The Non-Invasive Spectroscopic Study of a Parchment Object from the National Central Library of Florence: The Hebrew Scroll

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article entitled "Non-invasive spectroscopic study of a parchment object from the National Central Library of Florence: The Jewish Scroll" is well written and the idea is pretty clear. However, some points should be clarified before the publication. 

The reason why the authors decided the areas of interest. Page 5 the authors gave some hyperthesis, but the references for these points of view are missing.

The authors used many techniques but did not give all these results or the synthesis of the experiences. 

The figures of Raman spectra miss the annotation of the vibration peak.

I suggest the authors review all the results and give a further global interpretation in order to help the readers understand this work of art.

Author Response

Quality of English Language

(x) I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper

( ) English very difficult to understand/incomprehensible

( ) Extensive editing of English language required

( ) Moderate editing of English language required

( ) Minor editing of English language required

( ) English language fine. No issues detected

                Yes          Can be improved              Must be improved           Not applicable

Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?

                ( )            ( )            ( )            (x)

Is the article adequately referenced?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article entitled "Non-invasive spectroscopic study of a parchment object from the National Central Library of Florence: The Jewish Scroll" is well written and the idea is pretty clear. However, some points should be clarified before the publication.

The reason why the authors decided the areas of interest. Page 5 the authors gave some hyperthesis, but the references for these points of view are missing.

Answer: all considerations regarding the state of conservation of the artwork and the presence of previous conservation or restoration interventions were made during the present study by the conservator in charge of its examination and restoration (the author Alessandro Sidoti). Since the Scroll was studied for the first time in this project, there are no references to cite or refer to regarding its conservation history or analysis of its state of preservation.

The authors used many techniques but did not give all these results or the synthesis of the experiences.

Answer: like all diagnostic/analytical studies carried out with noninvasive techniques (since the National Central Library of Florence at which the Scroll is kept did not allow the use of invasive techniques for this study) not all techniques provided useful information to investigate the various issues relative to the study of the Scroll. This is the main reason (besides not making the manuscript a mere 'technical report') why only data of interest to the specific question/problem are given in the text.

The figures of Raman spectra miss the annotation of the vibration peak.

Answer: we thank the reviewer for the suggestion. Although all the information regarding the absorption bands is in the text, we have added these data in the figures.

I suggest the authors review all the results and give a further global interpretation in order to help the readers understand this work of art.

Answer: the reviewer is thanked for her/his comment. However, in view of the large amount of work involved in revising the manuscript, following the comments of the four reviewers, it is believed that in this new version the results and discussion part is clearer and more comprehensive.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript describes a multi-analytical approach to study a precious Jewish scroll.  Overall the manuscript describes a well thought out and logical analytical approach that follow what is generally done in the field. The language is almost ok but contain some confusing misspellings. The results and discussion parts of the manuscript need to be more structured. I have some specific notes;

General comment: Diffuse, RGB and VIS seems to be mentioned through the text meaning the same thing. Please check the whole text for this. I would suggest to only use VIS as it is the most standard term for an image representing the visible spectrum. If these words mean different things to the authors this should clearly be stated in the method description what the difference is.

General comment: There are no scales in any image. Add some measurement or estimation of size to your images where possible.

50  check grammar

75 The expression “conservative restauration intervention” is difficult to understand. Do the authors mean conservation instead of conservative?

84 “visible diffused” is a unknown concept to me, does the author mean that the lights were diffused? If so, that is a basic requirement in technical photography to have a diffused even lighting and should not be mentioned as a special technique. If it has another meaning this should be explained more clearly.

84-85 Luminescence cannot be applied, it is an intrinsic phenomenon, this should be rephrased.

119 The importance of the recto side being the flesh side is noted, how is that important in this context? No explanation is given.

145-147 An explanation of why these areas were of special interest should be given. How was this choice made?

150 In the figure text, why are there images referred to as RGB and not VIS?

183 Diffuse light, what does it mean?

184 “Colour band” maybe refers to a “colour standard”? Colour band is not a typical description. Also chromatic balance is not a typical wording, does it mean white balance?

189 “with natural and UV radiations was used as a source” this sentence does not make sense to me. What is natural radiations?

186-194 These is no mention of filters used to visualize UV luminescence, even if no filters were used that is worth mentioning.

General comment section 3.1:

-          A table explaining the camera – light source (light emitted x-x nm) – filter (transmission from x-x nm) combinations are helpful for the reader. 

-          No information on data processing, at least a general comment should be added.

-          No information on what standards were used, e.g. for colour calibration.

-          Its difficult to follow the different set-ups, there seems to be several sets of images taken. This must be clarified.

198 “RGB shot” could be written as VIS acquired. (Shot is not the best word for a scientific article.) There is information that you used the mode for acquiring a RAW and JPG, but there is no information about processing. JPG is not typically what is used in technical photography. Were both the RAW and the JPG used for some interpretation or why do we need this information?

203 “sources” should be written as “light sources” to increase understanding. This might be a reappearing issue in the text, please check all text.

207-209 This sentence is confusing. I suggest describing the transmission of DUG11. The wording “visible parasitic radiation emitted by the sources and the NIR radiation” is too complicated. NIR has not been explained. Do the authors mean visible parasitic radiation in general or parasitic radiation from the “visible range”? Again, I suggest a table to enhance readability and clarity.

210 Again, just stating which filter does not give information to the reader which nm was transmitted or blocked. For clarity, add the nm range.

211 I don’t think the general reader understands the concept of “shooting geometry”. Its better described in text e.g. as “two identical light sources were placed in a 45 degree angle… etc”

219 Check grammar

221 Check extra spaces?

229 Check use of passive/active tense in section 3.3, mix of was and is. Should be was to be consistent with the rest of the text.

249 Is the nr of spectra acquired relevant information? Does the nr have a meaning for resolution or quality? For some methods this is mentions but not for all.

251 Check use of passive/active tense in section 3.3, mix of was and is. Should be was to be consistent with the rest of the text.

261 Check use of passive/active tense in section 3.5, mix of was and is. Should be was to be consistent with the rest of the text.

270 Check this sentence. What is INGRANDIMENTO ?

298 General comment section 5. It would be helpful to add some structure to the results discussion. E.g., divide it into parts for material – pigments – inks or other suitable way. This is needed to highlight your results and so that the reader can orient themselves and get an overview of the materiality in the Scrolls.

299-303 Include images to support the suggested findings from raking light and transillumination.

316 remove “indeed”

318 It is not clear if this section is referring to analysis of pigments only or all the materials.

319 does “artist’s” material refer to pigment/binder or that the same hand did all scenes? Check spelling of “artist’s” if it should be “artists” as it makes some difference to the meaning.

321 It is not clear how the HSI data from one area can confirm that the same pigment was used in all areas. This needs to be clarified.

321 The SAM classification map should be better explained as many readers of Heritage may not be familiar with the method.

328 This Figure is poorly explained, please elaborate what is shown with a SAM map.

331 “Confirmed” is too strong of a word describing a UVL image, as a camera is not an analytical instrument. Technical photography is a way to visualize finds that are confirmed with analytical instruments.  However, Cu-containing pigments do quench luminescence.

340 Figure 4a is not discussed in the text, what are the important features?

380 Fe is shown in the figure but not discussed in the text, what is the role of Fe?

383 Check spelling/grammar

294 A more proper sentence would be “identified by Raman” (the use of “thanks to” appears in other places to in the text, please check all text)

396 Should be: Iron Gall Ink

401 What you have proven is that the darker ink contains carbonaceous material. Why it was added is not proven, that is an idea or speculation. Please rephrase.

417 It would be useful to mark the different inks in the image so one can follow the reasoning in the text. Does not say which Zone is depicted. Again a table of the inks and main components would be useful for the reader.

447 check spelling

416 / General for 7 – Choose if you write abbreviations or full words and stick to one way. The mix of Vis/UV/TI/transillumination etc is difficult to read.

462 check grammar “studied by .. investigation” should be “studied by .. techniques”

464 “evidenced manufacturing process” – no it was evidenced to contain calcium carbonate that is likely from a western production. Specific processes are not evidenced here.

470 Do you mean “single” rather than “unique”? The pigments identified are common.

473 Check this sentence.

480-482 Check this section. Use ”Iron gall ink”, “not ferro-gallic ink”

486 What are the green backgrounds? Not mentioned previously

All comments in previous section

Author Response

Rew2

Open Review

(x) I would not like to sign my review report

( ) I would like to sign my review report

Quality of English Language

( ) I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper

( ) English very difficult to understand/incomprehensible

( ) Extensive editing of English language required

(x) Moderate editing of English language required

( ) Minor editing of English language required

( ) English language fine. No issues detected

                Yes          Can be improved              Must be improved           Not applicable

Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?

                ( )            ( )            (x)           ( )

For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?

                ( )            ( )            ( )            (x)

Is the article adequately referenced?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript describes a multi-analytical approach to study a precious Jewish scroll.  Overall the manuscript describes a well thought out and logical analytical approach that follow what is generally done in the field. The language is almost ok but contain some confusing misspellings. The results and discussion parts of the manuscript need to be more structured. I have some specific notes;

General comment: Diffuse, RGB and VIS seems to be mentioned through the text meaning the same thing. Please check the whole text for this. I would suggest to only use VIS as it is the most standard term for an image representing the visible spectrum. If these words mean different things to the authors this should clearly be stated in the method description what the difference is.

General comment: There are no scales in any image. Add some measurement or estimation of size to your images where possible.

Answer: the dimensions of the Scroll portions shown in Figures 2a-h are about 350 mm in length while in height range between 172-192 mm, as reported in the text. This information is given in the caption.

50 check grammar

Answer: the sentence was corrected. The new version is ‘From September 14 2021 to January 23 2022 the “Florence Scroll” was loaned to the Israel Museum of Jerusalem for the exhibition "Painting a Pilgrimage: A 14th-Century Hebrew Scroll Unveiled”.’

75 The expression “conservative restauration intervention” is difficult to understand. Do the authors mean conservation instead of conservative?

Answer: the expression was corrected.

84 “visible diffused” is a unknown concept to me, does the author mean that the lights were diffused? If so, that is a basic requirement in technical photography to have a diffused even lighting and should not be mentioned as a special technique. If it has another meaning this should be explained more clearly.

Answer: the term has been changed to avoid misunderstanding.

84-85 Luminescence cannot be applied, it is an intrinsic phenomenon, this should be rephrased.

Answer: the sentence has been changed to avoid misunderstanding

119 The importance of the recto side being the flesh side is noted, how is that important in this context? No explanation is given.

Answer: It is just an observation; there is no particular importance to have this clarification in the text. Therefore, thanks to the reviewer's indication, we decided to remove the text "it is important to note that" from the sentence.

145-147 An explanation of why these areas were of special interest should be given. How was this choice made?

Answer: the selected areas are those that from a point of view of both style and materials used for the written and painted parts were found to be the ones on which to target imaging and spot spectroscopic analyses. The sentence was rewritten as ‘Some areas of the Scroll were selected from a point of view of both style and materials used for the written and painted parts as those of greatest interest for in-depth analysis’.

150 In the figure text, why are there images referred to as RGB and not VIS?

Answer: the term RGB was replaced with VIS.

183 Diffuse light, what does it mean?

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

184 “Colour band” maybe refers to a “colour standard”? Colour band is not a typical description. Also chromatic balance is not a typical wording, does it mean white balance?

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

189 “with natural and UV radiations was used as a source” this sentence does not make sense to me. What is natural radiations?

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

186-194 These is no mention of filters used to visualize UV luminescence, even if no filters were used that is worth mentioning.

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

General comment section 3.1:

-          A table explaining the camera – light source (light emitted x-x nm) – filter (transmission from x-x nm) combinations are helpful for the reader.

-          No information on data processing, at least a general comment should be added.

-          No information on what standards were used, e.g. for colour calibration.

-          Its difficult to follow the different set-ups, there seems to be several sets of images taken. This must be clarified.

Answer: the entire section 3.1 was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments. We think that now the technical information is clearer and more precise, and, in our opinion, there is no need to add an explanatory table in this regard.

198 “RGB shot” could be written as VIS acquired. (Shot is not the best word for a scientific article.) There is information that you used the mode for acquiring a RAW and JPG, but there is no information about processing. JPG is not typically what is used in technical photography. Were both the RAW and the JPG used for some interpretation or why do we need this information?

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

203 “sources” should be written as “light sources” to increase understanding. This might be a reappearing issue in the text, please check all text.

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

207-209 This sentence is confusing. I suggest describing the transmission of DUG11. The wording “visible parasitic radiation emitted by the sources and the NIR radiation” is too complicated. NIR has not been explained. Do the authors mean visible parasitic radiation in general or parasitic radiation from the “visible range”? Again, I suggest a table to enhance readability and clarity.

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

210 Again, just stating which filter does not give information to the reader which nm was transmitted or blocked. For clarity, add the nm range.

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

211 I don’t think the general reader understands the concept of “shooting geometry”. Its better described in text e.g. as “two identical light sources were placed in a 45 degree angle… etc”.

Answer: the entire section was rewritten taking into account the reviewers' comments.

219 Check grammar

Answer: we added the missing period at the end of the sentence.

221 Check extra spaces?

Answer: removed the extra space, thank you.

229 Check use of passive/active tense in section 3.3, mix of was and is. Should be was to be consistent with the rest of the text.

Answer: verb forms were homogenized.

249 Is the nr of spectra acquired relevant information? Does the nr have a meaning for resolution or quality? For some methods this is mentions but not for all.

Answer: For uniformity, we have included the measurement numbers of all analytical techniques. It is believed that this information may be of interest to readers (and another reviewer requested this information).

251 Check use of passive/active tense in section 3.3, mix of was and is. Should be was to be consistent with the rest of the text.

Answer: done.

261 Check use of passive/active tense in section 3.5, mix of was and is. Should be was to be consistent with the rest of the text.

Answer: verb forms were homogenized.

270 Check this sentence. What is INGRANDIMENTO ?

Answer: done.

298 General comment section 5. It would be helpful to add some structure to the results discussion. E.g., divide it into parts for material – pigments – inks or other suitable way. This is needed to highlight your results and so that the reader can orient themselves and get an overview of the materiality in the Scrolls.

Answer: the text has been reorganized to better highlight the different sub-sections. In particular, at the beginning of each sub-section, the topic covered in the following paragraphs has been explicitly mentioned.

299-303 Include images to support the suggested findings from raking light and transillumination.

Answer: we thank the reviewer for her/his suggestion. In fact, in the pre-submitted version we had included these images, but then thinking that there were too many figures in the manuscript we had decided to remove them.

316 remove “indeed”

Answer: done.

318 It is not clear if this section is referring to analysis of pigments only or all the materials.

Answer: in response to the reviewer's two comments (lines 318 and 319), we decided to edit the sentence to read like this 'All diagnostic and analytical techniques used provided consistent results regarding the artists’ materials, with data highlighting that the same pigments were used to paint the different scenes from the beginning to the end of the Scroll decoration', hoping that the meaning is clearer in this version.

319 does “artist’s” material refer to pigment/binder or that the same hand did all scenes? Check spelling of “artist’s” if it should be “artists” as it makes some difference to the meaning.

Answer: see previous reply.

321 It is not clear how the HSI data from one area can confirm that the same pigment was used in all areas. This needs to be clarified.

Answer: HSI measurements did not cover the entire roll but the areas where painted areas were represented and in some of the areas of greatest interest as far as the text is concerned. The text was rearranged in order to make this point clearer.

321 The SAM classification map should be better explained as many readers of Heritage may not be familiar with the method.

Answer: the sentences were reconsidered and a specific reference was added.

328 This Figure is poorly explained, please elaborate what is shown with a SAM map.

Answer: the figure and its caption have been reconsidered to be more informative.

331 “Confirmed” is too strong of a word describing a UVL image, as a camera is not an analytical instrument. Technical photography is a way to visualize finds that are confirmed with analytical instruments.  However, Cu-containing pigments do quench luminescence.

Answer: the term ‘confirmed’ was replaced with ‘in agreement with’ and the final sentence is ‘This finding was in agreement with the UVL imaging’.

340 Figure 4a is not discussed in the text, what are the important features?

Answer: Information about the FORS spectrum is included in the caption.

380 Fe is shown in the figure but not discussed in the text, what is the role of Fe?

Answer: the image was corrected. Fe map was substituted with S map.

383 Check spelling/grammar

Answer: done

394 A more proper sentence would be “identified by Raman” (the use of “thanks to” appears in other places to in the text, please check all text)

Answer: done.

396 Should be: Iron Gall Ink 

Answer: done

401 What you have proven is that the darker ink contains carbonaceous material. Why it was added is not proven, that is an idea or speculation. Please rephrase.

Answer: rephrased

417 It would be useful to mark the different inks in the image so one can follow the reasoning in the text. Does not say which Zone is depicted. Again a table of the inks and main components would be useful for the reader.

Answer: we add a new image where the different inks are highlighted.

447 check spelling

Answer: le entire sentence was revised as ‘Following recent paleographic analysis and documentary studies, the Hebrew Scroll of the BNCF has been recognized as an important and valuable textual document. Its historical importance also lies in the fact that it is a rare illustrated record depicting typical holy sites of pilgrimages from Egypt to Lebanon.’

416 / General for 7 – Choose if you write abbreviations or full words and stick to one way. The mix of Vis/UV/TI/transillumination etc is difficult to read.

Answer: the text was corrected.

462 check grammar “studied by .. investigation” should be “studied by .. techniques”

Answer: done.

464 “evidenced manufacturing process” – no it was evidenced to contain calcium carbonate that is likely from a western production. Specific processes are not evidenced here.

Answer: the sentence was rephrased as ‘The parchment was also studied through specific spectroscopic techniques, including the FT-IR in ER mode, which led to the hypothesis that it was produced in the Western style with calcite preparation’.

470 Do you mean “single” rather than “unique”? The pigments identified are common.

Answer: corrected.

473 Check this sentence.

Answer: done

480-482 Check this section. Use ”Iron gall ink”, “not ferro-gallic ink”

Answer: done

486 What are the green backgrounds? Not mentioned previously

Answer: corrected

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper by Bartolozzi and co-workers presents a non-invasive spectroscopic study of a 14th century Scroll. The methodological approach is well organized, and the results are interesting. However, minor but important concerns should be addressed before considering the paper for publication. 

- in line 330, the authors identify the green pigments as Cu-based pigment using FORS. Please add a few lines explaining the features in the spectrum that allow the above interpretation. Since the Raman analysis is the most informative technique for recognizing the green pigment, I suggest adding the Raman spectrum, highlighting the bands attributed to Verdigris.

- in line 351, the binder of the pigments was identified as animal glue. Since the authors make the attribution considering the comparison between the FT-IR spectra on plain and painted parchment, it is important to add a figure showing the above comparison, especially highlighting the intensity difference among the mid-infrared bands. 

-in line 374, please support the hypothesis of attributing the bands to sulphate or a sulphone with a reference. 

Regarding the characterization of the inks (page 11), the authors state that FORS and Raman allowed to identify three brown and three black inks (line 387). In line 397, they further state that all the brown inks have the same chemical composition. How do the authors differentiate the three brown inks by FORS and micro Raman? The same question arises also for the black inks. A better and deeper explanation is required here. 

The reviewer's opinion is that the Raman spectra of IGI (Figure 8b) and Carbon black (Figure 8c) are not that clear. The characteristic bands of inks are not well differentiated from the background, while other bands (not attributed) have comparable intensity to the characteristic ones. I suggest visually supporting the spectroscopic attribution by adding also the FORS spectra in the Figure 8. I would also suggest using the hyperspectral data, whether possible, to support the inks' identification further. 

- Two spectral ranges are reported for the hyperspectral camera: 400-900 nm (line 82) and 400-1000 nm (line 218). Please specify which range was used.

- In line 409, the author states that the MA-XRF "highlighted different concentrations of the main components". If a quantitative analysis was not performed, I would comment on the results differently. 

Author Response

Rew3

Open Review

(x) I would not like to sign my review report

( ) I would like to sign my review report

Quality of English Language

(x) I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper

( ) English very difficult to understand/incomprehensible

( ) Extensive editing of English language required

( ) Moderate editing of English language required

( ) Minor editing of English language required

( ) English language fine. No issues detected

                Yes          Can be improved              Must be improved           Not applicable

Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

Is the article adequately referenced?

                (x)           ( )            ( )            ( )

Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?

                ( )            (x)           ( )            ( )

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper by Bartolozzi and co-workers presents a non-invasive spectroscopic study of a 14th century Scroll. The methodological approach is well organized, and the results are interesting. However, minor but important concerns should be addressed before considering the paper for publication.

- in line 330, the authors identify the green pigments as Cu-based pigment using FORS. Please add a few lines explaining the features in the spectrum that allow the above interpretation. Since the Raman analysis is the most informative technique for recognizing the green pigment, I suggest adding the Raman spectrum, highlighting the bands attributed to Verdigris.

Answer: as requested by the reviewer, more details on FORS spectra, bibliographic references, and reference spectral databases have been added. In doing so, it was also possible to advance the hypothesis that the pigment is verdigris. The identification was then confirmed by Raman spectra although they are not particularly clear due to the presence of intense fluorescence. For this reason-as well as to reduce the number of figures-it was decided not to report them in the manuscript. The sentence is now ‘In particular, FORS measurements allowed to identify the green areas as painted with a Cu-based pigment due to its broad absorption band centered at around 750 nm and extending in the NIR to about 1200 nm. The shape of the FORS spectra could indicate that verdigris is present according to what is reported in reference spectral databases and in the bibliography (Figure 4a).’

- in line 351, the binder of the pigments was identified as animal glue. Since the authors make the attribution considering the comparison between the FT-IR spectra on plain and painted parchment, it is important to add a figure showing the above comparison, especially highlighting the intensity difference among the mid-infrared bands.

Answer: the figure with the comparison of the FT-IR spectra was added.

-in line 374, please support the hypothesis of attributing the bands to sulphate or a sulphone with a reference.

Answer: Thanks to the reviewer’s observation, we realized an inaccuracy by inserting the term sulfone. We are actually referring only to sulfates, which is why we deleted the other term and added references for sulfates only.

Regarding the characterization of the inks (page 11), the authors state that FORS and Raman allowed to identify three brown and three black inks (line 387). In line 397, they further state that all the brown inks have the same chemical composition. How do the authors differentiate the three brown inks by FORS and micro Raman? The same question arises also for the black inks. A better and deeper explanation is required here.

Answer: in accordance with the reviewer's comments, the inks part was extensively revised and expanded. The figure with the Raman and FORS spectra was modified so that a comparison of the acquired data was reported.

The reviewer's opinion is that the Raman spectra of IGI (Figure 8b) and Carbon black (Figure 8c) are not that clear. The characteristic bands of inks are not well differentiated from the background, while other bands (not attributed) have comparable intensity to the characteristic ones. I suggest visually supporting the spectroscopic attribution by adding also the FORS spectra in the Figure 8. I would also suggest using the hyperspectral data, whether possible, to support the inks' identification further.

Answer: As responded to the previous comment, the figure has been redone. However, the hyperspectral imaging contribution was not reported because the data were unable to add information to support the results presented.

- Two spectral ranges are reported for the hyperspectral camera: 400-900 nm (line 82) and 400-1000 nm (line 218). Please specify which range was used.

Answer: corrected

- In line 409, the author states that the MA-XRF "highlighted different concentrations of the main components". If a quantitative analysis was not performed, I would comment on the results differently.

Answer: the sentence was changed

Reviewer 4 Report

I read the paper titled "Non-invasive Spectroscopic Study of a Parchment Object from the National Central Library of Florence: The Jewish Scroll."

I found the research interesting because it provides new opportunities for scientists involved in pigment characterization through multi-analytical approaches and offers new results about Jewish Scroll production techniques. The paper is well-written, and the goal is focused and well-realized through a proper description of both the technique and data interpretation.

The manuscript is potentially interesting for readers of Heritage. As a reviewer, I suggest accepting the paper after minor revision. Here are some comments and suggestions:

Please improve the introduction by explaining the importance of multi-analytical approaches for the determination of pigments. Provide examples from the following papers:

"The Emergence of Liu Kang’s New Painting Style (1950–1958): A Multi-Analytical Approach for the Study of the Artist’s Painting Materials and Technique"

"How Many Secret Details Could a Systematic Multi-Analytical Study Reveal about the Mysterious Fresco Trionfo Della Morte?"

"Authentication of a Painting by Nicolae Grigorescu Using Modern Multi-Analytical Methods"

"Multi‐Analytical Non‐Invasive Study of Modern Yellow Paints from Postwar Italian Paintings from the International Gallery of Modern Art Cà Pesaro, Venice"

The identification of all pigments can be supported by comparing them with databases describing the main features for identification and the best techniques to use. Authors should improve the results section by discussing databases in the literature and approaches for pigment identification. I suggest citing the following papers:

"Historical Pigments: A Collection Analyzed with X-ray Diffraction Analysis and X-ray Fluorescence Analysis in Order to Create a Database"

"FTIR Spectra Database 2003 / Analytical Chemistry 215 A"

"FORS Spectral Database of Historical Pigments in Different Binders"

"On-line FT-Raman and Dispersive Raman Spectra Database of Artists' Materials (e-VISART Database)." If possible, plot the spectra of the identified pigment together with the spectra of the analyzed point.

Authors should explain the average amount of the sample needed for the measurement and the relative sampling for FTIR measurements.

Please improve the quality of the graphs; scale labels are barely legible. Moreover, standardize the text format (in some cases, the size changes).

Please consider adding the infrared spectra of significant points discussed in the paper, as they contain important information. Including these spectra will enhance the readers' understanding and provide a visual representation of key findings in the context of your analysis.

Correct some apex and some pedix of measure units and formulas (e.g., line 306, 307, 337...).

Author Response

Reviewer 4

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 I read the paper titled "Non-invasive Spectroscopic Study of a Parchment Object from the National Central Library of Florence: The Jewish Scroll."

 I found the research interesting because it provides new opportunities for scientists involved in pigment characterization through multi-analytical approaches and offers new results about Jewish Scroll production techniques. The paper is well-written, and the goal is focused and well-realized through a proper description of both the technique and data interpretation.

The manuscript is potentially interesting for readers of Heritage. As a reviewer, I suggest accepting the paper after minor revision. Here are some comments and suggestions:

Please improve the introduction by explaining the importance of multi-analytical approaches for the determination of pigments. Provide examples from the following papers:

"The Emergence of Liu Kang’s New Painting Style (1950–1958): A Multi-Analytical Approach for the Study of the Artist’s Painting Materials and Technique"

"How Many Secret Details Could a Systematic Multi-Analytical Study Reveal about the Mysterious Fresco Trionfo Della Morte?"

"Authentication of a Painting by Nicolae Grigorescu Using Modern Multi-Analytical Methods"

"Multi‐Analytical Non‐Invasive Study of Modern Yellow Paints from Postwar Italian Paintings from the International Gallery of Modern Art Cà Pesaro, Venice"

Answer: in accordance with the reviewer's request, an introductory sentence on the importance of a multi-analytical approach was included in the text along with the reference of some papers related to ancient manuscript studies with multi-technical approach. We preferred to cite these works instead of those proposed by the reviewer, as the latter focused on the study of contemporary works of art.

Maurizio Aceto, Elisa Calà, Analytical evidences of the use of iron-gall ink as a pigment on miniature paintings, Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, Volume 187, 2017, Pages 1-8, ISSN 1386-1425, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2017.06.017.

Maurizio Aceto, Angelo Agostino, Gaia Fenoglio, Monica Gulmini, Valentina Bianco, Eleonora Pellizzi, Non invasive analysis of miniature paintings: Proposal for an analytical protocol, Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, Volume 91, 2012, Pages 352-359, ISSN 1386-1425, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2012.02.021.

Melo, Maria João; Nabais, Paula; Guimarães, Maria; Araújo, Rita; Castro, Rita; Oliveira, Maria Conceição; et al. (2016). Supplementary material from "Organic dyes in illuminated manuscripts: a unique cultural and historic record". The Royal Society. Collection. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3515208.v1

The identification of all pigments can be supported by comparing them with databases describing the main features for identification and the best techniques to use. Authors should improve the results section by discussing databases in the literature and approaches for pigment identification. I suggest citing the following papers:

"Historical Pigments: A Collection Analyzed with X-ray Diffraction Analysis and X-ray Fluorescence Analysis in Order to Create a Database"

"FTIR Spectra Database 2003 / Analytical Chemistry 215 A"

"FORS Spectral Database of Historical Pigments in Different Binders"

"On-line FT-Raman and Dispersive Raman Spectra Database of Artists' Materials (e-VISART Database)." If possible, plot the spectra of the identified pigment together with the spectra of the analyzed point.

Answer: the authors thank the reviewer for the comment. References to databases present in the publications of BURGIO & CLARK for Raman and Vagnini M. et al.  for the FT-IR in external reflectance mode spectra are included in the text. In addition, the link to the IFAC-CNR's FORS spectral database has been provided (https://spectradb.ifac.cnr.it/fors/).

Authors should explain the average amount of the sample needed for the measurement and the relative sampling for FTIR measurements.

Answer: no type of sampling was permitted; all analyzes carried out were non-invasive. FT-IR spectra, as reported in the text were acquired in external reflectance mode.

Please improve the quality of the graphs; scale labels are barely legible. Moreover, standardize the text format (in some cases, the size changes).

Answer: the figures have also been extensively revised in accordance with the requests of other reviewers.

Please consider adding the infrared spectra of significant points discussed in the paper, as they contain important information. Including these spectra will enhance the readers' understanding and provide a visual representation of key findings in the context of your analysis.

Answer: we add the comparison of the FT-IR spectra dealing with the identification of the binder.

Correct some apex and some pedix of measure units and formulas (e.g., line 306, 307, 337...).

Answer: done