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 +
On Dec 30, 2009, at 11:27 PM, James Enterline wrote:
But really, give me some credit for being a little sharper than you imply.
That's becoming increasingly difficult. In 2002 Jim expected someone to believe that a scribe would make up an iron-gall ink without using the principal ingredient, green vitriol, and then retrace the entire Vjnland Map. Now he expects someone to believe that instead of quickly retracing the document, the scribe added carbon to his iron-free ink. Jim expects someone to believe this scribe still did not notice that his ink was not turning black (in a half-hour or so) so he completes the entire map, including its text. Not a very sharp scribe.
Jim expects someone to believe that hundreds of years later a hypothetical map-seller would ignore specific cleaning procedures (Plenderleith, see Dec. 13th post "More on the Enterline scenario"). The specific procedure calls for a conservator to brush bleach on a blotting paper applied to the back of a valuable document which is, itself, placed face down. Not a very sharp map-seller.
Jim's procedure brushes bleach onto the back of a tissue. So far, so good.... and it might even work. BUT the typewriter bond he and his map-seller are using (not a real blotting paper) is FACING the unprotected map's ink they desire to "spruce up". This Jim and the map- seller must do in order to transfer anatase to the front of the map. Obviously, adding anatase to the back of the map is useless and would not be very sharp for an intrepid theorist resolutely intent on authenticating a forgery by extending the doubts that few others have.
_______________________________________________ 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
