Palimpsest
Why am I still puzzling over what makes a collection a collection? Earlier in the semester, I would have said that a “collection” by definition has to be comprised of more than one thing in order to be a collection. And, yet, here we have the Archimedes Palimpsest, a single manuscript, and I think I would have to call this a collection. So perhaps the issues are qualitative, and not merely quantitative. Hmm…..
Categories: theorywatch
collections
