The word “hoax” is always hard to understand for me.
Some cases of probably-non-linguistic medieval/early-modern “texts” (in a very broad sense) are:
I don't think that these manuscripts count as hoaxes, because we are not sure that intentional deception was involved in their creation. We understand little of the nature of these works and their significance for their authors.
Some cases of probably-non-linguistic medieval/early-modern “texts” (in a very broad sense) are:
- The Book of Soyga (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). “The Book of Soyga contains thirty-six tables; each table is a square grid of 36 rows and columns; each grid cell contains a letter of the Latin alphabet. These tables turn out to be formed by a completely deterministic calculation method, or algorithm, starting from an arbitrary ‘code word’ for each table.” (36*36*36=46656 characters, almost one fourth of Voynichese).
- The two You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Dee and Kelley. The first language was presented in tabular form, and Dee was likely inspired by Soyga (of which he owned a copy which greatly puzzled him). The second language comes with an English translation, but the general consensus is that the English cannot correspond to the original, which could be a meaningless pseudo-language.
I don't think that these manuscripts count as hoaxes, because we are not sure that intentional deception was involved in their creation. We understand little of the nature of these works and their significance for their authors.


![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)