The Voynich Ninja

(04-01-2017, 08:39 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Stellar, does that mean a "no" for hoax?

Koen you have to give me more if I said we are not sure exactly when the VMS text was laid down onto the Vellum does that imply a hoax?


I'm not sure when it was written,  It does have meaning I'm certain of it.

Koen what's your definition of hoax regarding the VMS?

I'd say that there are two types of hoax theories, the 15th century hoax and "modern" hoax.

In the first case, the document is made to trick people into thinking it is somehow genuine, while it isn't. Like somebody drawing some weird stuff and weird glyphs and pretending like it contains medical knowledge while it doesn't.

The second is someone at a later time using old vellum on purpose to make the document look old, while it isn't. Again, the intention is to fool people into thinking the document is authentic. So basically a hoaxer would:

- Try to fool people, telling that the document contains knowledge while it doesn't

AND/OR

- Try to fool people by presenting the document as old, while it isn't.

Others might disagree, but that's how I would describe it in the most general terms possible in the specific case of the VM.

(04-01-2017, 09:30 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'd say that there are two types of hoax theories, the 15th century hoax and "modern" hoax.

In the first case, the document is made to trick people into thinking it is somehow genuine, while it isn't. Like somebody drawing some weird stuff and weird glyphs and pretending like it contains medical knowledge while it doesn't.

The second is someone at a later time using old vellum on purpose to make the document look old, while it isn't. Again, the intention is to fool people into thinking the document is authentic. So basically a hoaxer would:

- Try to fool people, telling that the document contains knowledge while it doesn't

AND/OR

- Try to fool people by presenting the document as old, while it isn't.

Others might disagree, but that's how I would describe it in the most general terms possible in the specific case of the VM.

What if the modern hoax does contain valuable information?  It was created in modern times with what the Author thought was an impenetrable cipher.  However, the Author used Historical facts and to add a layer as in another cipher he made it look old.

So in that regard I say NO to your question.  The Tepenece Signature needs further analysis then just confirmation by reading it.  We need hand writing comparisons!  If Rudolf II looked at the VMS and this document was important why did it or how did it get into Tenpences hands?  Maybe Tepence was the Author?  Maybe Wilfred?  Maybe Dee and maybe Me? lol

I don't really think its a modern hoax though not sure.

Okay I'll put that down as a no-vote, you can always change your mind in January 2018

Stellar, researchers have already located examples of Jacobi a Tepenecz's signature and they match the writing on Folio 1r. There's one signature that is very embellished and matches less well, but the others are good matches. It's also been established that there was an herbalist/botanist by that name in Rudolph II's court and that the designation "a Tepenecz/de Tepenecz" was awarded by Emperor Rudolph.

Also, I noticed that you sampled two different hands in your "Voynich glyph's [sic]" column. The hand on the final page is not the same as the hand under the zodiac-symbol drawings as you have implied. Plus, these marginalia hands do not appear to match the VMS main text (slant, rhythm, proportion, and pen angle are different). Also, the main text is at least two different scribes and would need to be sampled separately.

I said I'd close the voting after January, but that seems too late - most people have had the chance to answer the questions. I will close it January 14th and present the conclusions then.

A big thanks to all of those who have participated already, either in this thread or by PM. We can only reflect the views of the community if enough members participate.

We're still missing the views of some prominent members of the community. You know who you are!  (Rene, Marco, VViews...)
If there are some particular questions you won't answer, just leave them open.

Since only the 'yes' or 'no'  is recorded, I prefer not to answer.
I do like to speculate, but more about smaller questions.

This thread was clearly not meant as a discussion thread, so I also didn't want to start a discussion.
One of the questions on which I have the strongest opinion is the "fake" one, but here the question isn't very precise, as already mentioned above.
The main possibility that has been explored is a fake around 1600, which I consider excluded.
Also a modern fake is excluded.
A 15th century fake I consider entirely possible.

OK Rene

It's more about odds, so for example if you think a fake is possible but unlikely you'd answer "no". I mean, there's relatively little we can prove with certainty at the moment. But of course I understand if people like to stick to serious research

Hi Koen Gh,
I think it's a great idea to get an overview of things this way.
I hadn't answered the questions yet because the answer to most of these is "I don't know" and I wanted to stop and think about whether I could decide either way, but I can't.
There are so many of these that I might answer along the lines of "yes but..", "only if..." or "no unless..." and neither simple yes/no alternatives are able to convey that.
I'll give it a try though:

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. I don't know.
4. I don't know.
5. I don't know.
6. I don't know.
7. I don't know.
8. I don't know.
9. I don't know.
10. I don't know.
11. I don't know.
12. I'll be optimistic and say yes.
13. I'll be optimistic and say yes.
14. I don't know.

15. I don't know.
16. I don't know.
17. I don't know.

Sorry I couldn't do better!

I felt the same way, VViews, I wanted to answer, "I don't know" to most of them. I ended up compromising by breaking them into percentages of certainty and PMing the results, but even that made me feel a bit squirmy.

I hate committing one way or the other when I truly DON'T know!