08-04-2020, 10:02 PM
So, if the Voynich is in cipher then why is it in so much more difficult to decipher one than Fontana's? On the face of it one would imagine that the author of the Voynich was much more interested in or familiar with ciphers, so as to be able to produce something more difficult to break. There is no evidence that Fontana has any education in ciphers and apart from the diplomatic message he delivered no evidence that he came in contact with ciphers. So maybe it is not surprising that his cipher was so simple.
I would argue the author of the Voynich was someone with some significant background or acquaintance with ciphers or someone of real genius(like Da Vinci, but not Da Vinci of course) or possibly both. For someone with little background in ciphers to produce such a thing implies to me a big intellectual leap hence "genius"(I don't really like that word, but it serves its purpose). If the author was someone with a strong background and fascination in ciphers as well as a degree of imagination/invention then they could be responsible.
I would argue the author of the Voynich was someone with some significant background or acquaintance with ciphers or someone of real genius(like Da Vinci, but not Da Vinci of course) or possibly both. For someone with little background in ciphers to produce such a thing implies to me a big intellectual leap hence "genius"(I don't really like that word, but it serves its purpose). If the author was someone with a strong background and fascination in ciphers as well as a degree of imagination/invention then they could be responsible.