I've found the author of Voynich manuscript. He was Giovanni Aurispa.

[Koen G]

Tavie put it very well. In addition to that, we have seen this many times before. Always different systems, different languages, different translations, but they do essentially the same thing you are doing now. 

There is probably a good reason why we keep seeing this style of solution over and over. My guess is that it hits a perfect spot where, statistically speaking, the translation is no longer viable, but we still feel like it is.

You, and people who have come up with similar systems, still feel like you are working with the manuscript's text: you start from the text, and part of the system is rigid and consistent.

But at the same time, the degree of freedom required results in a situation where the number of possible translations for a single page is greater than the number of stars in the universe. What this system is essentially doing is using the MS text as a prompt for creative writing. But it makes you feel like you are solving it.

A large amount of text in the MS is without images. How would you translate such a page? And would someone else ever get a similar translation? Does your system actually provide a solution if everyone's result for a text-only page would be wildly different?