Was the paint added later? And is the artist also the scribe?

[sivbugge]

I observe areas where the green paint bleeds into the outlines of the plant, which I find very significant.

Indeed, the interaction between ink and paint is a very important detail.  But I don't think your conclusion that they were contemporary is certain.

Take for instance this clip from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (Beinecke 2014 scan, 2x):



There are some places, like (A) where the paint seems attracted to the inked outline, as you point out. But that does not imply that the ink was fresh.  It could be that the ink, even when dry, was a bit more wettable (hydrophilic) than the bare vellum.  

More interestingly, there are also places like (J,K,L) where the paint completely washed away the ink.  But that did not happen everywhere the paint was applied over the ink.  In some places, like (M), the ink does not seem to have been affected by the brushed-over paint, at all.

So, my preferred interpretation is that the paint was applied when the ink was already dry, but the ink was not waterproof and did not "bite" into the vellum.  Thus, when the inked outline was over-painted with a quick stroke of a relatively dry brush, it just stayed put.  But when a stroke of wet paint stood over it for many seconds, the ink became soft again, and a second brush stroke would wipe it away completely. 

All the best, --stolfi

Thank you for your reflections Stolfi! 
I agree with you regarding f11r. There is no evidence in 11r that the colouring was applied while the ink was still wet. 

However, in 11r we do not see the kind of bleeding that appears in 65r and 65v. So far, I have only found this specific type of bleeding in those two folios (although I haven´t systematically examined the entire manuscript for this phenomenon). 

Perhaps the word "bleeding" is too broad and doesn't clearly describe what I´m trying to highlight. What I wanted to demonstrate is how the ink line absorbs the green paint when the ink line is wet. This absorption can only occur if the ink line itself is wet. Chemical factors might influence how strongly it absorbs, but the line cannot be dry for this effect to happen. I´ve attached a reconstruction using the materials I had available.

Based on this, my conclusion is that the green paint was applied before the ink lines had dried in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and 65v.


About the reconstruction: 
1. A watery brown line was drawn. 
2. Before the line dried, I applied a watery green paint that touched the brown line. 
3. The brown line then began to absorb the green paint. 

All the best, 
Siv