{"title":"Conservation of two Coptic parchment manuscript fragments","authors":"P. Hepworth, M. Michelozzi","doi":"10.1080/03094227.2004.9638641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary The treatments of two similar parchment Coptic manuscript fragments at two different institutions are compared in this article. Both treatments involved the use of a remoistenable mending material—fish swim bladder membrane, or a fine Japanese tissue. Differences in the mending rationales are discussed and treatment innovations elaborated. Other factors impinging on treatment decision-making, beyond the conservation needs of the individual pieces, are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":243922,"journal":{"name":"The Paper Conservator","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Paper Conservator","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03094227.2004.9638641","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Summary The treatments of two similar parchment Coptic manuscript fragments at two different institutions are compared in this article. Both treatments involved the use of a remoistenable mending material—fish swim bladder membrane, or a fine Japanese tissue. Differences in the mending rationales are discussed and treatment innovations elaborated. Other factors impinging on treatment decision-making, beyond the conservation needs of the individual pieces, are also discussed.