Release of the Radiocarbon Report & Link

[ReneZ]

When I have more time, tomorrow, I can show an example of such a case, and the rather horrible date estimate that may result from it.

This is from the paper: "RADIOCARBON DATING OF HISTORICAL PARCHMENTS" by Fiona Brock,
© 2013 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona
Proceedings of the 21st International Radiocarbon Conference edited by A J T Jull & C Hatté
RADIOCARBON, Vol 55, Nr 2–3, 2013, p 353–363


I found it online, and who is interested in this may also be able to find it.

It includes (among many other things) a result for a manuscript referred to as "P1" that is a few decades later than the Voynich MS. One sample was taken, and it was preprocessed in two different ways.

The two results are:
"Mild ABA":      14C age (BP):    436 ± 26
"Strong ABA": 14C age (BP):    416 ± 27

The probability distribution for calibrated dates is:

   

This shows a completely different result from the Voynich MS, with a distribution covering almost a full century, and in one case an additional "blip" after 1600.
Fortunately (for me), the Excel file hat I used to replicate the results of the Voynich MS R.C. report also produces similar results for this case:

   

However, my tool does not extend into post 1550, so it misses this extra "blip".

Several interesting things may be seen:

The uncalibrated central dates differ by 20 years, but the peaks of the calibrated date distributions are only 5 years apart.

The two results are well within each other's 1-sigma uncertainty, so they are equivalent.

This last bit may be hard to accept for people who are not familiar with this type of statistics.