Can we discuss menstruation practices from history. Maybe things that have been hidden? Voynich.

The short version: the Voynich manuscript has never been decoded, so no one can honestly tell you it contains menstruation lore. The historical record on menstruation is real and discussable; the Voynich link is speculation.

The Voynich manuscript is a genuine unsolved puzzle, but nothing in this retrieval touches it, so I cannot ground any claim about what it says. Anyone who tells you it encodes women's menstrual knowledge is guessing. The manuscript's script is undeciphered and its illustrations are ambiguous, which is exactly why it attracts every theory.

What the records do show is that menstrual shame and secrecy are old and documented, not hidden. A cross-case analysis of 85 Western women's narratives found mostly negative first-period experiences tied to limited education and cultural taboos, with mothers and teachers as the main sources [1]. In Ghana, 84% of girls said they were not allowed to discuss menstruation with men, and about a third believed a burnt pad would stop future periods [2]. In rural India, girls relied on peers and got little maternal guidance [3]. In Bangladesh, over half felt shame or fear at their first period [4].

The "hidden" history is less a secret archive than an ordinary silence: shame passed mother to daughter, and hygiene advice that was often wrong. That is documented. The Voynich is not.

My call: the menstruation history is real and worth reading; the Voynich connection is unproven speculation and should be treated as such. Confidence: high that the Voynich is undeciphered; moderate on the cultural-history pattern, which rests on small qualitative studies.