The Voynich Manuscript: The Mysterious Code That Has Defied Interpretation for Centuries

In 1912, Wilfrid Voynich, an antiquarian book dealer, stumbled upon a strange volume, its vellum pages covered in a beautiful but unrecognisable script accompanied by equally mystifying pictures. The codex has remained undeciphered from that day to this. Voynich believed the codex to be the work of medieval philosopher Roger Bacon, others that of the Elizabethan mathematician and occultist John Dee. Whoever created the book--which now resides at Yale University--it remains to this day a singular enigma which continues to defy the best efforts of linguists, cryptologists, and scholars. With the benefit of the authors' exhaustive research, readers can hazard their own guesses as to the meaning and provenance of this most beguiling of mysteries.… (more)

User reviews

LibraryThing member jcovington

I had misgivings when I bought this, fearing a new-age, corn-ball pile of nonsense about this bizarre script. Instead, what I found was a thoughful, insightful investigation of the manuscript and the various attempts to understand it - not one of which involved antedilivian civilization or aliens.

3 more

LibraryThing member fdholt

What a strange manuscript that Wilfred Voynich showed the world in 1912. It was a medieval manuscript with strange writing and drawings of unidentified plants, female nudes, astrological symbols and medicinal herbs. Voynich implied that this was a work of Roger Bacon from the 13th century. For the

last hundred years, scholars have tried to decipher the writing and identify the plants. Although several scholars attempted to claim success in breaking the code in portions of the work, no one has been able to solve the mysteries. But the book is also the story of Voynich and several figures from the 16th century who may have touched the manuscript as well as the scientists and cryptologists who have tried to solve the mystery today. Is it genuine dating from the time of Roger Bacon or from the 1500s? Or is it the work of Voynich himself? There are no answers. The manuscript is now in the hands of Yale University where it can be studied and there are images on the web as well as active lists about the manuscript.

In addition to black and white images, the book contains many clear images in color of the manuscript pages as well as other similar works for comparison. Authors Gerry Kennedy and Rob Churchill have meticulously researched the topic and have cited all sources, including several unpublished manuscripts that they used in the preparation of the book. The bibliography includes all important sources (both books and articles) as well as websites. They also include an excellent index. Their explanation of ciphers and codes was fascinating.

The book has asked a lot of questions and presented the facts as we know them today. There are no answers, only further questions. Is this an elaborate hoax or a genuine coded work? We may never know.

Show Less

LibraryThing member isabelx

An investigation into a manuscript written in cipher and full of mysterious drawings, that was rediscovered in an Italian monastery in 1911 by the book dealer whose name it now bears, but was rumoured to have been written in Middle Ages by the English monk Roger Bacon. Kennedy's interest in the

subject was sparked by the discovery that he was related to Wilfrid Voynich's wife Ethel (the daughter of George Boole the mathematician who invented Boolean logic).

The book covers the history of the manuscript since its rediscovery and its putative history in earlier centuries, as well as the numerous failed attempts to decipher it and the many theories concerning its origins and purpose. After an even-handed discussion of all the theories the book ends with the authors telling us their individual conclusions about the Voynich manuscript, and I rather think that I may agree with Rob Churchill about the manuscript's origins. But you will have to read the book in order to find out what he thinks!

Show Less

LibraryThing member tuckerresearch

Kennedy and Churchill give an excellent history of the amazing manuscript. Well-researched. They then give a good history of attempts to decipher it. But they stop short (or at least seem to), by not giving their own theory, except for a few tangetial references to the thought it just might be an

ancient or classical hoax. Still, an excellent primer to the subject.

Show Less

Fewer