Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: flaking ink - does it expose white parchment colouring over ink?

  1. Default flaking ink - does it expose white parchment colouring over ink?


    Sara Mazzarino
    Report on the different inks used in Codex Sinaiticus and assessment of their condition
    http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/project/conservation_ink.aspx
    26. Major ink corrosion (Quire 86 f.7r, BL f.307r d11)
    Correction .. Quire 87
    - 4th column - 11th line
    Acts, 13:9 - 13:38 library: BL folio: 307 scribe:

    http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manusc...r&zoomSlider=0

    First, Sara's pic


    CSP - Acts - quire 87.jpgThen the CSP


    Wait, here there is no flaking visible.
    In fact, it looks like an overwriting.

    =============================

    Many questions can be asked from these pictures, and from this page. For now, we simply want to show one puzzle, and the resource involved

    Explanation
    Sara Mazzarino

    I have checked the image: if you zoom in the image at the specific line d11 you will be able to see brown colored areas. The brown is given by the background, which was chosen in order to minimize the impact of losses in the support, when looking at the images.

    If you compare the zoomed area with the detail pic on my report you will see that the brown areas of the first correspond to the white areas of the second. My aim was in fact to highlight the loss: for that reason I chose a white background as opposed to the brown.

    So, yes, I can confirm there is corrosion and loss in that specific area.
    Steven Avery

    Thanks, Sara.
    That was a great explanation, and after poking around both sides of the leaf I can see that it was totally eaten through.

    This leads to a second question, from the 1922 Kirsopp Lake black and white photos, on the CSNTM site, and you navigate to the two images (I am only showing recto)
    http://www.csntm.org/Manuscript/View/GA_01|
    CSNTM Image Id: 142050
    CSNTM Image Name: GA_01_NT_0108a.jpg

    Here we do not have the dark brown background. Yet it does not really appear to be eaten through. Is it possible that there was corrosion, e.g. in St. Petersburg, from 1911 to when Uncle Joe sold the ms. to Britain?

    Continuing from before, I realize that working off the Kirsopp Lake photos (actually taken for the 1912 NT edition first ) might be a bit difficult. It is just a bit curious, maybe the ink wore through from 1912 to 2009?

    On another topic, do you have any idea how to contact the image professional Laurence Pordes?
    Any help on that contact would be appreciated! Thanks

    (also discussed the tests that had been planned at Leipzig)
    Flip side:



    Emphasis added:

    ... However I do strongly believe that the corrosion was already there. In fact, the area of the specific word was previously erased and corrected. This made the parchment support even thinner than it already is. For this reason the ink affected the parchment in a more severe way creating holes.

    I suspect that on KL images the holes are not clearly visible because he may have used a black background to improve contrast and legibility of the photographs. Or he may have retouched the negatives plates, again in order to improve legibility. Retouching of negatives was a very common practice and I wouldn't be surprise if this too was the case.


    As far as the damage that may have happened from 1912 is concerned, well obviously nobody can guarantee that nothing has happened since. During the time of my studies on the Codex I compared KL images with CS at British Library and I didn't record evidences of changes sinces. To be fair, as previously mentioned, the negatives may have been retouched but we do not know that.

    What I can certainly say is that the conservation conditions of CS are absolutely perfect in is current state.
    So the ink corrosion was more likely erasing corrosion!

    As children our erasures always weakened or cut through the paper. Papyrus is tougher, but the principle is the same. And why and when was there an erasure ???
    Last edited by Steven Avery; 06-08-2018 at 01:19 AM.

  2. Default

    Please note the pictures now added.

    Also this post is referenced in another PBF

    Is the ink placed over the yellow ms. or does the ms. yellow naturally after the ink?
    http://www.purebibleforum.com/showth...-after-the-ink

    And this was revisited due to the new compendium post. a WIP, at:

    the collection of conjectural absurdities by textual scholars to "explain" the colour tampering dispartiy
    http://www.purebibleforum.com/showth...=1277#post1277


    Sara Mazzarino has been one of the most helpful CSP project writers in January, 2016 correspondence.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •