In Comparative Diagram 1, I have set the green lines after resizing the 122 rubbing to 122%, again the rubbing was shown at less than actual size. We can see that we did not make that much progress because the AN g 1, DC b 3, roulettes found on this binding are found only on this binding, and DC d 2, is linked to only one more binding Gid 472, where it is found with AE a 1 and RC m 5. Further to this the DC roulettes are very hard to verify. Gid lists a binding in the BSG, E4 1606 as being associated with 122 and this can only be in relation to the AN g 1 roulette as it is the only matching roulette on it. This is a very close match but it was not made with the same tool. Below in Comparative Diagram 2, I have taken a strip of imprint from the BSG rubbing for this binding and placed next to it a part of the Gid type model AN g 1. In this diagram the imprints have been enlarged considerably, allowing us to see that they are similar but not exactly the same. Well probably some would not see the importance of this exercise but if we accept the BSG binding as an example then we must also accept the other roulettes on that binding as part of the I B workshop, this would be a great mistake. It is vitally important to identify each roulette with certainty, far better to reject a questionable imprint than be led in the wrong direction.
|
