The Voynich Ninja

I would like now to push the charlatan hypothesis a bit more further and ask who actually could create the manuscript.

I don't believe it was the charlatan himself. Charlatans are social people, they like socializing and impressing others. 
And writing a manuscript with an invented language is, let's face it, a quite nerdy, tedious and solitary job. So I suppose our charlatan would
prefer to give this job to someone else who would do the job, preferably for small money.

I think I have a good candidate/candidates. Someone who would be cheap, not very qualified but qualified enough to do it.

In medieval ages there was a whole "subculture" of "eternal" students or failed students and failed clergymen. They had many names,
the most popular being "clerici vagantes" and "goliards"
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.



You had similar guys in quite modern times. There were some of them in the 1970s and 1980s although today they are somehow less popular. They were studying not to get the diploma and go to work but for the sake of studying, having fun, partying and delaying growning up and going to work. They could study for 10 years or so, starting new faculties and dropping unfinished ones.

Such guys also existed in medieval times. They had some knowledge and education but definitely prefered spending time in a tavern than in a library. It could actually be a tavern where some of them could meet our charlatan. They started talking and struck a deal - they will make him a fake manuscript for some, not so big cash.

Think of goliards as possible authors of the Voynich Manuscript
- they would had enough experience to do it but not enough to do it well
- they would be cheap
- they would have access to other manuscripts through their collegues from universities
- they wouldn't have moral objections to make such a hoax

It could be one man who did it or several men but our charlatan probably wanted it quickly so a team of goliards with different handwriting seems possible.

Theretically the charlatan and the manuscript author could be the same person but I doubt it. The charlatan wouldn't have patience to make the manuscript and goliards would be too young to pose as some medical authority. That's why I suggest two parties invlolved.

(21-03-2026, 01:23 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In medieval ages there was a whole "subculture" of "eternal" students or failed students and failed clergymen. ... You had similar guys in quite modern times. There were some of them in the 1970s and 1980s although today they are somehow less popular. They were studying not to get the diploma and go to work but for the sake of studying, having fun, partying and delaying growning up and going to work. They could study for 10 years or so, starting new faculties and dropping unfinished ones.

I know that type... I took almost 6 years to get my Masters, then 9 years to get my Ph.D.

I turned in my Ph. D. thesis three days before the absolutely definitive deadline of the last extension I could get. 

But I should not have rushed. Another student of my advisor, who started his Ph. D. on the same day I did, beat me by two days. Darn.

All the best, --stolfi

(21-03-2026, 01:23 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I would like now to push the charlatan hypothesis a bit more further and ask who actually could create the manuscript.

I don't believe it was the charlatan himself. Charlatans are social people, they like socializing and impressing others. 
And writing a manuscript with an invented language is, let's face it, a quite nerdy, tedious and solitary job. So I suppose our charlatan would
prefer to give this job to someone else who would do the job, preferably for small money.

I think I have a good candidate/candidates. Someone who would be cheap, not very qualified but qualified enough to do it.

In medieval ages there was a whole "subculture" of "eternal" students or failed students and failed clergymen. They had many names,
the most popular being "clerici vagantes" and "goliards"
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.



You had similar guys in quite modern times. There were some of them in the 1970s and 1980s although today they are somehow less popular. They were studying not to get the diploma and go to work but for the sake of studying, having fun, partying and delaying growning up and going to work. They could study for 10 years or so, starting new faculties and dropping unfinished ones.

Such guys also existed in medieval times. They had some knowledge and education but definitely prefered spending time in a tavern than in a library. It could actually be a tavern where some of them could meet our charlatan. They started talking and struck a deal - they will make him a fake manuscript for some, not so big cash.

Think of goliards as possible authors of the Voynich Manuscript
- they would had enough experience to do it but not enough to do it well
- they would be cheap
- they would have access to other manuscripts through their collegues from universities
- they wouldn't have moral objections to make such a hoax

It could be one man who did it or several men but our charlatan probably wanted it quickly so a team of goliards with different handwriting seems possible.

Theretically the charlatan and the manuscript author could be the same person but I doubt it. The charlatan wouldn't have patience to make the manuscript and goliards would be too young to pose as some medical authority. That's why I suggest two parties invlolved.

I do like this as an idea, though I will say: con artists often do have favorite scams and props and it's not unheard of for those to be very elaborate, so I think a con artist can definitely have patience to make something like this. And a manuscript can be used before it's the 200+ pages we see, so it didn't have to be created in one sitting.

(21-03-2026, 12:07 PM)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
However, "meaningless text" / "hoax" theories that start from the ground up with coherent logic and reasoning are not the same as that. To say "it has meaning, because x and y" is just as genuine as "it has no meaning, because x and y".

Nor is it giving up. If research on this hypothesis leads to new, previously unknown information, that could have benefits for all sides. For example, discovering similar hoaxes, or discovering aspects of hoaxes that the VMS shares, discovering new historical figures who could be relevant, or discovering historical precedent to which the VMS can be compared. That research could well lead to the conclusion that the VMS is not a hoax, too.

I have been following sevral hoax theories here over time. And what strikes me they never seem to resolve anything. Those that came in believing it is a hoax remained convinced of that and those that believe it is "genuine" remained convinced too.
The lack of a clear translation is a proof of deception for the hoax proponents; the linguistic patterns ,botanical matches, astrological tables, pharmacy  are evidence for the other party. It is very wrong to equal "meaningless" with "hoax", too.
It could be meaningless for us , but quite meaningful to the person (or the group) who created  and used it - being a cyphered text or umknown dialect and this is not a hoax. 
A hoax contains intended deception for somebody or some group of people mostly for profit (if not for joke).

I would add a few more thoughts about the wandering charlatan scenario

1)
The texts on the last page may suggest he was of German origin. However month names under Zodiac pictures are in something like French, Occitan or something like that. I would suggest that he could lose his book somewhere in France and it was its new owner that added the month names.
Maybe the charlatan found some buyer for it there?
Or maybe he had to escape from an angry mob when someone recognized him and left all his belongings at his marketplace booth?

2)
Making a fake women health manual could be very intentional. I hope I won't offend anyone here by it but there are both stereotypes and some real results showing that women are easier to trick or manipulate by someone with bad intentions (see for example: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ). Women are also more into natural or unconventional therapy thing. Probably many of potential female clients of our supposed charlatan would never ask him what do all these diagrams really mean and just by brief look would decide it must be something very wise and scientific.
Also some historic charlatans like Rasputin had mostly female followers:


3)
Of course if someone asked the charlatan what does these language and pictures mean anyway, then he had ready answers for that. Some obvious one is that he cannot reveal these secrets because some old monk/sage/shaman trusted them to him and he made him a promise not to talk about it to anyone. Or that it is some Babylonian, Arabic or Indian knowledge. He could adjust his stories ad hoc to the man who asked.

4) Some results suggest that at some moment Voynich Manuscript wasn't a book but a bunch of loose sheets or maybe even a scroll. It would fit the concept of doctor folding almanac. By carrying such thing with him, the charlatan could pose as a doctor:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


5) It is worth to discuss the general "charlatan" concept. By modern standards every medieval physician could be called a charlatan:
- they believed that you are made of 4 classical elements
- an ilness meant imbalance of these elements which meant e.g. that you are too hot and too humid
- they believed that they can examine hundreds of diseases by looking at your urine
- bloodletting was great for your health
- astrology was very important, medical surgeries should be done with special setup of planets

and so on. Today we know that this is all wrong.

There is however some difference:
- Medieval doctors had diplomas, believed in their work and did the best according to the state of the art knowledge.
- There were also village healers didn't have diplomas but had folk experience and didn't pretend to have formal education.
- Charlatans on the other hand had neither diplomas or folk knowledge and realized their remedies don't work but lied to people
both about their background and about their medicines

The more I think about this theory the more I find it relevant.

(23-03-2026, 07:46 PM)JustAnotherTheory Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The more I think about this theory the more I find it relevant.

This happens to anyone who develops and pursues a theory....
Unfortunately, most positive ideas (that aren’t based on a hoax) quickly fall apart. Negative ideas (that are based on a hoax) can’t be refuted until someone comes up with a solution.

In that sense, it’s more comfortable to believe in a hoax; there are people here who have been doing just that with passion for decades.

However, the structure of the VMS shows both sides: a clearly recognizable structure that points more toward a generated text, and a clearly recognizable structure that points toward a real language (encrypted).

I can assure you, every theory is still just a wild guess....

Quote:Negative ideas (that are based on a hoax) can’t be refuted until someone comes up with a solution.

Yes, that's a problem. It's really hard to prove any hoax theory.

You can tell stories like the mine above. You can make them more or less probable. But even if some story is probable, it still doesn't mean that it happened.

I can see two ways of proving or trying to prove a hoax theory.

1) Extra evidence
So it may happen that someone will find one day a totally unknown document related to Voynich Manuscript that will shed new light upon it. This is however quite independent of our efforts, you may browse libraries and old documents for years and still find nothing.

2) Linguistic and statistic analysis
This is a a difficult case. Voynich language behaves neither like a real European language nor like some random stuff. It has patterns but some of them are weird. It's some borderline case.
So if you want to see language there then you will see language. And if you want to see gibberish, you will see gibberish.

To me, the fact that almost everything about the VMS is alien, points to the fact that the creator(s) is (are) alien as well. In the sense of being alien to the general scribe/illuminator profession.

It seems as if someone(s) wanted to copy motifs and patterns from many existing manuscripts, like Taccola, the BnF herbal, and Bellifortis, but without ever having drawn a single flower or diagram before in their life.

Someone like a charlatan. Checks out to me. This seems like a good theory.

The only issue is, that the VMS is 200+ folios of material, which would require an extraordinary amount of work and hard labour. Wouldn't a charlatan be content with 50, or 100 pages or simple herbal illustrations? Why the variation in the illustrations? Why the text, that looks almost like a language and obeys Zip's law?

(27-03-2026, 07:47 PM)JustAnotherTheory Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.To me, the fact that almost everything about the VMS is alien, points to the fact that the creator(s) is (are) alien as well. In the sense of being alien to the general scribe/illuminator profession.

It seems as if someone(s) wanted to copy motifs and patterns from many existing manuscripts, like Taccola, the BnF herbal, and Bellifortis, but without ever having drawn a single flower or diagram before in their life.

Someone like a charlatan. Checks out to me. This seems like a good theory.

The only issue is, that the VMS is 200+ folios of material, which would require an extraordinary amount of work and hard labour. Wouldn't a charlatan be content with 50, or 100 pages or simple herbal illustrations? Why the variation in the illustrations? Why the text, that looks almost like a language and obeys Zip's law?

The Gibberish after all? paper shows that you do get zipfian distributions when people are tasked with writing plausibly looking garbage. And when no content is required, scribing would not take nearly as long as you think, especially with how crude the Voynich is.

A 50/100 page book looks like a pamphlet, you probably want more if you're binding a book...