The Book Switch Theory

[asteckley]

I must also add: I understand that there are different kinds of evidence, and that some things are uncertain. But manuscripts are provenanced by a range of factors, of which paleography is often the most crucial one. The style of the marginalia is evidence, unless we are dismissing the usefulness of paleography for dating manuscripts...

So I would add the inscription of the marginalia, in green, in the 15th century.

I would say paleography can range all the way from providing pretty strong evidence (e.g. "Here is some unknown writing. I have no other clues. Please, analyze it" --> "Oh, that is definitely the writing of Sir John the Authentic from the year 1388") to being biased supportive evidence(e.g. "Could this writing possibly be the writing of the person in my favorite theory" -->"Yes, I can see consistencies".)

But what paleographic evidence contributes to the provenance of the VMS?  It contributes to establishing the authenticity of some things (like say, the Marci Letter), but that hasn't come into play in identifying provenance.  (If I recall, Lisa Fagin-Davis suggested that some marginalia looked like the hand of Marci. But that would certainly fall in the category of finding similarities, not identifying a person.)