New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?"

[proto57]

But there is something that disproves a modern forgery and supports the C-14 dating.
It's not the wormhole, it's the feeding tracks. Since this type of worm does not occur in the present lid, but certainly in wood. So where is the lid?
The sequence: parchment, writing, lid, worm.

Respectfully, Aga, the presence of these holes does not at all "disprove" modern forgery, nor support the C-14 data. By the latter I mean that, even if the Voynich is authentic, and the wormholes genuine, those worms could have been active any time between 1420 and 1912. The wormholes, if real, don't date the Voynich.

Another thing to consider is that the term "bookworm", and "wormhole" is a general one, as such damage is caused by an array of insects. Each type demonstrates a different sort of damage, leaving different evidence: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

But the thing about "wormholes" is that they have often been successfully faked by forgers, even using live worms. They have also been bored by various mechanical means very convincingly. And authentic, existing wormholes have been used by first filling them with bits of scrap material, then inking or painting over them... after the ink is dry:

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

"... if a forger paints over paper with wormholes, the ink/paint would seep through the hole to the back, which would immediately alarm an expert authenticating it. Master forger Eric Hebborn came up with a clever solution to keep the paint out of such wormholes. He would patch the hole with some chewed paper, and trim the edges of the paper plug to perfectly fit the hole. He would then remove the plug after the paint was dry."

From the Wikipedia Vineland Map page:

"All the tests that we have done over the past five years [on the Vinland Map] — on the materials and other aspects — do not show any signs of forgery". The formal report of his presentation showed that his work ignored rather than contradicted earlier studies. For example, he experimented only with artificial wormholes, and did not follow up the observation made at the 1966 Conference, that live bookworms were a known tool of the fake antiquities trade."

And live worms were so used by forgers, this is far from the only reference. 

All that being said, and then considering the history of forging wormholes by many means, then looking at the images in the paper you link, I don't personally feel that it would all that difficult to duplicate what we see here. The writer of the paper hopefully dismisses the possibility the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. hole was abraded, with this, "Now it is not that the worm has only gnawed on the parchment, as we can see he has also eaten away the ink. At the same time no mechanical influences, such as scratch marks or abrasion in the worm track." As a professional jeweler and fabricator in many mediums, I can think of a great many ways such a worn strip could be made in existing parchment, which would end up looking quite like this.

Also, I am not sure where the last image in your linked paper comes from... the more circular hole, showing ragged edges, purportedly made by a bookworm. Although the text below it states, "In the lower image we see a strongly magnified image of a Wormhole from the woodworm. Note the surface structure of the hole. These bumps are formed when the worm is the wood gnaws. Since the enlargement of the picture above is just sufficient, the same structure is just about visible on closer inspection." But that is clearly a different hole, as the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. hole is roughly oval in shape, while this one is round. Where did that image come from? Was it used as a relative example of a genuine hole, for comparison? Or is it another hole from the Voynich?

In any case, in summary, wormholes are a time-tested and successful tool of forgers of manuscripts, art, and furniture, and have been for well over a century. They have been made by mechanical means of many kinds, and have been made by leaving live worms on these surfaces for relatively short periods of time. And genuine, existing holes have also been used, by protecting them from subsequent painting and inking.

Would Voynich have had access to live worms? I don't think that would have been a problem at all. He bought the Libreria Franceshini in 1908, which had a forty-plus year mountain of books and other literary items of all types. He probably could have started a Worm Zoo, with a wide range of culprits.

But again I appreciate such input and rebuttal to my own ideas. For instance, in this case, you have refreshed my memory on some points, caused me to consider others, and made me realize I ought to spend more time on this issue. For one thing, I am exited to experiment on a scrap of 16th century manuscript parchment I have (it fell out of the binding of my Erasmus Bible, it was used as filler). I'd like to put my own notion to the test: Can I replicate the damage seen on Voynich f1r? I also ordered a copy of the 1966 Vinland Conference, something I have really wanted a copy of...

Rich