The claimed Voynich page

[Fabrizio Salani]

My best guess is that this was an attempt by a "VMS fan" to create a sort of facsimile, but with emphasis on beauty rather than accuracy.

I agree. Let's not forget that VM pages show up in all kinds of works of art (comics, video games...). It's a fascinating object. In this case, I'm thinking a prop for an (amateur?) movie project, a play or an exhibition. Something with a bit of a budget, motivation to make it look authentic, but also creative freedom. Since prop makers are creative types, the changes are easily explained. Artistic preference, more page-filling, balance... It also explains why old parchment was sourced and then cleaned.

Without further evidence, I think many options remain open, but at least to me it feels like a creative project. The addition of the wax seals makes me think of a prop rather than a fan's passion project.

A prop or entertainment item, mixed in with a collectible miscellany of paper and parchment documents ranging from the 16th to the 18th century (notarial deeds, property transfers, inheritances, boundaries, various letters, many with seals of various types), kept in a drawer of an old wardrobe from a diocese of Narni and then (the piece of furniture), sold at an antiques market in Narni (2013) where the buyer, an expert in antique furniture (who sadly passed away a few years ago) contacted me asking if I was interested in any of those documents and for €110.00 (including shipping costs) I noticed that small parchment and purchased it. A consideration of mine: in these years, since I purchased it, I have shown it to all the most famous experts in the world on the Voynich manuscript and on ancient manuscripts in general (professors: Paolo Bensi, Pietro Baraldi, Renè Zandbergen, Raymond Clemens, Nick Pelling, Stephen Bax, Stephen Baxter, J.K. Petersen and I stop here just to name the most famous), and the peculiarity is that with the experience of all these scientists in the field of parchments, manuscripts and the Voynoch in particular, not one of them—excuse me if I repeat myself—not one of them has ever listened superficially or failed immediately to respond. On the contrary, they all debate and are always arguing about this parchment. These people are scholars who, just by looking at a document (like all great experts in any scientific field), know how to judge its interest or not, and they have all always told me: it is something very interesting and unique that deserves in-depth study. I imagine there must be a reason.
__________________________
I don't support any hypothesis; is it the last page of Baresch's booklet? Is it a copy made during the dark period of the manuscript's life? Is it a modern copy? Is it so hard to believe it's Baresch? Maybe so, also because I know that when something is too good to be true, it usually isn't. A copy from the dark period? Fascinating and would open the door to many other questions and hypotheses, but see above. The modern forgery hypothesis is simply the easiest of all, so why does it only convince a couple of people, and not even experts? I can't explain all this and I keep asking myself "what have I found"?