Image URL:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/45750157414/in/album-72157704898717615/
Table of Contents
Dark red text has been formatted as certain heading types. To ensure the table of contents is rendered correctly, make sure any edits to these fields does not change their heading type. [Olson - Annotation Field Notes FA18 - Wax for Seal and Imprint] |
Name: Nancy Olson and Sophie Pitman
Date and Time:
Location: Columbia University, Chandler 260 lab
Subject: Preparation for “Wax for Seal and Imprint” (f 42r) reconstruction
The first stage in the reconstruction required converting chunks of beeswax that I acquired from Andrews Honey, a vendor at the Union Square Greenmarket, into a form that could be manipulated, as described in the manuscript, by melting it.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/45750157414/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
Prepared work station with all required tools and equipment.
Placed the wax chunks in a clean coffee can. Checked the temperature of the unprocessed wax: 22.9° C (73.22° F). Weighed the unprocessed wax:
Total weight of coffee can plus wax = 275.3 g.
Weight of empty coffee can = 83.7 g.
Approximate weight of wax = 191.6 g.
Heated the hot plate to Mark 1. This was a lower setting than I had originally planned to use, but it quickly became clear that, because of the irregular shape of the chunks of wax, it would take quite a while for all of the wax to melt and that, at a higher setting, I ran the risk that the melted wax at the bottom of the can would turn brown while I was waiting for the largest chunk to melt. Beeswax will melt at temperatures of 62° to 65° C (144° to 147° F), but it will begin to discolor at 85° C (185° F). By 9:35, the melted wax on the bottom of the can had already reached a temperature of 62.2° C. I periodically tested the temperature of the melted wax in an effort to ensure that it would not discolor, but it was difficult to know whether the infrared thermometer was reading the temperature of the melted wax or of the metal coffee can enclosing the wax.
It was impossible to “stir” the wax in the coffee can because of the largest chunk, but I poked and prodded at the smaller chunks with a pair of chopsticks. As the temperature of the wax rose and it became more pliable, I was able to use one chopstick to pare away pieces of the smaller chunks so that more of their surface area was exposed to the hotter melted wax. Eventually, I was able to apply the same technique to the largest chunk, but forcing more of it down into the coffee can resulted in a significant drop in the temperature of the melted wax.
The wax had melted completely by 10:00 am. I poured approximately half of the wax into a disposable aluminum foil loaf pan lined with waxed paper to make it easier to remove the wax for the next stage of the reconstruction. I left the remainder of the melted wax in the coffee can. I left both containers to cool in a secure location on the lab countertop.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/32601130598/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
Name: Nancy Olson and Sophie Pitman
Date and Time:
Location: Columbia University, Chandler 260 lab
Subject: Molding a “large wax seal” using the method described in the manuscript
Prepared work station with all required tools and equipment.
It was my intention to use the wax in the foil loaf pan for this part of the reconstruction.
Before beginning work, I weighed the wax that I removed from the foil pan and the wax stored in the coffee can. The weight of wax that had been in the foil pan was approximately 55 g., whereas the net weight of the wax in the coffee can was approximately 135 g. Apparently, I didn’t do a very good job of dividing the melted wax equally between the foil pan and the coffee can!
I had decided to use the circular cookie mold available in the lab as the seal matrix. In preparation for molding the wax, I painted the interior surface of the mold with a thin coat of linseed oil.
In preparation for tempering the wax (i.e., if the heat of my hands was not sufficient to make the wax malleable), I filled a metal pot with water and placed it on the hot plate set at Mark 1. I then turned to other preparatory steps, but monitored the temperature of the water in the pot to make sure that it did not exceed my target range of 40.55° to 43.33° C (between 105° and 110° F). It was my assumption that, if the water was too hot, the wax would simply melt, so I had to keep the temperature of the water well below the wax’s melting point of between 62° and 65° C.
Almost immediately, it became clear that the temperature of the water was rising too quickly. I removed the pot from the hot plate and added tap water in small increments. Once the temperature of the water fell to about 45° C, I returned the pot to the hot plate, but because the heating element was still quite hot, I turned the hot plate off.
Several small fragments of wax paper adhered to the wax that had been stored in the wax-paper-lined loaf pan. I was able to coax them off by prodding with a toothpick.
Once the wax appeared to be free of debris, I started trying to knead it by hand. This proved difficult: although the wax was relatively pliable around the edges where it was thinner and although it could be bent in half, it was not what I would consider “malleable.” After about 5 minutes, I tried kneading it on a sheet of newsprint on the countertop, using my knuckles and the heel of my hand. That technique was not any more successful, and it resulted in bits of newsprint sticking to the bottom surface of the wax. I removed the bits of paper, and tried again to knead the wax on the countertop, but this time on a sheet of wax paper. (The temperature of the countertop must have been below room-temperature, so that probably was not helping to raise the temperature of the wax.)
After working on the wax for approximately 10 to 15 minutes using only my hands to raise its temperature to the point where it became pliable, I concluded that it would be necessary to immerse the wax in the pot of tepid water to achieve the requisite consistency.
Of course, by this point, the temperature of the water in the pot had fallen, and it needed to be reheated. I placed the wax in the pot of tepid water and left it for approximately 3 minutes. When I removed the wax from the water, I dried it off with a cloth napkin (unfortunately, not particularly absorbent).
I immediately began trying to knead the wax again by hand. At first, the wax was still quite hard to manipulate, but after a few minutes, it started to soften. I continued to knead it for 3 to 5 minutes, shaping it roughly into a disk.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/31533825037/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
When the wax seemed ready to be imprinted, I placed it on a sheet of newsprint on the countertop. Centering the cookie mold over the wax disk, I pressed down as hard as I could using my hand. I then used a hammer to increase the force with which I could press the matrix down, hammering first on top of the wooden handle and then around the underside of the metal cookie mold.
The manuscript instruction that follows the making an imprint on the wax is “ . . . [you will] put three or four pieces of paper on [top of it] and, with a stick, even and round like a pestle, you will roll it as if you wanted to polish it. . .” My interpretation of these instructions was that the purpose of the “polishing” action was to push the wax into the mold, to ensure that the wax found its way into all the nooks and crannies of the matrix, without the artisan having to rely on exerting pressure from above to accomplish this.
In order to carry out the instructions to “polish” the wax using a pestle, I needed to invert the matrix so that its open face would be facing upward. The presence of the wooden handle affixed to the bottom of the mold forced me to devise a solution that would allow the matrix to be balanced in the inverted position, while accommodating the protruding handle. I fitted a sturdy cardboard tube, slightly longer than the handle, over the handle and then placed the seal matrix-wax unit in the “sandbox” that is kept in the SE fume hood. The cardboard tube, with a diameter of 1 ½” and embedded at least 1 ½” into the sand, provided ample support and stability for the seal matrix-wax unit.
I placed 2 small sheets of newsprint on top of the wax as the recipe instructs and to prevent the pestle from becoming contaminated by the wax. I then moved the pestle over the paper covering the wax, sometimes just pressing the pestle down, sometimes forcing it forward in a plowing motion. As I did so, the sheets of newsprint began to take on the shape of the underlying wax, and I could see, somewhat indistinctly, how the shape of the wax responded to the pressure of the pestle.
When I was confident that the wax had conformed to the shape of the seal matrix, I eased the wax out of the seal matrix by pulling gently on the sheets of paper. The recipe says, “ . . . the paper . . . will help you lift it off the mold,” and it also says that the wax “ . . . will attach itself to the paper. Small bits of the newsprint paper had adhered to the bottom of the wax; I did not attempt to remove them for fear of damaging the impression left by the seal matrix.
The following photograph shows that the the wax generally conformed to the shape of the matrix, but it did not penetrate to the outer rim of some of the “petals.” This was probably because the upper surface of the wax disk, onto which the cookie mold was pressed, was not perfectly flat and was higher in the middle than around the edges. Consequently, the outer edges of some of the “petals” taper off or appear depressed relative to the forms at the center of the mold.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46473623241/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
If I were to do this reconstruction again, I would:
Name: Nancy Olson and Tianna Uchacz
Date and Time:
Location: Columbia University, Chandler 260 lab
Subject: Molding a “large wax seal” using molten wax for the purpose of testing whether a seal produced using the method described in the manuscript was superior to a seal produced using molten wax
Prepared work station with all required tools and equipment.
It was my intention to use the wax in the coffee can for this part of the reconstruction.
Before beginning work, I confirmed that the weight of the wax in the coffee can was approximately 135 g. The temperature of the wax before beginning was 23.05° C (73.5° F).
To prepare the cookie mold seal matrix to receive molten wax in an inverted position, I slipped the ring portion of a large Ball jar lid over the wooden handle of the mold so that the vertical sides of the ring formed a rim around the mold, making the mold deeper than it would otherwise have been. I secured the lid ring to the mold in this position using masking tape. I painted the interior surface of the cookie mold and the exposed portions of the lid ring with a thin coat of linseed oil. Because the linseed oil appeared to be pooling in the deeper sections of the cookie mold, I swabbed out the excess oil using a Q-tip.
Once the cookie mold matrix was prepared, I placed it in the “sandbox” in the SE fume hood, again using a section of thick cardboard tube to stabilize the matrix in an inverted position.
I then turned my attention to melting the beeswax in the coffee can.
The melting process began at approximately 4:40 pm. Having started with the hot plate set at Mark 1, I decided to increase the temperature to Mark 2, but initially, I held the coffee can elevated above the hot plate surface so that the melting wax would not scorch. Gradually the disk of wax that had solidified in the bottom of the coffee can began to melt, so much so that a disk of solidified wax began to float on a layer of melted wax. I stirred the solidified wax continuously with a chopstick to ensure that the melted wax would not become too hot and darken in color. By 4:55 pm, the wax was completely melted and ready for pouring.
I poured the wax from the coffee can into the matrix, moving the can around in an effort to spread the wax evenly throughout the cookie mold and trying not to have over-flow in the surrounding lid ring. The wax began to cool almost immediately, turning whiter as it did so. As the wax cooled, it became clear that the wax had not flowed evenly in all places; in particular, there were areas where the wax covered the rim of the mold, and areas where it did not. In an effort to remedy this, I returned to the hot plate to melt the bits of solidified wax that had formed in the coffee can and then poured a second layer of wax over areas that were uncovered or sparsely covered. This time, I allowed more wax to flow into the lid ring but did not fill it completely. Despite this second pouring, the surface of the wax in the mold was still uneven.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/31533819197/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
I had intended to remove the wax from the mold as soon as the surface was cool enough to handle, but I realized that the interior of the form might still be quite soft and that handling it might cause the wax to deform. To prevent this, I inverted the wax-matrix unit on a piece of aluminum foil and left it to cool completely. A comparison between the two seals was, therefore, delayed until next week.
If I were to repeat this portion of the reconstruction, I would:
Note to self: Today I came without the list of “tools and equipment” that I had had on the previous day, and I had to reconstruct the list mentally as I was preparing. Inevitably, there were things that I forgot until I needed to use them. This experience made clear the importance of drawing up such a list in advance and using it to set up the work station: it takes time to prepare, but in the end, it saves time!
Name: Nancy Olson
Date and Time:
Location: Columbia University, Chandler 260 lab
Subject: Unmolding a “large wax seal” made using molten wax
It was a bit more difficult to unmold the second “large wax seal” than I had anticipated.
After I removed the masking tape that I had used to secure the lid ring to the cookie mold, I realized that some of the molten wax had run under the flange of the lid ring and had cemented the cookie mold and the lid ring to each other. I used toothpicks to scrape away the excess wax and then to try to pry the two pieces of metal apart.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46473612761/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
| |
But even after the lid ring was removed from the seal matrix, an overhanging lip of wax prevented the cookie mold from separating cleanly from the wax. Using the heat of my fingers, I gently pushed the excess wax up and away from the cookie mold until I was able to remove the cookie mold.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46473610771/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
| |
Like the impression made by pressing the matrix into gently heated wax, the impression made by pouring molten wax into the matrix was not perfect: in certain of the “petals,” the molten wax had not spread evenly, and the outer border had several glaring gaps!
Name: Nancy Olson and Sophie Pitman
Date and Time:
Location: Columbia University, Chandler 260 lab
Subject: Preparation of “hard wax for imprinting seals” following fol. 133r_1 recipe
I had anticipated that this lab would be devoted to preparing “hard wax” to be used to imprint documentary seals. But in light of the discussion in class on 12/3/2018, during which it was suggested that the “hard wax” referred to in fol. 133r_1 might refer to types of seals other than documentary seals, I revised my protocol for this portion of the reconstruction. The revised protocol calls for preparing wax using the fol. 133r_1 recipe, testing that wax for increased “hardness,” testing that wax as a medium for documentary seals, adding color (preferably a dark red pigment) to one or two new samples, testing the colored samples as a medium for documentary seals, and finally impressing the colored samples according to the instructions provided in fol. 42r_2.
Because the fol. 133r_1 recipe requires adding lead white to the wax “until it becomes as hard as you fancy,” today’s reconstruction involved working with the hot plate in the confines of a fume hood. Because the recipe also requires adding “a drop of turpentine to bind it,” today’s work also involved working in a second fume hood where there was no heat source because of the flammability of turpentine. Please forgive the jumping back and forth between multiple locations!
In addition, because fol. 133r_1 starts with “white wax,” I had originally intended to execute this reconstruction two times, first using raw beeswax (as a material more authentic to the late sixteenth century), and then using pellets of modern “white” filtered beeswax. But the process of melting the raw beeswax was particularly time-consuming, and I decided to do trials using only raw beeswax. As soon as I started the first trial, in which I added lead white to the molten beeswax, it became clear that adding the white pigment would, in and of itself, impart a creamy white color to the material.
Prepared work station with all required tools and equipment. The lead white that I would be using was Kremer cremnitz white, basic lead carbonate (2 PbCO3Pb(OH)2).
I still had solidified raw beeswax in the original coffee can:
Total weight of coffee can plus wax = 180.6 g.
Weight of empty coffee can = 83.7 g.
Approximate weight of wax in can = 96.9 g.
The weight of the new raw beeswax was 232.0 g. Thus, the total weight of wax was:
Approximate weight of wax in can = 96.9 g.
Weight of new raw beeswax = 232.0 g.
Total weight of beeswax = 328.9 g.
To avoid having to move a heated hot plate from a countertop to the fume hood, I began today’s reconstruction in the confines of the SW fume hood.
Placed the chunks of new raw beeswax in the coffee can with the solidified beeswax. Heated the hot plate to Mark 1, and placed the coffee can on the hot plate. As was the case on 11/27/2018 and 11/28/2018, the new wax took much longer to melt than the wax that had been melted before; it was almost an hour before the new wax and the old were completely melted.
The fol. 133r_1 recipe provides no guidance with respect to the proportion of lead white to be added to the melted wax, although it does indicate that “a drop of turpentine” should be added to “bind” the mixture. It seemed clear that the lead white was the more important of the two ingredients to be added, but with no guidance as to quantity, I decided to do three trials. Each would require adding a small amount of lead white and a “drop” of larch turpentine to the molten wax, but after the first two trials, a portion of the wax-lead white mixture would be removed so that the proportion of lead white in the mixture would increase with each successive trial.
Before beginning the trials with lead white, I removed the following quantities from the melted beeswax to serve as controls:
For the first trial, I added approximately 7 g. of lead white to the melted wax, stirring vigorously with a chopstick to blend. It took approximately 10 minutes of stirring for the lead white to be incorporated thoroughly. The mixture was definitely more milky after the addition of the lead white, but it also seemed less viscous, more runny.
I then moved to the NE fume hood where was no heat source and added a “drop” of larch turpentine to the mixture. Initially, I tried to use a glass dropper to add the turpentine, but it was extremely sticky, and it was impossible to expel the turpentine from the dropper using air pressure from the dropper bulb alone. Eventually, I resorted to coaxing off a drop of turpentine that appeared to be dangling from the end of the dropper using a clean chopstick. The turpentine seemed to be incorporated almost immediately into the wax-lead white mixture; the chopstick used for “coaxing” and stirring the turpentine emerged from the mixture with no evidence of the sticky turpentine residue.
Before beginning the second trial, I removed the following quantities of the beeswax-lead white mixture (Trial 1 mixture with the lowest proportion of lead white):
Based on the weight of the wax remaining in the coffee can before the second trial, I estimate that only about 50 g. of wax-lead white mixture was actually poured into the Trial 1 loaf pan. Based on the weight of the wax remaining in the can, the mass fraction of lead white in the Trial 1 mixture is slightly more than 2% (7 g. lead white ÷ 326 g. beeswax).
For the second trial, I again added approximately 7 g. of lead white to the melted wax-lead white mixture. It took approximately 10 minutes of stirring for the lead white to be incorporated thoroughly. The mixture was slightly more milky than after the first trial addition of lead white. (This was more evident from the color of the cooled test sample than from the color of the molten wax in the coffee can.)
Once again, I then moved to the NE fume hood to add a “drop” of larch turpentine to the mixture, and had much the same experience as I had during the first trial.
Before beginning the third trial, I removed the following quantities of the beeswax-lead white mixture (Trial 2 mixture with a moderate proportion of lead white):
Based on the weight of the wax remaining in the coffee can before the third trial, I estimate that about only about 73 g. of wax-lead white mixture was poured into the Trial 2 loaf pan. Based on the weight of the wax remaining in the can, the mass fraction of lead white in the Trial 2 mixture is slightly less than 5%.
For the third trial, I added approximately 5 g. of lead white to the melted wax-lead white mixture. It took less stirring time for the lead white to be incorporated thoroughly. The mixture took on a creamy color rather than the milky white color evident after the second trial addition of lead white. (Again, this was more evident from the color of the cooled test sample than from the color of the molten wax in the coffee can.)
Again, in the NE fume hood, I added a “drop” of larch turpentine to the mixture, and had much the same experience as I had had during the first and second trials.
After the third trial, I removed the following quantities of the beeswax-lead white mixture (Trial 3 mixture with the highest proportion of lead white):
The majority of the wax-lead white mixture was left in the coffee can. This wax may be used in the next stage of the reconstruction as the base to which pigment will be added. The tare weight of the wax-lead white mixture remaining in the can was 179 g. Based on this weight, I estimate that the mass fraction of lead white in the Trial 3 mixture is slightly more than 7%.
The tests of attempting to imprint spooned-off samples of plain beeswax and wax-lead white mixtures using a small seal device were not very helpful. The first test, using plain beeswax, produced clear imprints of the seal device in the still-soft wax.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46473714611/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
The subsequent tests involving wax-lead white mixtures sometimes produced clear imprints, but more often, they produced blurred imprints or indistinguishable smears, especially when a piece of ribbon was layered between two globs of wax mixture.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46422830942/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
| |
It became apparent that wax had become lodged in the engraved design on the face of the seal device and that that was causing part of the problem. Even after attempts had been made to clean the wax out of the design, the imprinting was not very successful.
Name: Nancy Olson, Tianna Uchacz, and Sophie Pitman
Date and Time:
Location: Columbia University, Chandler 260 lab
Subject: Addition of pigment to “hard wax for imprinting seals” made based on fol. 133r_1 recipe
Prepared work station with all required tools and equipment. Because I would be working with the wax-lead white mixture, I set up the hot plate in the confines of the SW fume hood.
I started by comparing the malleability of the plain beeswax sample made on December 6, 2018, with the malleability of the Trial 1, Trial 2, and Trial 3 samples made on the same date. The plain beeswax was definitely the most malleable of the four. The Trial 1 and Trial 2 samples were marginally less malleable. There was a noticeable difference between the plain beeswax and the Trial 3 sample; initially, the Trial 3 sample could still be manipulated, but it offered a bit more resistance to attempts to fold it, and eventually it snapped in half.
Because the objective of the fol. 133r_1 recipe seems to be to add “hardness” to the wax (and I equated snapping in half with increased “hardness”), I decided to proceed with the Trial 3 wax-lead white mixture.
Fol. 133r_1 provides no suggestions regarding what pigment to use or in what quantity; it says, “Next mix in whatever color you want.” Some guidance can be found elsewhere in the manuscript: the recipe for black sulfured wax to be used for casting small animals (fol. 139v_1) suggests using “a half quantity” of ground charcoal to the wax to give it color, meaning to add half as much charcoal by weight as wax. (This recipe was reconstructed by Charles Kang in Fall 2016. See “Black Sulfured Wax” annotation.)
Although I have had no experience in mixing powdered pigments with any sort of medium, a 2:1 ratio of wax to pigment seemed out of proportion.
Quite different guidance was provided by T.W. Cowan, a late-nineteenth/early-twentieth-century expert on bees and beekeeping. In one of his volumes, Wax Craft: All About Beeswax, Its History, Production, Adulteration, and Commercial Value (1908), Cowan offered numerous recipes for adding color to wax. For red pigments, he suggested the following (p. 120):
The mass fraction implied by the proportions given in the black sulfured wax recipe is 33%. In light of the striking difference between the proportion given in the author-practitioner’s recipe and those given in Cowan’s recipes, it seemed worthwhile to make two trials, one using a 2:1 ratio (Sample A) and a second using a 100:6 ratio (Sample B).
The tare weight of the Trial 3 mixture remaining in the coffee can was 179 g. This suggested that I should melt the Trial 3 mixture and then divide it into two parts, each weighing roughly 90g. Thus, I would need 45 g. of pigment to make Sample A and 5.4 g. of pigment to make Sample B, or a total of 50.4 g. of pigment.
The pigment issue was further complicated by what was available in the lab. Knowing that the black sulfured wax proportion would require a significant amount of pigment, I had originally planned to use Kremer Iron Oxide Red, Natural (Fe2O3), of which there was a large supply on hand. All of the pigments suggested by Cowan were organic rather than metal-based, but of the three, only dragon’s blood was available in the lab, and it was in pieces that would require grinding before it could be used. In order to produce enough dragon’s blood powder, it would be necessary to use up almost the entire amount on hand of what is a relatively expensive pigment ($43.00 for a 100 g. bag). In view of the time delay that grinding the pigment would entail, I decided to continue with my original choice of Iron Oxide Red.
I began melting the Trial 3 wax-lead white mixture at 10:30 am with the hot plate set at Mark 1. The melting process stalled when I was not actively stirring the mixture, so I raised the temperature of the hot plate to Mark 2. The melting was completed at 10:52 am, but the surface of the mixture solidified while decisions were made with respect to the quantities of pigment to be added and which pigment to use. Because only the top surface had solidified, the mixture was completely melted again by 11:35 am.
I poured approximately 90 g. of the wax-lead white mixture into a second clean coffee can to be used for the Sample A trial, leaving approximately 90 g. in the original coffee can to be used for the Sample B trial.
I started with the Sample B trial. I added 5.4 g. of Kremer Iron Oxide Red to the wax-lead white mixture, stirring continuously with a chopstick. When the pigment was fully incorporated, I spooned off the following amounts:
I poured the balance of the mixture into a small foil loaf pan lined with waxed paper. The wax mixture was originally as dark as the Iron Oxide Red powder, but as it began to solidify, the surface took on a milky patina.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46422849022/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
For the Sample A trial, I added 45 g. of Kremer Iron Oxide Red to the wax-lead white mixture in the second coffee can, stirring continuously with a chopstick. When the pigment was fully incorporated, I spooned off the following amounts:
I poured the balance of the mixture into a small foil loaf pan lined with waxed paper. This mixture was somewhat darker than the Sample B wax mixture, and it remained dark as it solidified.
Attempts to imprint spooned-off samples of pigmented wax mixtures using a small seal device were no more successful than the earlier attempts to imprint wax-lead white mixtures. What happened on several trials was that the still-molten wax erupted around the edges of the seal device. This suggested that if the wax was too liquid when downward pressure was exerted on the seal device, it would flow sideways, out of the path of the pressure from above. Alternatively it might suggest that, if the surface of wax had already partially solidified but the interior of the mass was still liquified when the seal device was applied, the still-liquid portion of the wax would push in all directions in which it did not encounter an irresistable force; thus, the liquid wax would push up and to the sides, disrupting the partially solidified surface.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46473715501/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
| |
The fact that the wax kept getting stuck in the engraved design on the face of the seal device also suggested that it might be advisable to coat the face of the device with some type of oil to prevent the wax from adhering to the cold metal. An alternative approach might involve heating the seal device slightly, so that the metal of the device did not cause the wax to solidfy immediately on contact.
The lesson of these tests seemed to be that perhaps the author-practitioner was right: perhaps imprinting on warm wax was better than imprinting on molten wax. At the very least, these results demonstrated that affixing a seal to a document requires some level of skill and a knowledge of how the materials are likely to interact based on temperature.
Name: Nancy Olson, Tianna Uchacz, and Sophie Pitman
Date and Time:
Location: Columbia University, Chandler 260 lab
Subject: Attempt to imprint “hard wax for imprinting seals” made based on fol. 133r_1 recipe
The purpose of today’s work was to repeat the reconstruction attempted on November 28th, but this time using one of the pigmented wax samples.
Prepared work station with all required tools and equipment. Because I would be working with the wax-lead white-pigment mixtures, I set up the hot plate in the confines of the SE fume hood.
Sample B (lower pigment ratio) mixture weighed 73.9 g. Began trying to knead Sample B at 11:05 am; it was noticeably harder than any of the other samples, and within a few minutes it broke into two pieces. The broken surface revealed flecks of white in the interior, suggesting that the lead white had never been fully incorporated into the mixture.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/45560712295/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
| |
Because the Sample B wax broke so quickly, I anticipated that the Sample A (high pigment ratio) mixture would be even less malleable. On the basis of this experience, I concluded that Sample B was a better candidate for imprinting while warm than Sample A.
I heated a pot of water on the hot plate in the confines of the fume hood. When I immersed the Sample B wax in the water, the water temperature registered 106° F, but the temperature quickly rose. To prevent the water from becoming so hot that the wax mixture melted, I added tap water in small increments to bring the temperature down.
I left the wax in the pot of water and left it for approximately 3 minutes. When I removed the wax from the water and dried it off, I immediately began trying to knead the wax again by hand. After a few minutes, it started to soften. I continued to knead it for 3 to 5 minutes, shaping it roughly into a disk.
When the wax seemed ready to be imprinted, I placed it on a sheet of newsprint on the countertop. Centering the cookie mold over the wax disk, I pressed down as hard as I could using my hand. I then used a hammer to increase the force with which I could press the matrix down.
I then tried to replicate the process of “polishing” the wax using a pestle. I fitted a cardboard tube over the cookie mold matrix handle and then placed the seal matrix-wax unit in the “sandbox” that is kept in the SE fume hood. This time, the support provided by the cardboard tube was not as good as it had been for the November 28th reconstruction, and I had to steady the seal matrix-wax unit using my left hand while I “polished” the wax using the pestle held in my right hand.
When I was fairly confident that the wax had conformed to the shape of the seal matrix, I removed the wax from matrix, but the impression was less than half as deep as the impression in the raw beeswax. To get a better impression, I returned the marginally printed wax disk to th3 pot of warm water for several minutes. After the second attempt, the impression in the pigmented Sample B wax as equal in depth to the impression in the raw beeswax, with the pigmented wax generally conforming to the shape of the matrix.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/45560695345/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
| |
NB: This photograph was taken several days later after a further reconstruction experiment, but it allows a comparison between the imprint taken by the raw beeswax and the imprint taken by the pigmented wax.
The fact that the Sample B pigmented wax had to be warmed in the tepid water for a longer period of time was perhaps due to the higher density of the material; taking into account both the lead white and the iron oxide added to the wax, I estimate that roughly 10% of Sample B by volume was composed on powdered metallic compounds.
I then turned my attention to the Sample A (high pigment ratio) mixture. It weighed 108.1 g; before being manipulated or heated in water, its temperature was 84.7° F. When I tried to manipulate it, it broke in half almost immediately.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/45560707395/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
Interestingly, the internal structure of Sample A appeared to be quite different from Sample B. In addition, the lead white appeared to have been more fully integrated into Sample A, perpahps because it took more time to incorporate the larger quantity of pigment into Sample A.
I immersed Sample A in the pot of tepid water for approximately 3 minutes, after which it was no more malleable than it had been at room temperature.
Name: Nancy Olson, Tillmann Taape, and Naomi Rosenkranz
Date and Time:
Location: Columbia University, Chandler 260 lab
Subject: Attempt to model raw beeswax and “hard wax for imprinting seals” made based on fol. 133r_1 recipe
At the end of the fol. 42r_2 recipe, the author-practioner suggests “carving the figures” that have been imprinted using a large wax seal. At the end of the fol. 133r_1 recipe, he says that the wax prepared according to the fol. 133r recipe is “the wax goldsmiths use for modeling.” Thus, this reconstruction is an attempt to test how easily both raw beewax and the wax-lead white-pigment mixture prepared according to the fol. 133r recipe respond to being modeled with the kinds of tools used to model clay.
To test the raw beeswax, I used the seal prepared by pouring molten wax into the cookie mold matrix. I started by trimming away the rim of excess wax that had formed when the molten wax overflowed the matrix. I used a short, flat blade. It proved more difficult to remove this excess than I had anticipated, perhaps because the wax wax quite thick and quite sticky. Once the excess had been removed, however, the wax responded readily to being modeled by a tool with a squared-off loop which I used to clean up and bevel the trimmed edges. I then used a tool with a small oval loop to incise an outline on three of the imprinted “petals” and to remove the center of the outlined area on one of these.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46473718551/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
| |
Although the photograph is not very good, it shows (vaguely!) the incised lines near the top of the image. They are hard to see in the photograph, and they were equally difficult to see while I was working.
I then turned to trying to model the pigmented wax samples. Expecting the harder wax to offer more resistance, I started experimenting on the block of Sample A wax with mixed results. I tried using the squared-off loop to trim the edges but found that I had little control over the tool on those surfaces. I had better results using the oval loop to incise the top surface of the block, but when I tried to used a wood-carving tool, which required that I push it away from me rather than pull it toward me, I again found that the tool didn’t lend itself to working with the medium.
Image URL: | https://www.flickr.com/photos/128418753@N06/46473717081/in/album-72157704898717615/ |
| |
The two diagonal lines on the left were made using the oval modeling tool; the two on the right were made using the wood-carving tool.
Finally, I tried to model the “large wax seal” made from the Sample B wax. As with the raw beeswax seal, I used the small oval loop to incise lines in three of the “petals” of the seal. (See image in field notes for December 10th.) True to the author-practitioner’s prediction, the addition of color made the texture added by the modeling tools much more visible.
As a final test, I tried to imprint the small fleur-de-lis seal device at the edge of the Sample B wax disk. I had done nothing to raise the temperature of the wax, but even so, the seal device left two fairly clear impressions. (These can also be seen in the image accompanying the December 10th field notes.)
