12-10-2025, 09:50 PM
If you’re an established scholar, you’d have to be immensely brave (or a little bit foolish?) to hang your hat on Voynich theories that can neither be proven nor disproven, and could open you up to ridicule! For a part of my life, decades ago, I was a research fellow with a growing publication record. I would not have touched the Voynich with a ten foot pole! Let’s hear it for the few brave academics who forge ahead regardless!
One thing I always find interesting is that medievalists often, to my mind, get the images right or mostly right. Brumbaugh, for instance, was quite certain they had to do with the “water of life”. But instead of telling us why and how he came to his conclusion, which he had expertise in, he tried to solve the “cipher” text, an area he had no background in at all.
Didn’t this happen to many of the would-be decipherers? It’s true the other way around too. Experts in STEM fields bring their interpretations to the images without any expertise in medieval art history, semiotics or figurative critical thinking. I think the funniest thing I ever saw in VMS analysis was a description of the Rosettes page from the pov of a scientist.
At any rate, even if I think an “expert” academic theory or interpretation is complete nonsense, if they’ve stayed in their lane, I have nothing but respect for those brave enough to step into this dangerous territory. It’s admirable. When they step outside it, like Brumbaugh, Feely, Cheshire et al., they appear a little foolish.
One thing I always find interesting is that medievalists often, to my mind, get the images right or mostly right. Brumbaugh, for instance, was quite certain they had to do with the “water of life”. But instead of telling us why and how he came to his conclusion, which he had expertise in, he tried to solve the “cipher” text, an area he had no background in at all.
Didn’t this happen to many of the would-be decipherers? It’s true the other way around too. Experts in STEM fields bring their interpretations to the images without any expertise in medieval art history, semiotics or figurative critical thinking. I think the funniest thing I ever saw in VMS analysis was a description of the Rosettes page from the pov of a scientist.
At any rate, even if I think an “expert” academic theory or interpretation is complete nonsense, if they’ve stayed in their lane, I have nothing but respect for those brave enough to step into this dangerous territory. It’s admirable. When they step outside it, like Brumbaugh, Feely, Cheshire et al., they appear a little foolish.