Is there a reliable source to check with when one of the (seemingly yearly) "Professor X has translated / proven bogus / connected to aliens the Voynich Manuscript" claims comes around in the media? Is there a blog or some such that the real scholars congregate at?

Allow me to ask the big question that almost everyone is likely curious about: the language. I've heard theories that the writing is anything from a constructed language, a cipher of a known language, to an unknown effort at transcribing East Asian logograms. Given your research, what do you think is the most likely answer?

Thanks so much for joining us!

What is the state of research into the provenance for the manuscript? How confident are we in who owned it when?

From how often it appears in the media, I get the impression that there's quite a number of researchers working on the Voynich Manuscript. Apart from the fact that it's a fascinating document, is there anything in particular that these researchers are hoping to learn from it? Do you think it could be "worth the hype" so to speak?

There is an xkcd comic that jokingly suggests the Voynich manuscript is a rulebook for a tabletop role-playing game. Given the mystery surrounding the manuscript, is there any more unusual hypotheses about the manuscript that any academic credibility?

What's your favourite section / page of the manuscript and why?

What's the weirdest (in your opinion) section / page and why?

For me, the most interesting and puzzling part of of the Voynich Manuscript is that with a few exceptions, the plants depicted in it don't appear to match real plants. Do you think that there's a convincing explanation for this yet?

Don't know what to ask as I am not very knowledgeable on them, but, tell me anything of your choosing about them you find interesting.

After decades of facile deciphering attempts, the Rohonc Codex has recently been shown to have been written with a complex code, thanks to greater attention from medievalists with cryptographic knowledge. Are you familiar with this work, and do you think this bodes well for the Voynich deciphering project in general?

How do you know it's 15th-century?

Speaking as a historian of the early modern era, but not of book history or the VMS specifically, I find myself having to ask the historiographic question. How have scholarly (or otherwise) interpretations of the manuscript changed over time? For example, was there a Reformation interpretation of the VMS? An Enlightenment one?

Relatedly, and more conspiratorially: how often (if at all) has the manuscript been referenced in other sources that claim to understand what it says?

Is there any evidence that suggests to you that the manuscript is or is not just nonsense? For example, is there a compelling reason not to think (or not to think) that it is not a "book without words" produced for aesthetic purposes?

My ultra-skeptical side is inclined to doubt that it says anything at all. But of course the possibility that it does is extremely enticing.

Many people have asked about well-founded or unsupported but not ridiculous angles. What is the most ridiculous take on the Voynich Manuscript, in your opinion?

Are there any ideas for why the manuscript had naked women drawn throughout?

I don't know enough about the manuscript to know what to ask, but I want to commend the moderators and you for this. This is by far one of the best ama's I've seen in a long time.

What made you decide to dedicate time to this specific manuscript instead of any other one?

Do you work with the manuscript directly, or with digital images? I am mostly asking because I would love to hang out in the Beinecke, but I'm also curious whether researchers see value in touching/experiencing the actual object as opposed to reproductions.

Why do reputable publications like the Times Literary Supplement keep publishing "solutions" which turn out to be very dubious?

The Voynich Manuscript seems to attract a lot of attention from all angles... by which I mean there are some pretty weird theories out there that seem... ungrounded. How do you feel that this intersection with, and perception of association with, 'fringe' elements impacts the broader academic study of the document?

What’s the closest thing to a consensus about its purpose? As in, is it’s language likely to have been some sort of secret language for members of a group? Or could it just be a creative endeavor by a bored enthusiast?

How much closer to a decryption do you think the rigorous application of historical methods to the VMS will get us? In other words, when the dust clears from the application of art history, palaeography, etc. to the manuscript, do you think that the results of those investigations will provide the information that the codebreakers would need to crack this thing?

I know very little about the Voynich Manuscript despite hearing about it for around ten years in the media and popular culture. I think the pictures are stunning. Past that, however, what makes the Manuscript so important? Is it curiosity about what it says or about the authorship? Is there something deeper about it that reflects on or impacts society? Is it just a click bait story for slow news day?

Please don't take my question for cynism. I am all for humanities research and have nothing but respect for the folks that dedicate their lives to academic studies. I just don't understood why the Voynich Manuscript is so famous.

What contemporary figures in it's area of origin might have made use of the technology purported to be represented in it?

Also, In history when is the next verified or suspected use of the technology?

Do you think it was written by women? Since women have traditionally had so few safe spaces where knowledge could be shared, could this be one of them?

If not, what is the leading hypothesis?

Thank you for doing this on such a controversial and fun topic! I’m curious to know if we’ve found any similar documentation anywhere. Does this thing exist in a vacuum? Are there similarities to other documents? Thanks!

Someone asked your favorite page/part, but I'd be curious to know what the most vexing or confusing segment of the manuscript is- especially for you as a historian rather than decoder.

Last I heard, some guys were claiming it's in old Turkish, has it been translated yet?

Thanks for the AMA doctor! Do we have any idea who this text might be intended for? To put it in such code which even today we cannot decipher with advanced algorithms and whatnot, it seems as though the audience when it was written would likely be very small. As you said in another answer, with five different hands working on it and such gorgeous illustrations it seems as though such a work would be quite expensive to produce then. Is there any idea of for whom it was produced?

I've heard just internet theories about it being potentially written by women of the time attempting to secretly pass on medicinal knowledge to potentially avoid accusations of witchcraft. Has there been any evidence in support of this theory, or any evidence that discredits it?

What got you interested in your field?

Do you have any book recommendations to learn more about the history of the manuscript and current research about it?

Do the marginal writings in latin-script and a High German phrase give us any interesting insight into who could have owned it near its creation? Perhaps this there was a community who could read Voynichese, but not write in it, as is common when communities move to a new location and don't teach their children their original language?

Do you think its genuine, that the text is actually a text and not some medieval prank thats indecipherable?

So the classic XKCD joke is that the Voynich Manuscript is just a time-shifted DnD sourcebook. What indications do we have that the Voynich is a "non-fiction" work vs a "fiction" work, ie, intended to be taken with some level of literality?

If I were a professional in such an interesting, yet niche, topic, I doubt I’d get many opportunities to outright brag about my findings.

What unique discoveries have you, personally, contributed to the overall understanding of this mysterious manuscript?

As somebody who is really interested in Mesoamerican history and archeology, especially Aztec royal palaces and botanical gardens, I've always found the idea that the Voynich manuscript is a one-off attempt at transcribing a Nahuatl/Aztec botanical document to a new script to be a fun idea, even if I don't think it's super likely.

As far as I know, most Nahuatl linguists aren't on board with the proposals: There's a rebuttal here for example.

However, since then, the researchers behind the Nahuatl Voynich theory have put out a new book, "Flora of the Voynich Codex: An Exploration of Aztec Plants" but despite being years old now I haven't heard any real commentary on it.

What's the status/reception on that book, if anything?

I saw you say in another reply you think this hypothesis a dead end, which is totally fine (as I said, i'm not convinced either), i'm moreso just curious if anybody has done major rebuttals or breakdowns of it yet I could read to be up to date on the state of things!

Is there anything unique about the ink/inks used in the manuscript?

Probably a dumb question, but is there any seeming linguistic cohesion in the writing? Essentially, is it just random hodge podge, or are there patterns in the text that could resemble actual language (even if unresolved in meaning)?

Hey Dr. Brewer, really cool to have your doing this AMA! I've done amateur digging into the Voynich Manuscript, and I've seen a surprisingly diverse amount of opinions on it from professional historians (not any who work directly on it like you, though, I think). Most point to idea of it either being written in code or being a hoax. You wrote here that it's your opinion it is actual information being written in code--I'm wondering what you think of the hoax angle? From what I've read, the general idea is that purchasers of books often weren't able to read the language they were written in and mainly bought them due to their perceived value as "rare" tomes to add to their library. From this it would follow that there'd be a market to create hoax books that would be bought with their actual "contents" essentially sight unseen.

Do you ever get any weird mail because of your work on the manuscript? The subject seems to be a crackpot magnet!

If the VMS never existed, what do you think would be the other candidates for the most prestigious unsolved historical manuscripts/artifacts?

What do you make a of the 12thC Roma/Chezch translations of the VMS?

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b8z0c6hta8t85ui/Voynich%20Manuscript%20Revealed%20%282018%29.mp4?dl=0

Update/follow-up :

https://www.dropbox.com/s/j4eutwkm41bz1jo/Voynich%20Manuscript%20Update%20and%20QA.mp4?dl=0

Is the Voynich Manuscript the only extant manuscript like this? Given the effort required to produce any sort of book in this period, something like this couldn't have been very common, but is it a unique mystery or just the most famous of a "genre" of mysterious manuscripts? If the latter, what makes/made it extra special?

What do historians studying VMS hope to accomplish, independent of decryption?

Thank you!

Someone asked your favorite page/part, but I'd be curious to know what the most vexing or confusing segment of the manuscript is- especially for you as a historian rather than decoder.

There's been so much mystery and effort over the meaning of the manuscript for so long. It's generated so much imagination and intrigue.

If the mystery were solved, do you think the truth would live up to all of that speculation? Is it likely to be more boring than expected, or do you think the truth will be as exciting as it's made out to be?

What led you to work on such a famously frustrating project?

I've found ancient manuscripts fascinating ever since I read The Rule of Four and its fun fictional investigation into the Hypnerotomachia Poliphili. This eventually lead me to discover the infinitely more fascinating Voynich manuscript. I've often browsed the digital versions available online when I'm procrastinating just to daydream.

I did however recently learn of Henry Darger and the Story of the Vivian girls and for the first time questioned if the Voynich manuscript might be the results of a similar individual with the means to indulge a compulsive mental illness. This got me wondering if it's possible the cipher is possibly internally inconsistent, or mis-applied given that it must have been done by hand and is essentially part gibberish and part meaningful.

So I guess my two questions to you are:

1. Do you feel there is merit in comparing the voynich manuscript with other similar cryptic texts in history to infer possible reasons for its creation, or would it be unhelpful to assume there's any similarity simply because they appear similar from our perspective on them as historical curiosities? (And I guess do you find any other texts interesting?)

2. Do you think it's possible the author(s) mis-applied their intended cipher and this is why it's difficult to decode?

This is probably an extremely long shot, but have any other documents been uncovered that have a similar script to the Manuscript? I recognize if there were it would most likely have lead to VMS being cracked by now, but I had to ask it.

Are all the plants in the book exist in the nature? Or fictional.

And lots of ladies there, is there any similar painting style from other books from the same era?

With current AI technology, is it possible to feed the information to a computer so it can find patterns in the text, to make it easier to find what language is encoded in the book?

Are there available datasets built from the manuscript? For instance you mention that there are 30k words in it, have they been transcribed somewhere using some sort of index for the symbols? (And can we play around with it?)

I went to a guest lecture about this back in college. The lecturer said something along the lines that the thing was potentially written by a con artist trying to pawn it off as something important to people with money.

What's your take on this theory?

I just saw this today, so this is probably dumb, but how did scribes(?) advertise their skills at this time? Was there any sort of competitive market and could this be used to ensure the wealthy sponsors (authors?) selected the most capable scribe? Do we know much about this selection process?

I am assuming that the people that train to create illuminated manuscripts don't generate content. They typically copy or receive some kind of dictation. Is this accurate for how the process actually worked?

Is it possible that this document is just a way to practice? It would be wasteful but it's not like that really stops people with means. Now that I think of it, do we know how these scribes practiced? Are there examples?

Super cool though. Thanks for introducing me to this.

Is there anyway to remove some of the paint from the manuscript, in order to find out where the pigments for the colors came from?

In information security there is a common practice of password cracking. For reasons outside the context of this post, a computer stores a cryptographic hash (a pseudo looking random string that appears random but will always result in the same output string of the input is the same) and a “password cracking” attack can be done by guessing a password and seeing if it matches the hash. Has this technique been used/adapted to deciphering the manuscript? A powerful rig can attempt millions of guesses a second so it could be quite powerful.

How unique is the VM really? The only other similar work I have heard of is the Codex Seraphinianus, which has been intentionally written in a meaningless (but nevertheless fascinating) language.

Are there any other, lesser known, contemporary works similar to the VM? Has inventing fictional languages, or writing natural science books in hidden ciphers, been a popular pastime in the 15th century? Or are we really looking at a one-of-a-kind work of a singular genius or madman (or both)?

Is it just an elaborate hoax (in the sense like an art project of someone) ? Does it contain any valuable information that you can understand ? Can any of its content be correlated to the real world ?

The images are beautiful, and incredibly creative, but they seem to lack as much professional technique and finish as other examples from the period. Like second-rate execution of amazing ideas. Does this indicate that it’s perhaps a labor of love by a single individual, as opposed to the product of a well-planned and funded effort of multiple stakeholders?

What is the leading theory pertaining to the manuscript

Is it possible that the manuscript is a work of fantasy fiction in a similar way to how Tolkien invented his own languages and world while still featuring elements of our own?

Is there any theory as to why the manuscript would be coded, especially if it’s just a treatise on herbs?

What progress is being made in translating the manuscript? Is any progress being made?

Are there other (legible) pre-modern manuscripts with illustrations that are similar to those in the VMS?

Have you gotten to handle the manuscript in person? What was it like?

How would someone have used the manuscript in the 15th century? Is it more likely that manuscript was used by the creator or that it was provided with a guide/cipher to someone else?

If it's for someone else's consumption, what kind of person would it be for? And would the cipher have to be easy enough for them to use?

Okay, so this is my own crank thing, but it seems to me that at least some of the "galaxies" in the manuscript (e.g., https://pixels.com/featured/voynich-manuscript-astro-rosette-2-rick-bures.html) look as much like sea urchins (e.g., https://fineartamerica.com/featured/view-of-sea-urchin-shells-adam-hart-davisscience-photo-library.html) as galaxies. Has that been considered and rejected?

Was the market for exotic literature in the time it was created profitable enough to justify a team of fraudsters to go through the trouble of creating something so elaborate just to enrich themselves?

How much would something like that sell for at the time to the right buyer?

Is there any chance that the script is nothing but gibberish or that the whole thing is just an elaborate prank in an attempt to befuddle "scholars" and laugh it off or some guys attempt to make some money by selling something exotic?

Are we sure this was created with noble and genuine intent?

Is the Voynich Manuscript the longest (pre-modern) undeciphered text?

what would you consider the most iconic page of the manuscript? also, are there any works similar to/adjacent to the VMS?

What is the state of knowledge on the VMS and do you personally believe it will ever be decoded? Is there any sort of progress or breakthrough moment yet to come? Can this remain a mystery forever?

Has it been ruled out that the manuscript is just a centuries old sh*tpost made to mess with people? I would certainly make something similar as a joke.

How likely is it that the text is giberish and the whole thing is a forgery ?

AMA was held at an unfortunate time for me to ask, I’d like to try asking even though the thread seems to be concluded.

Were commonplace books, journals, diaries in use among the affluent in the fifteenth century? Also as a collaborative effort?

Journaling folks today come up with conlangs and decorate their pages with drawings, and some of what we see in the Voynich looks like what people put in their notebooks now.

how likely do you think it is that we'll get something like an academic consensus in the next 10 years on any of the major questions about the VMS, like the identity of the authors, or a complete interpretation of the text?

how much progress has the field made in the last 10 years on the VMS (even if "progress" includes "conclusively debunking previous claims and theories")?

If you presume medical or gynealogical information, what efforts have you made towards comparing availability of (/need for secrecy around) such subjects geo- and demographically, and temporaly?

And where can I read about it.

The Voynich is such a crazy concept to me

I don’t have a question that wouldn’t sound stupid, but I would like to say thank you so much for this. I knew of the Manuscript but didn’t really know and learnt more about it because of a trilogy of books that mentioned it throughout, and it piqued my interest more but I didn’t have any idea where to start so I could research more. Im going to use the links provided and I hope that your research one day helps us to understand this amazing manuscript, again many thanks to you and your colleagues

How plausible is it that the Voynich Manuscript was essentially a botched translation of a Chinese textbook? Were translations very common during that time period, and how far?

What is your opinion of the Codex Seraphinianus and apart from the stylistic similarities, is it considered useful in any way towards contextualizing or understanding the Voynich Manuscript?

Wish I was here to ask a message on this. But I wonder if a qunntum computer soudl decode this manuscript.

What is the source, or content, of the Voynich Manuscript? After decades of studying it, do we have any idea what it contains?

I’ve been waiting for this ever since the Voynich Manuscript was mentioned as the focus in one of the 39 clues books I read as a tween in the early ‘10s.

How many serious school of thought is there on the VMS? Is the gibberish camp sizeable?

Also, if you find it very unlikely that's it's the work of a prankster or a bored person with a lot of free time and money, do you know about the state of encryption in that time? How would've one applied complex encryption algorithms to obscure hand-written texts?

Has there been any breakthroughs recently? How long have you been working on the manuscript?

Well I'm fairly certain you've concluded by now but I just wanted to ask - is there any chance that anything of historical or practical consequence will come of the manuscript?

I've always been convinced it's just the made up language of some old nerd who was world building in the old world. Do any of the weird plants they drew resemble any plants found in the real world, for instance?

What, to you, is the point of studying the Voynich manuscript?

Oh my, I love this topic. My question is simple - are you aware that VMS was a big part of the story of a video game Broken Sword: The Sleeping Dragon? It's an adventure game from 2003 and I played it when I was young and it led me to investigate Voynich Manuscript for many days and I still sometimes think about it and the possibility of it being deciphered one day!

So was the script just some type of Turkish as YouTube world have me believe?

I thought it was proven to be a Turkic language

Have historians considered that it is just the product of a schizophrenic mind?

It's a satire of academia.

Does the VMS tell us where TANIS currently is or will be?

How’s the smell

it's either a hoax or the ravings of a madman...

After having looked into a bit, my going theory is that it was written by Leonardo DaVinci as a child.

I don’t think it was a hoax, just a gifted, neurodivergent child with access to a lot of resources, (edit to add and an active imagination) learning imperfectly.

(Edit to add: many of the pictures of people and plants suggest imagination, or mixing up roots with leaves based on drawing from memory).

There are a lot of similarities in the writing, and even some clues with the birthing page dealing with horoscopes. There are some other things, but it’s been a decade since I studied it and can’t recall. (Edit to add: if I recall, it’s written in a similar mirror-style that DaVinci was prone to, and possibly a local dialect of Italian as well as mixed with other languages, phonetically spelled from the rules of that local dialect).