Wissenschaftliche Artikel der BAM
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Buchkapitel (4) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (4)
Referierte Publikation
- nein (4)
Schlagworte
- Archaeometry (3)
- Manuscripts (2)
- Non-invasive analysis (2)
- Coptic (1)
- Drawings (1)
- Fakes (1)
- Ink (1)
- Leonardo da Vinci (1)
- Limitations (1)
- Non-destructive testing (1)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 4 Material und Umwelt (4) (entfernen)
In this paper, we discuss the importance of scientifically investigating cultural artefacts in a non-invasive way. Taking as test case Leonardo da Vinci’s Manuscript with anatomic drawings and notes, which is stored in Weimar, we clarify fundamental steps in the chronology of this folio. By means of microscopy, infrared reflectography, UV photography, and X-ray fluorescence analysis, we were able to identify various types of sketching material and several varieties of iron gall ink. For his sketches, Leonardo used two different sketching tools, a lead pencil and a graphite pencil, as well as several types of ink for developing these sketches into drawings. With regard to ink, it is important to observe that there is no difference between the ink Leonardo used for drawing and the ink he used for writing text. Based on the materials analysed, we suggest a chronology for the creation of this unique folio.
Our standard protocol for the characterisation of writing materials within advanced manuscript studies has been successfully used to investigate manuscripts written with a pure ink on a homogeneous writing surface. However, this protocol is inadequate for analysing documents penned in mixed inks. We present here the advantages and limitations of the improved version of the protocol, which now includes imaging further into the infrared region (1100−1700 nm).
This paper addresses the sensitive issue of authenticating unprovenanced manuscripts of high monetary value to certify they are genuine. Over the last decade, the popularity of material studies of manuscripts using non-destructive testing (NDT) has increased enormously. These studies are held in especially high esteem in the case of suspicious writings due to the methodological rigour they are reputed to contribute to debate. We would like to stress that materials analysis alone cannot prove that an object is genuine. Unfortunately, audiences with a humanities background often tend to disregard the technical details and treat any published interpretation of instrumental analysis as an objective finding. Four examples are outlined here to illustrate what questionable contributions the natural sciences can make in describing manuscripts that have actually been forged.