(17-07-2026, 07:16 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (17-07-2026, 01:21 PM)Oscroft Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've always had half a mind to try and make some from scratch... just need to find some suitable galls.
It will probably be easier to buy the ingredients from a lab supply store:
Those are the smallest amounts I could buy. They are all quite cheap. I intended to make a YouTube video about it. Maybe one day...
All the best, --stolfi
That's an interesting thought, thanks. It sounds like a more practical approach - and removes the risk of falling out of a tree
(17-07-2026, 08:24 PM)Oscroft Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (17-07-2026, 07:16 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (17-07-2026, 01:21 PM)Oscroft Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've always had half a mind to try and make some from scratch... just need to find some suitable galls.
It will probably be easier to buy the ingredients from a lab supply store:
Those are the smallest amounts I could buy. They are all quite cheap. I intended to make a YouTube video about it. Maybe one day...
All the best, --stolfi
That's an interesting thought, thanks. It sounds like a more practical approach - and removes the risk of falling out of a tree
Except that stuff made with purified lab-grade chemicals may not really match the experience (not in terms of manufacture, but in terms of texture/consistency/etc.) of doing it with something more like what would have been used in the early 15th century. Using fruit pit derived gums as a binder rather than true gum arabic (as was fairly common for cost and availability reasons) probably creates an iron gall ink that behaves somewhat differently.
(18-07-2026, 12:14 AM)kckluge Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Except that stuff made with purified lab-grade chemicals may not really match the experience (not in terms of manufacture, but in terms of texture/consistency/etc.) of doing it with something more like what would have been used in the early 15th century.
Yes, real Medieval "iron-gall" inks may have been arbitrarily worse than the optimum formulation. (Down to not being iron-gall at all -- which I believe is the case of the VMS).
On the other hand, green vitriol as it was collected from some old mines was naturally rather pure, since it was in the form of crystals. And purifying it to something like 98% or more would have been trivial.
According to You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view., depending on the species, the soluble components of oak galls can be 80% tannin, 8% gallic acid, 8% gums. I suppose that the last two explain why the official US standard formula has them: namely, it was supposed to imitate the natural product. From what I know, they should not contribute to the ink's color or resistance.
As for the gum arabic, it should not play any role in the chemistry. So any other inert thickening agent should work just as well.
All the best, --stolfi
(17-07-2026, 01:21 PM)Oscroft Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Just an aside... you can buy a variety of iron gall inks from UK suppliers, some plain black and some with other pigments or dyes added for variety. I have several that I like to use with fountain pens
A note for anyone else considering making ink, as I'd hate my suggestion to lead anyone to ruin their fountain pens... The commercial iron gall inks I have are specifically for fountain pens and contain no binder (like gum arabic). Binder is used in quill/dip pen inks, and those inks should not be used in fountain pens as they can clog. (I expect everyone knows that, but just in case).
(18-07-2026, 06:19 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (18-07-2026, 12:59 AM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Yes, real Medieval "iron-gall" inks may have been arbitrarily worse than the optimum formulation. (Down to not being iron-gall at all -- which I believe is the case of the VMS).
You’re wrong.
No, you are wrong.
The evidence is all over the book, especially on You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and f116v.
And that is one of several wrong assumptions that everybody makes and have turned people away from the solution for the last 100 years.
All the best, --stolfi
[
attachment=16652]
You’re way off the mark there.
See pages You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and 116v. It’s a typical iron gall ink. If it weren’t, you probably wouldn’t be able to see anything at all.
To really understand it, you need to know the whole history of the ink. I’m currently working on that.
There are three types of iron-based inks.
If the VM had been written in a non-iron-based ink, it would look something like this.
This is exactly the kind of abrasion Crowe was looking for, but didn’t find. Not every ink contains soot and gum arabic to make it appear a beautiful black. Once the gum arabic has become brittle with age, the writing crumbles too.
Is that clear?
[
attachment=16655]
Did you know that for 20,000 years, right back to ancient times, the recipe hasn’t really changed at all?
Saliva/water, fruit juice/sugar and charcoal.
When I’ve finished my work, you’ll know exactly what I mean.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
[
attachment=16657]
Here is another example from Duc de Barry.
The ink has already started to wear away. Every time the book is opened and closed, the writing is now being damaged. The mere friction between the pages is destroying the writing.
This does not happen with iron gall ink. Simply because there are no particles that can rub off.
(18-07-2026, 01:31 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You’re way off the mark there.
See pages You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and 116v. It’s a typical iron gall ink. If it weren’t, you probably wouldn’t be able to see anything at all.
To really understand it, you need to know the whole history of the ink. I’m currently working on that.
There are three types of iron-based inks.
If the VM had been written in a non-iron-based ink, it would look something like this.
This is exactly the kind of abrasion Crowe was looking for, but didn’t find. Not every ink contains soot and gum arabic to make it appear a beautiful black. Once the gum arabic has become brittle with age, the writing crumbles too.
Is that clear?
Did you know that for 20,000 years, right back to ancient times, the recipe hasn’t really changed at all?
Saliva/water, fruit juice/sugar and charcoal.
When I’ve finished my work, you’ll know exactly what I mean.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
Stolfi mentions 100 years so forgery there is room for and that means the pages were not turned enough
And that is one of several wrong assumptions that everybody makes and have turned people away from the solution for the last 100 years.
All the best, --stolfi
(18-07-2026, 07:29 PM)conlangyalesbaby Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Stolfi mentions 100 years so forgery there is room for and that means the pages were not turned enough
Maybe... The text on You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. looks rather worn compared to the other pages. They look less worn on the following pages, but then it disappears. It's quite logical that few people were flipping through or reading this book at the time. But I'm not really an expert...
You should also explain the nature and meaning of this forgery. Who was it intended for, at the very least? How was it created?