Anal. Chem. 2004, 76, 2674
Correspondence
On the Absence of Evidence That the Vinland Map Is Medieval Michael Henchman*
Department of Chemistry, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts 02454-9110
The article, Evidence That the Vinland Map Is Medieval (Anal. Chem. 2003, 75, 6745-6747), is constructed with conjecture and with false logic. It imagines that the ink of the Vinland Map is an iron-gall ink where conclusive evidence shows the ink to be not an iron-gall ink but a carbon-based ink. It asserts that the ink was homogeneous where conclusive evidence shows that it is not. Twenty-nine years ago, the Vinland Map was shown incontrovertibly to be modern. That conclusion stands today. The publication of the article, Evidence That the Vinland Map Is Medieval, in the December 1 issue of Analytical Chemistry1 has consequences that extend above and beyond the matter of the Vinland Map. In just one day this article triggered, throughout the world, over 100 newspaper articles, and television and radio reports.2 Two major TV productions are scheduled to be shown in the U.K. and United States later this year. In every case, science is discredited because of the seeming inability of scientists, after 40 years of effort, to solve a scientific problem. Is it any wonder that science, scientific argument, and scientists are held in decreasing public esteem?3 The status of the Vinland Map is, and has been for the past 30 years, as follows. In 1974, Walter and Lucy McCrone demonstrated the Vinland Map to be a fake.4 Nothing since has altered that finding. The McCrones found the ink on the map to contain synthetic anatase in a distinctive crystalline form and colored with a yellow impurity. Synthetic anatase in this form first became available around 1920. Since that time, various institutions, organizations, and individuals, each with their own agenda, have sought and failed to challenge the McCrones’ findings. * E-mail:
[email protected]. (1) Olin, J. S. Anal. Chem. 2003, 75 (23), 6745-6747. (2) As shown by a Google search. Headlines spanned the globe, from “Vindication for Vinland Map” (Germany) to “Medieval map is real” (South Africa). (3) Gross, P. R., Levitt, N., Lewis, M. W., Eds. The Flight from Science and Reason; New York Academy of Sciences, New York; Distributor John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, 1997. (4) McCrone, W. C.; McCrone, L. B. Geogr. J. 1974, 140, 212-214. (5) Baynes-Cope, A. D. Geogr. J. 1974, 140, 208-211. (6) Brown, K. L.; Clark, R. J. H. Anal. Chem. 2002, 74 (15), 3658-3661. (7) McCrone, W. C. Chemical Analytical Study of the Vinland Map; Report to Yale University: New Haven, CT, 1974. (8) McCrone, W. C. Anal. Chem. 1988, 60 (10), 1009-1018. (9) Ambers, J.; Bowman, S. Radiocarbon 2002, 44 (2), 599.
2674 Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 76, No. 9, May 1, 2004
Olin’s article consists of conjecture. Conjecture does not belong in ACS journals (as two of the reviewers of this article stressed). Olin’s conjecture is not supported by the evidence. (i) Olin conjectures that the ink of the Vinland Map is an irongall ink. At the first scientific examination of the map 37 years ago, Baynes-Cope showed that the ink was not an iron-gall ink.5 Brown and Clark have identified the ink as a carbon-based ink.6 (ii) Olin’s hypothesis requires the ink to be homogeneous. The McCrones showed, 29 years ago, that the ink consists of two separate layerssa broad yellow underlayer and, on top of it, a thinner black line.4,7,8 Throughout, Olin deceives with false logic. Here, with my emphasis, are three instances from the Introduction: (i) Did a forger use a parchment ... that ... was blank in the fifteenth century? It is this possibility that disallows using the date of the parchment as conclusive proof that the map is authentic. Dating the parchment to 1434 AD admits one, and only one, logical conclusionsthat the map could not have been made before 1434 AD. That apart, no relations of logical necessity link the dates of the map and the parchment (and the binding). Olin deceives herself, and others, by implying that there are,9 as evidenced further below. (ii) Thus. the map and the paper of the document, with which it is bound, both date to the mid-fifteenth century. (iii) The fifteenth century binding ... has provided further evidence for the origin of the map. The business of science requires reviewers and editors to distinguish fact from fancy, truth from falsehood, argument from conjecture, science from belief. These considerations guided my recommendation that the article be not published. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Publication of this article is supported by the project “New Internet Exhibits to Bridge Science and Art, and Increase Cultural Literacy”, supported by the U. S. Department of EducationsFunds for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education, Grant P116A011454.
Received for review December 30, 2003. Accepted March 5, 2004. AC030423U 10.1021/ac030423u CCC: $27.50
© 2004 American Chemical Society Published on Web 03/26/2004
