About technic problems in this web:
Yesterday I wrote a text and couldn't publish it due to technical problems: the forum page wouldn't load, as it used to happen when it was overloaded with readers or bots.
Mikeh, before publishing a written text, I do the following as a preventative measure: select all, copy. If there's a technical error when trying to publish it, I can paste the copied text, which is in the phone's memory. Perhaps this method is more convenient for you than using a computer. Or maybe I misunderstood you. I have the problem you mentioned, but a while ago I verified that I'm human. The forum page then asks for verification, and the written text is at risk. That's why it's advisable to make a copy using the simple method I explained. Caution: It's best not to copy another text with your phone before pasting the written text, as the last copied text will be pasted.
Now I put my yesterday text. It is old text becouse you have answer some detaills today with your interesting publications. Thanks for new images by Steve and thanks for Mikeh link about the 20 years for each watermark.
I put here my yerterday text, as a curiosity, because it talks about the same topic you are addressing today. Yesterday reflections:
*******
About watermark period:
Mikeh, thanks for your thoughts. We can use the years of the watermarks Decker mentions as a guide to try to estimate the earliest and latest years based on those years, which is the evidence Decker mentions. That period would be an estimate based on the years Decker mentions. However, we would wonder whether there could have been watermarks of each type that were earlier or later than the years known by Decker.
I agree with your reflection about the year 1462, which perhaps existed until 1492. We don't have a completely precise definition. For example, perhaps that watermark existed from 1460 to 1490. The only evidence for that watermark (duck) is 1462 and 1475.
I see more problems with your reflection on the year 1515. That year refers to a watermark (initial A) that had already been used previously in 1503. That is, the year 1515 was not the beginning of the manufacture of that watermark; the earliest evidence is 1503. We also don't know if that watermark began to be used in 1503. That is, perhaps it was used a few years earlier, although we have no evidence for that.
In any case, your general estimate is interesting. You talk about a
maximum of 20 years of use for each watermark in a manufacturer, and you talk about a maximum of 10 years for paper storage, which can logically be added to those 20 years, as you say, so we have a margin of 30 years for each watermark. I suppose the 10 years of storage is an estimate you made. I don't know if we have historical data to back up that 10 years, but it seems like a reasonable estimate as a maximum, as the paper could deteriorate after 10 years.
However, I wonder what the 20-year estimate for each watermark is based on. If that timeframe is true, then it might be useful for arguments like yours. I don't know how long watermarks were used, but it would be interesting if there were a maximum timeframe, established by law or for other reasons. However, if 20 years is a mathematical average, then there were watermarks that were used for more than 20 years.
-------------
About watermark variations:
Steve shows two duck watermarks that were used in Vienna for almost 50 years (1451-1500). Steve, it's great that we can see some of the watermarks you've located. Vienna (Germany) seems far from Venice, so perhaps there were two different makers using a duck watermark. Is that possible? However, the star scale (Venice, 1475) located by Steve can perhaps be added to Decker's list. Decker speaks in the plural (scales), and Steve's image shows a single scale with two pans, but I imagine Decker was referring to the same thing, that is, a single scale. It's great that we can see the bull watermark published by Steve, which was used in Rotenburg, Germany. Surely the Italian bull watermark mentioned by Decker was similar.
About bull watermark, we have the same question as with the star scale. In both cases, we see a watermark with a similar description in two different countries. I imagine that perhaps they were different makers.
That Briquet watermark book (consulted by Decker and Steve) uses the German word "Verwendungsort" which refers to the place where the paper was used. That is, we don't know if perhaps the papermaker was from somewhere else. Do you think it might have been exported paper?
Perhaps it was Italian paper used in Germany, or perhaps it was German paper used in Italy. In short, they were different manufacturers using a watermark (the same or similar), or perhaps it was paper exported from one country to another. I don't have much knowledge on the subject of paper.
Steve observes similar watermarks whose french descriptions reflect differences: the bull's head sometimes had a nose, mouth, and eyes, or lacked a mouth, or lacked both a mouth and a nose. There are also differences in the stroke of the entire watermark. That is, the snake and the cross have similar but different shapes. There are many images of variations on a French page linked by Steve. I include the link and some screenshots below:
https://memoryofpaper.eu/briquet/loadWm ... 16&lang=fr
Thanks Steve for the watermark images!
Perhaps these variations of the bull are the ones Decker mentioned. Perhaps the variants correspond to different manufacturers. In that case, the same watermark could have been made in different countries and manufacturers. I don't know. I suppose that a single manufacturer doesn't change much the watermark design. They'd just make some variations or improvements over time.
We can study the years in the screenshots (or in the link I posted) to see if all those variants appear to be from a single manufacturer. I think if there are two different designs in the same year, then there was possibly more than one manufacturer. But there's a small problem. I assume the Baquet book's dating for each watermark refers to the year of publication or use of each paper, which could have been manufactured in an earlier year.
We see that the bull watermark was used early in 1396 (although there was no cross above but another sign) and was used late in 1577 (with an R inside the bull's head). That is more than 20 years. However, each specific variant was used for a shorter period of time. Perhaps 20 years, as Mikeh says. Or perhaps sometimes less than 20 years? For example, I click on a watermark on that website (see yellow image bottom) where we see a period of almost 20 years (1482–1499).
--------------
I'd like to ask Mikeh: What do you think about similar watermarks in Germany?
It's possible that Decker remembers something to answer our questions, posed yesterday by Mikeh. However, I hope Decker has some personal notes we could refer to. That would be an added aid to his memory. Decker's article only briefly describes each watermark. Surely, these watermarks can be located in Briquet's book, as Steve has done. It would be good to visually see the watermarks in the manuscript volume found by Robert Steele. Decker saw these watermarks, but I assume he didn't photograph them. It's difficult to photograph a watermark. With luck, perhaps Decker has some sketches or images of the watermarks in the manuscript volume that was found by Robert Steele. I say this in response to a question from Steve. Anything Decker could contribute to complement his article would be interesting, since he studied the manuscript watermarks and perhaps has personal notes on them. I'm just imagining.
It would be interesting to know what the watermarks on the manuscript volume look like. I suppose Decker saw the watermarks while personally consulting the volume. Do you know if it's possible to consult the manuscript volume in person? The watermark Briquet book is very interesting, but it would be good to see the watermarks on the paper used in the manuscript. About 25 folios have watermarks, according to Decker. The volume has many pages that don't have watermarks. I suppose the paper was produced in large sizes and then cut to fit the size of the book's folios. I suppose the folios without watermarks belonged to a large paper that had its watermark in only one place. I don't know. I imagine that just out of curiosity.
---------------
I put my new resume about Decker article:
I'll now provide a summary similar to the one I did yesterday, but with all the watermarks in chronological order. I add with a question mark (1475?) the italian watermark (Venece) located by Steve with star and balance.
• duck: 1462, 1475.
• bull + cross + serpent: 1473, 1483, 1485.
• bull + cross + serpent (different): 1492.
• star + balances: 1475?, 1494, 1496, 1504.
• star + balances + CM: 1497.
• globe + crosses: 1503.
• initial A: 1503, 1515.
