An apocryphal story is that sincere come from Latin for without wax (I'm a
bit thin on Latin but the Italian would be sensa cera)  meaning that stone
from a supplier that had not been doctored by having the surface
imperfections masked with wax.  I have also heard it told as proof of a
Latin good bronze for the same reasons.  The reputations of stone and bronze
suppliers have not substantially improved, nor have their methods, for a
long time.  Now we know why so many conservators are insincere (not without
wax).

When I used to maintain the Balto statue in Central Park by FG Roth I always
felt that I was waxing roth.

Mark

Subject: Re: waxing limestone
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Walter" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 10:07 PM
Subject: Re: waxing limestone


> In a message dated 6/14/2001 7:16:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask]
> writes:
>
> << > Personally, I never heard of waxing stone, and am willing to bet it's
> not a
>  >  good idea (trapping water behind the wax would be disadvantageous and
>  >  counterproductive), but you can ask.
>
>  I understand that Trinity Church nr. Wall Street was once coated with wax
>  (which attracted a lot of surface dirt -- hence the black color) for many
>  years. It was cleaned not too many years ago, the wax and dirt removed.
It is
>  now the original pinky-brown sandstone of the Upjohn design. I have not
>  confirmed this story, however -- take it for what it's worth.
>
>  Mary >>
>
> Oh, great. This is just great. Now I've got girls providing me with
technical
> as well as historical information.  Next, I'm gonna find out my wife is a
> girl.
>
> But wait a minute..........I think Trinity church downtown is way earlier
> (1760's without checking, or maybe slightly post-Revolutionary) than
Upjohn's
> churches (1840's, without checking?).
>
> Sign me,
>
> Maybe regained some self respect.
>