. Fine. We’ll just wait a while for you to eat crow on this one, just like the last time you were breathlessly enthusiastic about a Vonych translation that everyone was saying was crap. ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/67 "2019-05-16T20:46:54Z")
It doesn’t matter if some guy claims he is able to read the manuscript. What matters is that you and I can do so. Especially if it be in Latin, not exactly an obscure language in Europe, we should be able to read it just like we can read Julius Caesar. I wonder what explanation he offers for the fact that statistical analysis of the text shows it is different from Latin, as well as other reasonable guesses for the language, nor does it look like Latin (or proto-French, or whatever) when we stare at it. High-res images of the manuscript, as well as several transcriptions of the contents, are available online, so if it’s that easy we ought to be able to go through a couple of randomly-chosen paragraphs right here. ---
**Author:** ![Sicks\_Ate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Sicks\_Ate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sicks_Ate)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/68 "2019-05-16T20:50:46Z")
> [@Darren\_Garrison](#): > > The next logical step is to roll your eyes at this hyperbolic bombast and wait until this thread is bumped for the next person who decoded the manuscript. (Given past patterns, it should be only a few months to wait.) It’ll probably be one “Dr. Stewart.” ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/69 "2019-05-16T20:56:19Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > No he hasn’t, and no they don’t. He has made some claims as to what some isolated words and phrases mean, without corroboration. That’s not translation. And here’s an example of one of his extended “translations,” which looks like you passed a passage through Google Translate from Polish to Swahili to Chinese to Korean to English… I am reminded of James Thurber, who once claimed, tongue in cheek, that he was having his entire library translated into French. Because they lose something in the original. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/70 "2019-05-16T20:56:45Z")
I’ve found [a video](https://youtube.com/watch?v=YpUJbUTljfU) of someone reading a translated passage using the new decryption method. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/71 "2019-05-16T21:13:30Z")
[Here’s a book](https://www.amazon.com/Voynich-Manuscript-Unchopped-Thomas-ONeil-ebook/dp/B00996VMOE/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_1?keywords=o%27neil+voynich&qid=1558040903&s=books&sr=1-1-fkmrnull) ca. 2012, full of charts and graphs, that also claims to have solved the mystery. It’s an astrological text! From the publisher’s blurb: > [@](#): > > A 575 year old mysterious text named the Voynich Manuscript hidden in plants, herbs, castles, astrological charts and naked woman [sic]. Through out[sic] the ages people have asked, “What is in the hidden code”? Now for the first time read what no one else has read. Take a peek at the decoded text! See if you can make any sense of it; I can’t. ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/72 "2019-05-16T21:13:52Z")
> [@Darren\_Garrison](#): > > And [one of the descriptions linked on that page](https://ciphermysteries.com/2017/11/10/gerard-cheshire-vulgar-latin-siren-call-polyglot), demonstrating what a total twit Cheshire is. Damn, that’s quite the take-down. What I found interesting was his list of “non-language-like behaviours” of the VM text. I had also never heard the phrase “Neal keys”, which is apparently the name for the “letters” in the manuscript that look like one or two legged gallows and that don’t correlate with any other known letters. I’m going to lose a lot of time on that blog. Here’s a more [general take-down of VM solutions](https://ciphermysteries.com/2018/02/02/open-letter-pretty-much-every-linguistic-voynich-theorist-ever) from 2018. I’m going to lose so much time. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/73 "2019-05-16T22:05:16Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And this guys has actually translated some parts and the translations make sense. Which, oddly, was pretty much your same reaction the last time a - completely different - supposed solution gained this amount of media traction. So, [for example](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20471802&postcount=49): > [@Voynich Manuscript](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript/753076/50): > > > [@Colibri](#): > > > > Yeah, they do. The claim that he deciphered it is bogus. He provides no evidence that he has done anything of the kind. > > Yes, they make that claim, but more actually they _doubt_ that he did so. But where is their evidence? > > Read the articles. > > “I could list a whole load of things that are wrong with this, but I’d be typing all night on a TL;DR post and nobody would care. _sigh_” > > "_On checking around the web I find that a clear majority, if not all, of the most widely known VM researchers agree that Nicholas Gibbs has not solved the VM puzzle. Apart from his theory being a mish-mash, a hodge-podge, a veritable congeries of conflicting theories old and new, he restates what is blindingly obvious to many and long since known amongst VM theorists aka ‘Voynicheros’. …There is so much wrong with Gibb’s ideas that I must pause here or risk my sanity."_ > > Here’s one that says"_The idea that the book is a medical treatise on women’s health, however, might turn out to be correct. But that wasn’t Gibbs’ discovery. Many scholars and amateur sleuths had already reached that conclusion, using the same evidence that Gibbs did. Essentially, Gibbs rolled together a bunch of already-existing scholarship and did a highly speculative translation, without even consulting the librarians at the institute where the book resides._" > > Everyone already knew it was a book about women’s health?:dubious:😕 > > But another: "_Regarding the validity of his solution, I personally find it lacking in logic. No author would expect a book to be understood by its readers when only the first letter of each word is given; it’s a massive loss of content. And then grouping together those letters so that they appear to be words obfuscates the meaning further. If his analysis that it’s a book about women’s health is correct, it’s the worst one ever written. It could have served no reader."_ > or is it- > It can’t be a book about women’s health?😕 > > and just who is attacking Gibbs? “VM theorists aka ‘Voynicheros’”. > But as the Atlantic sez: > “\*Some of the skepticism of Gibbs’s theory likely has to do with him being an outsider. He does not seem to be known to professional scholars or the amateur Voynich community.” \* > > Their main attack is that he is ( **Oh noes the horrors!!!** ) making a TV special about it. :eek::eek::eek::eek: > > TV special and “not one of us”= ipso facto he is wrong. > > Of course, maybe his “solve” is wrong. I dunno. I am not a “Voynichero” by any means. But so far, it is the most convincing theory I have read. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/74 "2019-05-16T22:19:36Z")
> [@bonzer](#): > > Which, oddly, was pretty much your same reaction the last time a - completely different - supposed solution gained this amount of media traction. So, [for example](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20471802&postcount=49): _"Of course, maybe his “solve” is wrong. I dunno. "_ ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/75 "2019-05-16T22:22:22Z")
> [@Yllaria](#): > > Damn, that’s quite the take-down. … Actually, it’s not, it was written\* two years \*before Cheshire’s article was published. Look, I am not a expert on this but he did provide a few short translations that made sense. And it is in a peer reviewed journal, which the rest have not been. is everyone’s point is that the manuscript isnt translatable? So every translation is bogus? ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/76 "2019-05-16T23:29:02Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So every translation is bogus? It sure is, unless you and I can read it and it makes sense. The same way you can learn to read Old Babylonian, Ancient Egyptian, and Classical Chinese. And Latin. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2019, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/77 "2019-05-17T00:09:33Z")
> [@Scumpup](#): > > No matter how many frauds have claimed to have translated the manuscript, it is an error to automatically roll one’s eyes and conclude every claim is a fraud. Ancient languages were untranslated until they were. Coded messages were untranslated until they were. Unthinkingly dismissing every claim as a fraud is intellectual laziness. If you are too lazy or too busy to seriously evaluate every claim, it is better to just ignore the claims. Slightly different, in as much as there was never any question about where those ancient languages came from, roughly when they were spoken, or, indeed, whether they were actual languages in the first place, or just clever gibberish. ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2019, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/78 "2019-05-17T00:40:12Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Actually, it’s not, it was written\* two years \*before Cheshire’s article was published. > > Look, I am not a expert on this but he did provide a few short translations that made sense. And it is in a peer reviewed journal, which the rest have not been. > > is everyone’s point is that the manuscript isnt translatable? So every translation is bogus? Check out YouTube and you will find at least dozens of “translations” that are just as robust. Cheshire’s paper includes: “Ultimately, a consensus emerged: that the manuscript was either impossible to solve or else written in gibberish, as an elaborate practical joke” which is a gross misstatement, and "Unbeknown to the scholarly community, the manuscript was written in an extinct and hitherto unrecorded language as well as using an unknown writing system . . . ", which is an obvious falsehood, and “Past scholarly attempts at solving the writing system are far too numerous to mention individually, but none was successful in any way, because every attempt simply used the wrong approach . . .” which is amazing self-congratulation. He speaks of Proto-Romance as if it were a single language. This lets him ransack multiple languages for words that sound something like what he’s decided to declare the non-standard letters in the manuscript sound like. His work showing how he decided what the “letters” sound like is not shown. His work showing how he decided which letters were written is not shown (the penmanship in some areas is not good - he’s only showing areas where it is easy to read). His work showing how he decided the translation of most of the words is not shown. He does not discuss grammar at all. That is not a linguistics paper or a history paper. It’s a puff piece. All conclusion and no analysis. The Author Information given: “Dr. Gerard Cheshire has recently completed his doctorate, expounding an adaptive theory for human belief systems, and is now a Research Associate with University of Bristol. The solution to the codex of MS408 was developed over a 2-week period in May 2017 after he came across the manuscript for the first time whilst conducting research for his PhD dissertation. Having deciphered the writing system, he subsequently realized the significance of the manuscript to Romance linguists and Mediaeval historians, and so decided to publish the information.” Translation: I have a doctorate in Biological Sciences\* and History and Linguistics can’t be hard compared to that. - per the University of Bristol, where he’s listed as a Visiting Research Associate. As a separate thing, Janick and Tucker (the OP link) argue that the carbon dating of the manuscript has to be wrong because that illustration there has to be a sunflower, which is a New World plant. Also because other illustrations look like Mexican cities to them. Have you seen those illustrations? They’re like ink blots - you could read anything into them. Also, they don’t translate anything, they just identify medieval illuminations without any background in medieval history. (Background: 1- horticulture, 2- herbarium director, with help from a linguist and wildlife ecologist) At least Cheshire doesn’t claim the carbon dating has to be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2019, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/79 "2019-05-17T01:00:37Z")
Well, we can cross [This one](https://news.artnet.com/art-world/medieval-voynich-manuscript-mystery-solved-1548679?utm_content=buffer963d2&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=news&fbclid=IwAR3rntjWJaY5gm-CywLUIkrvH6VcmbxIsFGwpotN8d3Lfj-Ru4dmRPwPQYQ) off of the list. Fascinating. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2019, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113/80 "2019-05-17T01:06:32Z")
Whoops. Already a thread on this. Sorry ! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voynich-manuscript-finally-deciphered/821113.md?page=5)