14-05-2026, 06:39 AM
I am currently the proponent of a theory that claims that the Voynich manuscript is based on the original, which is the Book of Enoch (1 and 2). Revisionist D.N. O'Donovan has subjected this to basic attributes for possible validity. Not one of these attributes was negative. With each further investigation, I find more and more evidence. The problem is that this theory breaks many paradigms. Plants are not plants, the Book of Enoch was lost at that time, the bathing nymphs are rather angels and other spiritual images, the recipes are epistles and apocalyptic history. The astronomical part is for 13 months and for a 360-day calendar with each month having 30 days. I have also questioned the currently valid date of creation. I understand that this theory would essentially erase a whole decade of research. So I understand that there is still no reaction. Dr. Donovan was probably right in saying that it will take two years before something moves and changes.
