The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[proto57]

Anyway, here are my point-point-comparisons to a particular armadillo illustration: The Gesner armadillo. This particular one not only has the most number of comparable points (pointy ears, upturned snout, but also one very particular feature of both is the same: The scales are drawn backwards:

Armadillos don't have scales like that.

The artist here doesn't seem to know the difference either and has unfortunately drawn the scales of a pangolin on two creatures.  Is this hubris, or deliberately meant to mislead us?

You do know that the "artist here" is me, right? In any case, as the artist, I can answer: Not much thought was put into strict distinctions past a certain level, it's just a cartoon.

Here's a pangolin from India with it's scaly hide... ...the obvious interpretation is that it's meant to be another dragon, and not the great sleeping armadillo that lays over the heavens.

Well if the identification was "obvious" as you say, we wouldn't be having these discussions at all!

But while I have you, I'll ask, "I have given a context within my overall hypothesis as to 'why' an armadillo would be used here*. Would you, similarly, have an overall context for the Voynich: meaning, geography, parallel usage, whatever... which you feel would explain the use of a dragon on f80v?".

   

   

* Above, two Kunstkammers which contain animals, plants and artifacts from (among other places in the world) the "New World". Many others suspect that the Voynich is a New World document... I do not, but I do accept the reasons that led those researchers to believe this possible: Many apparent New World plants and animals, including the armadillo. In short, as a book meant to appear as though it You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., this imagery would be perfectly in context, and to be expected.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., by Jules Janick and Arthur O. Tucker, (portion of) pages 167 and 168: