05-10-2024, 01:38 PM
In no world could you argue that "paper" is a synonym for "parchment" or "vellum." It isn't just that paper "suggests" a pulp-based, pressed, and dried substrate. It's that paper IS a pulp-based, pressed, and dried substrate. That is a serious error, especially for someone trying to argue that the manuscript is a fake. If he wants to make a serious argument about the material evidence, as he does, this carelessness immediately suggests that we should not be taking that part of his argument seriously. If you need a more generic term that covers both paper and parchment, the right term would be "substrate" or "writing material."
I don't want to be the kind of person who tosses out an entire book based on what might have been just a careless mistake, but in this case, the error has implications for the rest of his argument and implies that he hasn't really done the reading or understood some fairly important details about the physical reality of the manuscript.
I don't want to be the kind of person who tosses out an entire book based on what might have been just a careless mistake, but in this case, the error has implications for the rest of his argument and implies that he hasn't really done the reading or understood some fairly important details about the physical reality of the manuscript.


![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)