They claim to have revealed what language is written and what the world's most enigmatic text says – 05/16/2019

Some say that it is a medieval medical textbook written in abridged Latin and intended for wealthy women. This is not true, say others: it was written in Hebrew by an Italian doctor and clearly shows Jewish women taking ritual baths. A nonsense, others believe it: the text was written in an old Turkish poetic style. Or it could have its origins in ancient cornuallés. Or in the Aztec language of Nahuatl or in Manchu.

Regarding the Voynich manuscript, a curious document of the fifteenth century apparently written in a code currently preserved in the library of Yale UniversityPerhaps the only thing that academics, cryptographers and enthusiasts agree on is the depth of their mysteries. The text accompanied by beautiful illustrations seems to have been written in a code that represents a real language… but what does it mean?

Now, a British academic says that the manuscript is a type of therapeutic book of reference composed of the nuns of María de Castilla, Queen of Aragon, in a lost language known as proto-romance

Clarin Bulletins

What happened today? We tell you the most important news of the day and what will happen tomorrow when you get up

Monday to Friday afternoon.

In a peer-reviewed research article published in Romance Studies magazine, Gerard Cheshire, research badociate at the University of Bristol, says the manuscript constitutes "a compendium of information about medicinal plants, therapeutic baths and astrological readings " focused on women's physical and mental health, reproduction and parenthood ".

Cheshire believes that "instead of being written in code, his language and his writing system were common at the time of his composition and baderts that the document is the only text written in proto-romance that has survived.

Although some people think that the Voynich manuscript is a fraud, the vellum in which it is written was dated by the carbon method in the early fifteenth century, and most researchers They accept that the text is contemporary. It bears the name of Wilfrid Voynich, a Polish bookseller who bought it in 1912, but it is largely unknown who his former owners were.

Look also

While the significance of the volume has puzzled scholars since it attracted the attention of scholars in the early 20th century – it is said that it could not be deciphered by Alan Turing or the FBI's the time of the Cold War – Cheshire He claims to have solved his mysteries in just two weeks "Using a combination of lateral thinking and ingenuity".

However, the Cheshire theory inevitably aroused the skepticism of the Medievalists.

"I'm sorry, my friends, the" proto-novel "does not exist," tweeted Lisa Fagin Davis, executive director of the US Medieval Academy, about Cheshire's work. "It's a more circular and self-fulfilling nonsense with aspirations."

Cheshire insists their work is anything but that. "I have experienced a series of" eureka "moments when deciphering the code, followed by a feeling of disbelief and enthusiasm when I became aware of it. importance and revelations regarding the origin and content of the manuscript, "he said.

The identification of María de Castilla "has required a lot of effort," he told the Guardian by e-mail. "But I had already solved the codex, so I applied lateral thinking and reasoning."

Look also

He argues that the manuscript comes from Castello Aragonese, a castle located on an island in front of Ischia, and that It was compiled by Dominican nuns as a reference source for the female-dominated court of María de Castilla, wife of King Alfonso V of Aragon. The niece of Maria's granddaughter, she said in the work, was Catalina de Aragón, the first wife of Henry VIII.

Cheshire says the document includes images of Queen Mary and her court conducting trade negotiations while taking a bath. The italicized notes in the text may have been added by her.

Those who do not believe in this theory say that "eureka" moments are not new. Kate Wiles, a medieval, linguist and editor-in-chief of History Today, said there was a new theory about the meaning of the manuscript "every six months at least … there have been at least two at last year ".

Cheshire's theory does not convince her. "It takes liberties as to how, we understand, languages ​​work," he said. "This raises the existence of a language built with words drawn from many places and eras, but does not, together, create something compelling as a workable language."

He then added, "One of the reasons why the Voynich manuscript is so appealing is the existence of languages ​​such as hieroglyphs and linear B, which were deciphered." But they did not come out from nowhere, they have taken decades of work and they have resorted to many scholarly sources.There can be only one person who says "I have deciphered". The whole domain must be in agreement. "

When asked what his response was to those who were not convinced of his interpretation, Cheshire was optimistic. "The works published in the journal have been peer-reviewed by blind peers and verified by other researchers: this is the usual confirmation in the scientific field.It is not necessary to convince anyone because, in In due course, linguists and historians will use the solution to study the manuscript.

"In addition, there was no interpretation, because the alphabet, the writing system and the language were explained in detail so that others can translate any word, phrase or phrase. " Now, he will invite other people to develop his work and translate the entire manuscript. The mysteries of the Voynich manuscript will not rest in peace yet.

The Guardian. Special

Translation: Elisa Carnelli

PS