Posted by Jim Allen on June 28, 1999 at 17:55:39:
In Reply to: Re: Comments on discussion posted by Yon Bard on June 28, 1999 at 16:34:07:
: : A couple of thoughts regading the discussion:
: : 1. Perhaps the session should have been entitled "Who believes that there is scientific evidence for dating Turkoman pieces to the 17th and 18th centuries?" The character of some of the discussion reminded me of people talking about the Shroud of Turin. Nonetheless, it has been interesting to read.
: : 2. Regarding C-14 dating-has there been any testing on rugs of a known age, e.g., 16th century Persian court rugs? I am not aware of this, but would appreciate any information in this direction. I am sure something along these lines as been done and would appreciate any references.
: : 3. It would be of some interest to read people's thoughts on other groups of rugs and bags, e.g. Balouch or South Persian.
: I think Jim Allen has asserted somewhere that the Ardebil carpets were carbon-dated, and the results agreed closely with their known late-16th century date. Jim, if you are reading this, can you confirm?
: Regards, Yon
: Yes. Nobiku had worked on the Ardebil before it became the Gettys'. She had some threads from the foundation. In fact I have threads from all the rugs tested by Jull in our run in glassine envelops. The Ardebil tested to a mean date in the range of the inscription. This is not the rug which is in the V and A Museum in London mind you. We were mightly impressed by this performance. I have the rough data and Craig has the actual curves from all those samples. I personally would love to see the German accelerator do those same samples. JIM
Post a Followup