The Voynich Manuscript, that wonderfully imaginative botanical treatise whose author, not content with drawing imaginary plants, used imaginary language to describe them, is available in high-resolution scans at the Internet Archive.

It is impossible to improve upon the Voynich Manuscript itself, of course. It is unique; it could not have been improved if someone had strapped Dr. Seuss into a time machine and sent him back six hundred years. But Dr. Boli would really like to draw your attention to the “reviews” on the page. Almost every single one has solved the wonderful mystery and unlocked the code, revealing that the manuscript is a treatise on women’s health, a message from the stars, a book of hallucinogenic herbs; the language proves to be proto-Romance, Berber, Scots Gaelic, Macedonian, one of the Landa scripts of Punjab, Syriac, Russian, or Arabic or Farsi or Greek (the reviewer seems to regard these three as more or less interchangeable).

The definiteness of the statements is wonderfully reassuring. Almost every reviewer has found the only possible solution to the puzzle.

“The Book basically describes transpeicies migration. How Fauna based life form migrate from plant to animal – e.i. human life forms.”

“Much of the text is a list of overwhelmingly Finno-Uralic names with some Dutch, Danish, French, and German tossed in now and then.”

“This is the first five books of King James. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Even though this was wrote 200 years prior.” (For the depth of erudition it displays, this is probably Dr. Boli’s favorite.)

“The algorithm is written on page 116. There is written the at Czech language. Have you found ( algorithm)!!!”

“If you study the history of Landa languages. The character hiding and mixing still happens in business communities in remote villages in Multan in Pakistan, to this day. Please widen your knowledge as I have detailed as much as possible, There is no alternative to this, because this is the truth. All the researchers so far have guessed and fooled public. I want to emphasis this again ‘English does not have these sounds’.”

“completely readable. If one backs up from trying to crack its language you can see that its in three different languages.. one is picture language, 2nd is plant language and third is most important, it is star constellations language.. Its actually telling you a story you are not ready to here..its repeating the same message on every page too..”

You will spend an hour reading these reviews, but it will be an hour well spent. You will know nothing more than you already knew about the Voynich Manuscript, of course, but you will know a great deal more about human psychology than you knew before.


  1. Diane says:

    Dear Editor,
    You say, “… imaginative botanical treatise whose author, not content with drawing imaginary plants, used imaginary language to describe them”.
    First, the idea of the content as created by a single author is the result of Wilfrid Voynich’s imagination and the internal evidence strongly suggests that his imagination erred. Secondly, that it is a ‘treatise’ of any sort is another bit of kite-flying, and the fact that the plant-pictures aren’t amenable to presuming their origin European doesn’t prove they are products of anyone’ invention, only that the drawings are not like European ‘specimen’drawings in the Dioscoridan tradition. Nor is is true to say that the language is ‘imaginary’ although it is possible that the script – like all scripts – is the result of human ingenuity. The old ideas you repeat mostly stem from deeply conservative people maintaining guesswork presented without a shred of evidence in 1921.

    Pity you cut off the previous comment, I should like to have read it, and seen the commentator’s name.

    • Dr. Boli says:

      Thank you for the comment. The best way to make Dr. Boli think good thoughts about you is to disagree with him. He thought it would be good to bring your comment to the eyes of current readers, so he has made a new article of it here, and he invites you and everyone else to join the discussion at that page.

  1. […] what irks me is that, in your article on the Voynich Manuscript, you mentioned several obviously incorrect and even internally inconsistent theories, but you […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *