This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the
whole list)
o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o +
Fellow MapHisters,
An interest in maps, new or old, generally includes some interest in
the technique by which a given map came into existence. On that
score, a seriously misleading comment by James Enterline in his
latest Vinland Map posting needs pointing out before it becomes part
of the map's increasingly twisted lore.
In the conclusion to his December 29 message, Enterline wrote (with
regard to the much discussed "glitch" in the ink line in the Welsh
region ):
It's as though some force had pulled the carbon back away from the
edge before it had a chance to dry completely. Maybe a bubble or
variation of pressure from the brush. Lifting it up -- even a
bristle or two from a twist of the wrist --could create a slight
suction, pulling the edges back toward the center again.
Please note that the Vinland Map was drawn and lettered with a pen,
not with a brush. Whether the pen was a quill pen (which people
knew how to shape also in the twentieth century), or a steel nib, may
be difficult to determine, but in either case the point of a pen is
always shaped to hold a bit of ink after dipping and to disperse it
under slight pressure. Painting and lettering with a brush would
have produced a very different result from anything seen in the
Vinland Map.
Happy New Year!
Kirsten A. Seaver
_______________________________________________
MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography
hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of
the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of
Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for
the views of the author.
List Information: http://www.maphist.nl
Maphist mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist
