DECIPHERING THE MOST MYSTERIOUS
MANUSCRIPT IN THE WORLD
by Michael Theroux
(Note: This article
was written in 1991 - the author wishes to express that his views may have
changed regarding Newbold's decipherment of the Voynich MS. The article is
presented here in its entirety without edit for historical purposes
only.)
consonants alone, so that no one can read it unless he knows the
words and their meanings. In this way the Hebrews and the
Chaldaeans and
Syrians and Arabs write their secrets. Indeed, as
a general thing, they
write almost everything in this way, and
therefore among them, and
especially among the Hebrews.
Important scientific knowledge lies hidden.
For Aristotle in the
book above mentioned says that God gave them all
scientific
knowledge before there were any philosophers, and that from the
Hebrews all nations received the first elements of philosophy. .. .
In
the fourth place, concealment is effected by commingling letters
of various
kinds; it is in this way that Ethicus the astronomer
concealed his
scientific knowledge by writing it in Hebrew, Greek,
and Latin letters in
the same written line. In the fifth place, certain
persons have achieved
concealment by means of letters not then
used by their own race or others
but arbitrarily invented by
themselves; this is the greatest obstacle of
all, and Artephiushas
employed it in his book On the Secrets of Nature. In
the sixth
place, people invent not characters like letters, but
geometrical
figures which acquire the significance of letters by means of
points and marks differently arranged; these likewise Artephius
has used
in his science. In the seventh place, the greatestdevice
for concealment is
that of shorthand, which is a method of noting
and writing down as briefly as
we please and as rapidly as we
desire; by this method many secrets are
written in the books of the
Latin-using peoples. I have thought fit to touch
upon these
methods of concealment because I may perhaps, by reason of the
importance of my secrets, employ some of these methods, and it
is my
desire to aid in this way, at least you, to the extent of my
ability."
The other 7 shorthand signs of Newbold's discovery all
fit the same general character of the first 15, and were used by Bacon to fill
out the Greek shorthand, which was lacking expression.
Newbold continued
by employing the biliteral method to the converted shorthand, and found that
frequency analysis of the resultant alphabet revealed it to be characteristic of
Latin. The final stage in the process of decipherment was the anagramming
process. The process of anagramming texts was probably the most popular method
of the day used for concealing messages, and the necessity of concealment was
due to political or ecclesiastical reasons of the time, making the information
unpropitious for pronouncement. It is known that the Cabalists were professed
anagrammatists, and the third part of their art - themuru (changing)
dealt with transposition and recombination of the letters of words for mystical
interpretation. The fact that it was also a tradition among the "orders" can be
witnessed in the works of von Bingen, and certainly in the Abbe N. De Montfaucon
De Villars' "Comte De Gabalis" (Quodtanto impendio absconditur etiam
solummodo demonstrare destruereest - Tertullian). It was even continued
with the likes of Galileo (Haec immatura a me jam frustra leguntur -
oy), Tycho Brahe (who also was at the court of Rudolph), Johannes Kepler,
and many others.
At last, the plain text began to emerge, and without
going too far afield for the letters of anagrammed text. The letters to be
rearranged occurred in pairs next to one another, either indirect or reverse
order, and only relatively infrequently did Newbold have to go as far as three
or four words ahead in order to fill in the plaintext.
What Newbold
discovered in the text was absolutely astonishing - enough to gather a lot of
attention from the scientific community. The biological drawings in the text
were described asseminiferous tubes, the microscopic cells with nuclei, and even
spermatozoa. Among the astronomical drawings were the descriptions of spiral
nebulae, a coronary eclipse, and the comet of 1273. One of the more baffling
things about this was that many of the drawings of plants, and of the galaxies
appeared to have been invented. There was no doubt that if Bacon were the author
of such a text, he must have had some way of obtaining the information. For
instance, Newbold's translation of the caption near the drawing of the nebula of
Andromeda (which clearly shows its spiral characteristics), gave its location by
the following:
"In a concave mirror I saw a star in the form of a
snail....between the
navel of Pegasus, the girdle of Andromeda, and the head
of Cassiopea".
Now, Bacon is credited with the invention of the
magnifying glass, but it should be certain that he did not invent the telescope
or the microscope as many at the time of this discovery conjectured. The
"concave mirror" is probably the single most important clue here. Many of the
later prominent Renaissance figures would not only describe similar visions of
travel to distant places, several also included such "shewstones" as their
viewing apparatus. In the works of Dee, Kircher, and even the more famous
Nostradamus, one will find reference to such a device, and in each case these
individuals recorded the experience of visions associated with it. Some of their
descriptions were later proven to be precise. The actual knowledge pertaining to
the use of a device such as this is probably now lost, but in any case it is
most worthy of mention considering the circumstances. Let us now turn to some of
the objections to Newbold's decipherment of the MS.
NEWBOLD'S
DETRACTORS - AND HIS VALIDATION
Initially, upon the announcement of
his findings in1921, Newbold received some praise for his work. Even John M.
Manly, a military intelligence cryptanalyst, wrote a favourable review in
Harper's Magazine. But, this was not to last very long, and soon the
attacks proceeded. The first of such attacks came from research chemists who
stated that the rough vellum surface upon which the MS was written had caused
the ink to break up into spots and shadings with age. This break up of
characters, they stated, was what Newbold had actually seen when deciphering the
shorthand characters.
This criticism that the ink had merely broken up
into spots and shadings due to age was unfounded due to the fact that many
documents nearly as aged as the Voynich MS, with comparable ink, do not display
cracking similar to the individual characters in the MS. Also, if the
arrangement of characters was due to this breaking up of the ink, certainly more
than 22 individual shorthand symbols would have been discovered by
Newbold.
The next attack was concerned with the biliteral method of
Newbold's decipherment. Cryptographers stated that by Newbold's methods, Bacon
could not have enciphered the text to begin with. But, Newbold clearly detailed
the enciphering process, and revealed that Bacon did not use "orthodox" methods
of enciphering to which the cryptographers were accustomed.
Attacked
most heavily of all was the anagramming process Newbold used. These detractors
maintained that one could anagram any text into anything one chose, and that
this method would not have followed the qualifications of a "good" cipher, in
that the first quality of any "good" cipher is that it must convey its message
with absolute certainty. Newbold's anagramming process did NOT use "blocks of 55
to 110 characters", as had been put forth by these detractors, on the contrary,
it can be shown from his own notes that he was very careful in his
observations:
"The only indication that the recomposition is correct
is the regular
appearance, at intervals of NOT more than three or four
words, of
letter groups suggesting words appropriate, in syntax and logic, to
the preceding text. If they fail to appear, if one is driven to
arbitrary choice in order to make sense, the recomposition is
probably
wrong."
I have observed this misrepresentation of facts of Newbold's
decipherment in a number of works (David Kahn's gigantic work titled The
Codebreakers immediately comes to mind) and find it quite an admonition to
any other statements made by such authors. The fact that his detractors used
such methods to anagram texts into any messages they seemed fit - designed to
expose flaws in Newbold's decipherment - is clearly disinformation. Newbold, by
HIS method, equally tried other texts of the period including works of Bacon
which were not meant to be in cipher, and while he could form Latin words for a
time, he was soon left with unmanageable groups of consonants, and discontinued
the experiment, as Latin requires between 40 and 50 percent vowels.
It
wasn't until after Newbold's death in 1926 that more serious assaults would
come. In 1931 John Manly (who earlier gave praise) published a 47 page article
in Speculum Magazine of what he called "a detailed analysis" that
attempted to make Newbold's work seem entirely worthless. But many more would
hinge their deprecations on Newbold's interpretation of the drawings contained
in the MS. Most said that the biological pictures were cabalistic (they
certainly were!), symbolical, vague, and capable of various interpretations. I
must note that I personally have given these biological drawings to persons well
credentialed in the field of Biology, and asked them to give me an explanation
of what they see in them. In every instance, and without any prior knowledge of
the MS, they have given descriptions that very closely resemble the deciphered
interpretations of Newbold.
Other assailants made particular note of the
drawing that represented the nebula Andromeda. Based on the fact that the spiral
nebula in Andromeda lies edge on to earthly observers, Bacon would have had to
have an incredibly powerful telescope to view such a thing. But, as we have
noted, no one was really claiming that he did.
It may be deduced from
these painstaking onslaughts that maybe these assailants felt it was necessary
to hide the true nature of the work. In Manly's 1931 article, he blatantly
reveals his real concerns with the warning to all that, "these results (of
Newbold's) threaten to falsify to no unimportant degree, the history of human
thought." Kahn, in The Codebreakers, devotes several pages to the MS
decipherment, and groups Newbold into a category he later describes as oddballs
and lunatics who believe in such things as water witching.
Of course, the
depreciated Newbold decipherment did not discourage others from attempting to
figure out the MS, and a few of the arguments put forward may have been somewhat
conceivable. In 1944, Professor Hugh O'Neil, a botanist at the Catholic
University of America, offered evidence that the MS could not have been written
before 1493. He observed that the drawings in the MS include the likes of the
common sunflower, and Capsicum, both plants native to the Americas which
according to him, were unknown to Europeans before the return of Columbus from
his second voyage. We needn't go into the Columbus discovery here, as
historically it is well known that he was hardly the first to venture to the
Americas.
Not long after O'Neil's observations, Dr. Leonell Strong, a
cancer research scientist and amateur cryptographer, took on the project of
deciphering the MS. Fancifully boasting that he could "unravel" the secret of
any cipher, Strong said that the solution to the MS cipher was a "peculiar
double system of arithmetical progressions of a multiple alphabet". Even here,
there was a great similarity to Newbold's system, but Strong altogether
bombastically stated that the plaintext revealed the MS to be written by the
16th century English author Anthony Ascham, whose works include A Little
Herbal, published in 1550. Although the MS does contain one section
resembling an herbal, it is unknown where the author of A Little Herbal
would have obtained such literary and cryptographic knowledge.
The
speculation of William F. Friedmann, another military cryptographer, was that
the MS was actually a text in an artificial language, and may have held some
merit if it were not for the fact that he was also responsible, and instrumental
in the demolition of Newbold's theory (again, after Newbold's death). But, he,
too never went any further than this simple hypothesis. Many others have
invented their own versions of decipherment of the MS, but all of them fall
short of making anything intelligible out of the mysterious characters. To the
cryptographic orthodoxy, the MS is still "undeciphered". I believe many have
merely taken the disparaging words of others as proof that the Newbold solution
is bogus, without actually examining the specifics. Had Newbold been an amateur
with nothing but this decipherment for credentials, it would certainly raise
some doubt. But, Newbold indeed practised his techniques on similar manuscripts
such as the Tironian signs of the so-called Vatican Document (which I
won't detail here as it would necessitate the space of an entire article in
itself) and many others. It is most probable though, that the Voynich MS
actually cost Newbold his health, both physically and mentally. In the latter
days of his work on the MS he began to grow weary and would often restructure
his entire method without any sense of reason. Still, the heart of Newbold's
inspiration lies in his initial work on the MS, and there has not been anyone
since who has even come close to the original genius of his solution to "the
most mysterious manuscript in the
world".
REFERENCES
1. The Cipher of Roger
Bacon by William Romaine Newbold,
edited by Roland Grubb Kent.
University of Pennsylvania Press,
1928.
2. Secret and Urgent -The
Story of Codes and Ciphers by Fletcher
Pratt. Blue Ribbon Books,
1942.
3. The Secret Teachings of All Ages by Manly Palmer Hall.
Philosophical Research Society, 1977.
4. Cryptography - The Science
of Secret Writing by Lawrence
Dwight Smith. W.W. Norton, 1943.
5.
Opus Majus by Roger Bacon. Complete Latin version by
Howard R.
Bayne, 1946.
6. Comte De Gabalis by the Abbe N. De Montfaucon
DeVillars.
Paris 1670.
7. "The Incredible Roger Bacon" by Manley Mills.
Fate, April 1951,
pp 69-72.
8. "Cipher of the Secret Book" by
Betty McKaig (Interview with
Leonell Strong). North County
Independent, Oct. 7, 1970.
9. "The Insignificant Cry of Roger Bacon" by
Malachi Martin.
Intellectual Digest, August, 1972. pp 52-55.
10.
"Codes and Ciphers" by Peter Way - Encyclopedia of Espionage,
Aldus
Books London, 1977.
11. Oddities and Curiosities of Words and
Literature by C. C.
Bombaugh. J. B. Lippincott, 1890.
12.
Riddles in History by Cyrus H. Gordon. Crown Publishers,
1974.
13. A True and Faithful Relation of What Passed for Many Years
Between Dr. John Dee...and Some Spirits. Edited by Meric
Casaubon.
London, 1659.
14. The Hieroglyphic Monad by Dr. John Dee translated
byJ. W.
Hamilton-Jones. Neil & Co. Edinburgh, 1947.
15. The
Curious Lore of Precious Stones pp 188-196
16. The Codebreakers
by David Kahn. McMillan Co., 1967.