Re: The Vinland Map's Ink

On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 12:59:54 -0500, "Steve Marcus"
<smarcus_spamout_@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
>"Ken Towe" <ken.towe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:1112385625.726713.14570@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Mr. Marcus wrote:
>>
>> "Back to square one, are we? The tape of the recent televised special
>> on the VM clearly shows a person reininking over a previously drawn
>> line. He, for it was a man, had absolutely no problem doing this, your
>> experience as a draftsman notwithstanding."
>>
>> Yes, but we never saw the finished product did we? Given enough time
>> and the extra care needed to re-ink a document the question of accuracy
>> seems less of a problem. But, if the VM is genuine one needs to explain
>> why any scribe would want to go to the significant trouble of
>> re-tracing his steps over an entire document. Why should a scribe good
>> enough to have been given the honor of drafting a world map have
>> started with a weak non-iron-gall ink in the first place? And then
>> having done so never noticed the difference until the ENTIRE project
>> was completed...map and legends! Then, instead of pulling out a new
>> piece of parchment and using a normal iron-gall ink to redo the thing,
>> he chooses to spend the extra time and care to re-ink the whole map
>> with another non-iron-gall material...a carbon-based ink. Parchment was
>> not that expensive or difficult to obtain. That a medieval scribe did
>> all that seems like a non-starter as an explanation. The explanation
>> offered by McCrone seems much more plausible, especially if the forger
>> had plenty of time to go over his first effort carefully. And, of
>> course, a medieval scribe is not going to have access to
>> commercial-grade anatase anyhow. Because there is no evidence (XRD,
>> SAED, TEM) for any clay minerals associated with the anatase on the VM
>> a natural clay source (where anatase is typically less than 3% of the
>> whole) is out of the question. Paint chips falling off the ceiling or
>> anatase bleeding off of a bleached coated paper must (a) stick only to
>> the ink and not the parchment and (b) somehow wiggle under the black
>> and come to rest on the yellow. Come on now!
>>
>
>Dr. Towe, I agree 100%. My posts in this thread (and on the endless threads
>on this topic that have appeared off and on in sci.arch over a period of
>years) are intended to convey the position that while nothing is ever 100%
>certain, the current state of the evidence (the ink evidence as well as the
>cartograhical and linguistics evidence), as well as logic, compels a
>conclusion that the VM is a fake. I am glad that your post (and the others
>you've written in the last several weeks) clearly lays out the current state
>of the evidence and the conclusion compelled thereby because I have been
>posting to that effect for quite a while (and providing links to material
>you've written on the topic), but your credentials in the field are, of
>course, vastly superior to mine.
>
>You evidently didn't undestand my position from my last post, and I'll
>assume the blame for that because you don't know the complete posting
>history between Eric Stevens and me. In the face of the evidence that the
>VM appears to have been drawn by placing a black pigment containing "ink"
>over a yellowish "ink" of some sort in an attempt to simulate the appearance
>of a document drawn on parchment using iron gall ink several hundred years
>ago, Stevens took the position (not just recently, but quite a while ago)
>that it would be "impossible" for a forger to "trace over" the lower line as
>accurately as it would appear to have been done on the VM. I laughed at
>that statement then, and I laugh at it now.

Steve Marcus appears to regard derision as a scientific argument.

>Ultimately it appeared that
>Stevens had come off his position on the "impossibility" of reinking.

I have never said it was impossible. I have quoted someone else who
said it was impossible. I have *explained* why I think it would be
very difficult to apply a second layer of ink indetectably.

>Stevens has now gone back somewhat to his original "impossible" position by
>askng whether it would be possible to do the reinking "indetectably." My
>post referred to that history; hence the "full circle" comment. I was
>trying to make the point that it was not impossible that a *forger* could
>have done the VM by "tracing over" or "reinking" an underlaying yellowish
>binder layer with a black pigment containing upper layer. I've posted quite
>often that if "reinking" was the method used by the *forger*, it was in fact
>done in a way that apparently *was* very difficult to detect circa 1956, and
>which was more easily detected in the 70's when McCrone applied the right
>technology.

I've never seen any work by McCrone which leads directly to the
conclusion that the map was reinked. Marcus has several times made
this claim but never given a link or reference to the relevant work by
McCrone, even when asked.
>
>I have posted several times in this thread to the effect that it is
>nonsensical (or at least illogical and in contradiction to Occam) to assume
>that a scribe who wanted to draw the VM circa 1440 would have either
>intentionally omitted the iron component from an iron gall ink, or would
>have continued to draw the entire VM using a "spoiled" or "defective" ink
>once he or she had discovered that the ink being used was "defective." I'm
>glad that you agree.

Careful analysis of what Ken Towe has written will not show that he he
exactly agrees with your statement above.

In any case, are you aware that it takes several days for iron-gall
ink to darken, even when the ink was properly mixed? The scribe may
not have known that there was anything wrong with the ink until some
time after he had finished the map.

As to how a mediaeval scribe came to be in this position, 'ink maker'
was an acknowledged trade in the days of iron gall ink and I would
expect that the scribe bought his ink rather than wandered the forests
to gather the materials to make his own. All it takes to get a batch
of defective ink is for there to be a slip on the part of the
inkmaker's apprentice.



Eric Stevens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... That a medieval scribe did ... the current state of the evidence (the ink evidence as well as ... direct quotation of your position) regarding the lines on the Vinland Map ... it is interesting that you have criticized Brown/Clark and McCrone ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >>map as extensive as the Vinland Map, even a single line drawn directly on ... >>the parchment would ultimately run the quill out of ink to the point where ... started and stopped the yellow strokes. ... >>> The case you raised was what might happen had the scribe used faulty ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... Why should a scribe good ... > piece of parchment and using a normal iron-gall ink to redo the thing, ... Because there is no evidence (XRD, ... history between Eric Stevens and me. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >>reason for not using an old type of ink for the top lines. ... > essentially tannic acid and iron sulphate. ... it was the iron that would have made a black pigment. ... So would the scribe have even started writing with such ink? ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >>> very difficult to apply a second layer of ink indetectably. ... >>direct quotation of your position) regarding the lines on the Vinland Map ... claim of impossibility was B.S. then, ... criticized Brown/Clark (and by inference McCrone) for offering an opinion ...
    (sci.archaeology)
Loading