3 ms·
The scientific process is interesting, and I don't object to it's use on Egyptian papyrus or the Dead Sea Scrolls. I find it unlikely anyone was expecting to f
by boomboomsubban 5y ago
The scientific process is interesting, and I don't object to it's use on Egyptian papyrus or the Dead Sea Scrolls.
I find it unlikely anyone was expecting to find some revelatory details in the letters between Marie Antoinette and her alleged lover. They just wanted to know more about her intimate affairs.
- Armisael16 5y agoThis was really more of a proof of technique. Marie Antoinette’s letters were readily available (the team is French). The article on Ars is pretty shit at conveying that - you have to get to the 7th paragraph for any technical details to come up - but that’s an(other) indictment of Ms. Oulette, not the research team.
- boomboomsubban 5y agoFrom the article >So when Fabien Pottier and several colleagues at the Museum of Natural History's Research Center for the Conservation of Collections (CRCC) took on the task of uncovering the censored portions of letters between Marie Antoinette and von Fersen, they naturally turned to similar techniques. That doesn't sound like developing the method was their primary goal.
- Armisael16 5y agoRight, the article is garbage. The paper is in an open-access journal. You can just go read it.
- boomboomsubban 5y agoThe paper also sounds like the technique was developed to read these letters, and that it will hopefully be useful elsewhere.