I agree, the notion of "fake" in this case depends entirely on the intentions of the makers: did they believe the thing they were making was genuine or not? A book of spells might be "fake" or a hoax if the maker knew well that he was inventing things and he would be fooling his audience. But the exact same book of spells might have been made by someone who actually believes in the power of these spells, which would make the book's contents only "fake" in the light of a modern scientific assessment of its effectiveness. But from that point of view, even the stories from the Bible would be fake, since serpents can't talk. (By the way, some biblical books are much more deserving of the term "forgery" than the VM, since they are written under false names, and thus are forged testimonies of people who have known Jesus.)
It is for this reason that I find the question of "fake" not very interesting, at least at this point of our investigation. A book that was intended as a hoax by its makers might look just the same as one that was made with good intentions.
It is for this reason that I find the question of "fake" not very interesting, at least at this point of our investigation. A book that was intended as a hoax by its makers might look just the same as one that was made with good intentions.