TPO 35- In 1912 a bookseller named Wilfrid M. Voynich acquired a beautifully illustrated handwritten book (manuscript) written on vellum (vellum is a material that was used for writing before the introduction of paper). The “Voynich manuscript,” as it

PRACHI DAVE's picture

The reading and the lecture are both contradicting with each other, in terms of the origin of the Voynich manuscript. The author of the article presented three theories to explain the origin of the Voynich manuscript. However, the professor casts doubt about the claim mentioned in the article and refutes all the theories presented in the passage.
First of all, according to the reading, Anthony Ascham could be the author of the book who is a physician and botanist, since the description of the plant in the manuscript is similar to his other book's medicinal plant. On the contrary, the speaker negates the argument presented in the passage. Furthermore, he discusses that Anthony was an ordinary physician and scientist. Hence, there are fewer chances that he had complex information regarding the herbal plant. Thus, he cannot be the original writer, since he could not write the complex code in the manuscript.
Secondly, the author posits that the manuscript could be written by the great magician named, Edward Kelley, in sixteenth-century. He might use the complex alphabet in unorganized order to present it as a magical book in order to sell it to wealthy people. Although the lecturer refutes this by asserting that it was quite easy to fool people in sixteenth-century. Hence, Edward could not put so much efforts to turn the book into a complex version.
Finally, it is mentioned in the article that M. Voynich could have created the fake book since he had some knowledge of the old manuscript. On the other hand, the speaker believes that the vellum and the ink, found in the manuscript were around 400 years back. However, the Voynich might able to get vellum to create the fake book but there is no chance that he found the ink which was used before 400 years. Hence, he cannot be the original writer.

Essay Categories: 
Your rating: None Average: 7.3 (1 vote)