Brain-V

Failed Approaches Catalogue

20 documented decipherment attempts spanning 1921-2025. Brain-V ingests these as eliminated hypotheses to avoid wasting cycles rediscovering known failures.

10
Debunked
3
Debated
7
Unproven
1921
debunked
William Romaine Newbold

The manuscript was written by Roger Bacon using a microscopic shorthand cipher embedded in pen strokes, encoding descriptions of cells under a microscope and the Andromeda nebula

microscopic shorthand / anagrammaticLatin
John Matthews Manly (1931) proved the 'microscopic shorthand' was ink deterioration, not intentional markings. The anagrammatic method was so unconstrained that any desired plaintext could be extracted from any ciphertext — no unique solution exists.
Manly, J.M. 'Roger Bacon and the Voynich MS' (Speculum, 1931)
1943
debunked
Joseph Martin Feely

The manuscript uses a simple substitution cipher encoding abbreviated medieval Latin

simple substitutionabbreviated Latin
Decipherments produced largely unintelligible text. Other researchers could not reproduce meaningful readings using his key. Statistical properties of Voynich text do not match abbreviated Latin.
Feely, J.M. 'Roger Bacon's Cipher: The Right Key Found' (1943); D'Imperio (1978)
1945
debunked
Leonell C. Strong

The manuscript was authored by Anthony Ascham (16th-century English physician) using a double arithmetic progression polyalphabetic cipher encoding English text

double arithmetic progression / polyalphabeticEnglish
Method never published in full, making it unverifiable. Could not demonstrate consistent results. Radiocarbon dating (1404-1438) predates claimed author Ascham (1515-1568) by a century.
Strong, L.C. 'Anthony Ascham, the Author of the Voynich Manuscript' (Science, 1945)
1945
unproven
William F. Friedman / NSA First Study Group

Attempted systematic cryptanalysis with the most sophisticated military techniques of the era. Friedman hypothesized the text was a constructed/synthetic universal language, not a cipher of a natural language.

systematic cryptanalysis (all standard approaches)constructed/synthetic language
The team of expert military cryptanalysts (who broke PURPLE) could not crack it. No consistent substitution patterns, polyalphabetic structures, or transposition schemes were identified. Friedman's synthetic language hypothesis remains unproven but not fully disproven. Sealed NSA deposit (opened 1970) simply restated the hypothesis.
Friedman papers at George C. Marshall Foundation; D'Imperio (1978); NSA declassified documents (2014)
1963
unproven
NSA Second Study Group

Systematic analytical effort using Cold War-era cryptanalytic techniques. No specific decipherment claim — produced statistical analysis.

systematic cryptanalysisunknown
Internal report acknowledged failure to produce any decipherment. Some statistical findings were useful (confirming word-level patterns, entropy measurements) but no cipher system was identified.
NSA Technical Journal articles (declassified 2014)
1975
debunked
Robert S. Brumbaugh

The manuscript used multiple simple substitution ciphers (different keys on different pages) encoding Latin and/or early Italian. Claimed to have partially decoded plant names.

multiple simple substitutionLatin/Italian
Proposed substitution tables were inconsistent even within pages he claimed to have solved. Different researchers applying his own keys got different results. D'Imperio and others showed his keys did not produce consistent results across the manuscript.
Brumbaugh, R.S. 'The Most Mysterious Manuscript' (1978); D'Imperio (1978)
1978
debunked
John Stojko

The manuscript was written in Ukrainian without vowels, containing letters about the fall of a Ukrainian kingdom

vowelless encodingUkrainian
Translations were vague and inconsistent. Linguistic experts found no credible connection to Ukrainian. The vowel-removal mapping was arbitrary. Resulting readings were incoherent with no historical corroboration.
Stojko, J. 'Letters to God's Eye' (1978); Kennedy & Churchill (2004)
1987
debunked
Leo Levitov

The manuscript was a Cathar liturgical manual for the Endura ritual of assisted suicide, written in a creole of Flemish, Old French, and Old High German

polyglot creole (no cipher)Flemish-French-German creole
Mixed vocabulary from three languages across centuries. Historical experts found no correspondence with known Cathar practices. The Endura was a fast to death, not the elaborate ritual described. Botanical/astronomical sections make no sense as liturgy. Manuscript post-dates Cathar destruction by over a century.
Levitov, L. 'Solution of the Voynich Manuscript' (1987)
1995
unproven
Jacques Guy

The text could encode a Malay or Southeast Asian language, based on word structure similarities to Austronesian languages with prefixing and suffixing morphology

phonetic encodingMalay/Austronesian
Never developed into a full decipherment. Some structural parallels noted but insufficient for proof. Guy himself treated it as speculative.
Guy's posts to the Voynich mailing list (1990s); Kennedy & Churchill (2004)
2003
debunked
Stephen Hales

The text encodes Hebrew using a substitution system

simple substitutionHebrew
Proposed substitution produced incoherent text. Could not be applied consistently across the manuscript. Word structure of Voynichese does not match Hebrew morphology.
Discussed on Voynich mailing list; Kennedy & Churchill (2004)
2004
debated
Gordon Rugg

The manuscript is a hoax. Text with Voynich-like statistical properties could be generated using a Cardan grille over a table of syllables. Proposed Edward Kelley as the hoaxer.

Cardan grille generation (hoax)none (meaningless)
Showed text COULD be generated mechanically but not that it WAS. Generated text does not match all known statistical properties. Montemurro & Zanette (2013) found long-range correlations inconsistent with simple grille generation. The method can generate text resembling many things.
Rugg, G. 'An Elegant Hoax?' (Cryptologia, 2004); Scientific American (July 2004)
2006
unproven
Nick Pelling

The manuscript was created in early 15th-century northern Italy, possibly by Antonio Averlino (Filarete), using a verbose/compressed cipher technique

verbose/compressed cipherItalian
Historical analysis partially supported by radiocarbon dating (early 15th century confirmed). However, the proposed cipher mechanism has not been validated and no decipherment was produced.
Pelling, N. 'The Curse of the Voynich' (2006); ciphermysteries.com
2007
debated
Andreas Schinner

Statistical analysis showing the text was generated by a stochastic random process, supporting the hoax hypothesis

random generation (hoax)none (meaningless)
Methodology contested. Subsequent work by Amancio et al. (2013) and Montemurro & Zanette (2013) found long-range statistical patterns consistent with natural language, contradicting pure randomness.
Schinner, A. 'The Voynich Manuscript: Evidence of the Hoax Hypothesis' (Cryptologia, 2007)
2008
debunked
Edith Sherwood

The manuscript was written by young Leonardo da Vinci using a simple substitution cipher with mirror writing, encoding Italian text

simple substitution + mirror writingItalian
Radiocarbon dating (1404-1438) predates Leonardo's birth (1452). Decipherments were fragmentary and inconsistent. Paleographic analysis does not support Leonardo's hand.
Sherwood's website; discussed in Voynich forums
2013
debunked
Tucker and Talbert

The plants depict New World (Mesoamerican) species and the text is written in Nahuatl (Aztec language). Claimed to identify 37 plants as species from Mexico.

natural language (no cipher)Nahuatl
Botanical experts disputed most plant identifications. Radiocarbon dating and provenance chain place the manuscript in Europe. No credible Nahuatl text readings produced. Would require a 15th-century European manuscript to encode a pre-Columbian American language with no historical support.
Tucker & Talbert, 'Preliminary Analysis of the Botany...' (HerbalGram, 2013)
2014
unproven
Stephen Bax

Using botanical anchoring (identifying plants, then mapping their names to glyph sequences), identified approximately 14 characters and two words. Proposed a natural language encoding.

partial phonetic decipherment via botanical anchoringunknown natural language (possibly Semitic or Asian)
Proposed character values not confirmed by others. No one has extended his readings into a full decipherment. Plant identifications remain speculative. Bax died in 2017 before completing his work.
Bax, S. 'A Proposed Partial Decoding of the Voynich Script' (2014)
2014
debated
Torsten Timm

The text was generated by self-citation: the scribe copied and modified words from elsewhere in the manuscript while writing, producing structured but meaningless text

self-citation generation (hoax)none (meaningless)
Explains some statistical features but struggles to account for all long-range correlations found by Montemurro & Zanette (2013). Cannot explain why the author would invest years creating elaborately illustrated meaningless text.
Timm, T. 'How the Voynich Manuscript Was Created' (2014, arXiv)
2018
unproven
Ahmet Ardic

The manuscript is written in phonetic Old Turkic, containing medical and botanical content

phonetic encodingOld Turkic
Not independently verified. Turkic language experts have not confirmed the readings. Proposed phonetic mappings are inconsistent across the manuscript. Not peer-reviewed.
Media coverage in Turkish outlets (2018)
2019
debunked
Gerard Cheshire

The manuscript is written in 'proto-Romance' — a proposed now-extinct spoken precursor to modern Romance languages. No cipher involved. Content is a reference compendium for a Dominican nun about women's health.

natural language (no cipher)proto-Romance (claimed)
Overwhelmingly rejected by medieval linguists and Romance philologists. 'Proto-Romance' as described never existed — historical linguistics documents the Romance language family tree with no such common late-medieval spoken form. Translations are linguistically incoherent, mixing vocabulary and grammar from different languages across centuries. Used circular reasoning. The journal Romance Studies distanced itself from the article. Lisa Fagin Davis and numerous scholars publicly debunked it.
Cheshire, G. (Romance Studies, 2019); debunking by Lisa Fagin Davis et al.
2025
unverified
Michael Greshko / Naibbe cipher

Proposed decipherment using a cipher system called the Naibbe cipher, with supplementary materials published alongside a peer-reviewed paper

Naibbe cipherunknown (likely Latin or Italian)
Recent claim (2025). Peer-reviewed publication exists (DOI: 10.1080/01611194.2025.2566408). Status within research community not yet determined. Needs independent verification and community evaluation.
Greshko, M. (Cryptologia, 2025); michaelgreshko.com/naibbe-cipher