UK to scrap centuries-old tradition of printing laws on vellum

Several proponents of vellum are opposing the move, citing tradition, history, and the longer-lasting qualities of the material.

|
Gothic: Art for England 1400 - 1547' at the VICTORIA AND ALBERT MUSEUM
Detail of the Bedford Hours and Psalter. Illumination on vellum.

For centuries, Britain has printed its acts of Parliament on vellum, including the historic Magna Carta.

But now the practice of using vellum, a parchment made from calfskin, is under threat.

The House of the Lords announced that starting this April, all legislation will be printed on simple archive paper instead of the traditional calfskin vellum, in an attempt to save £80,000 (equivalent to $116,000) a year, the Telegraph reported.

But some members of parliament and conservationists are not happy, and say that scrapping the use will forsake the history of the UK.

“All of our most important historical documents, from Magna Carta to the Lindisfarne Gospels, have been made by using vellum and because of this have lasted through the ages so that future generations can appreciate and understand our shared history," said Sharon Hodgson, a Labour MP. She raised the issue in the House of Commons after a supplier of vellum was given 30 days’ notice by the parliamentary authorities, according to the Guardian.

“That is why it was disappointing that such an important decision, with ramifications on the future of the craft and the conservation of our history, was pushed through without any prior consent of the House of Commons and instead using a ruling made by the House of Lords from over 16 years ago – which was rejected by the House of Commons at the time – to push forward on this change," Ms. Hodgson added.

In announcing the move, the House of Lords said that “using animal skin to painstakingly record and preserve laws was hardly efficient, given, among other things, that it is more unwieldy and difficult to store than paper. It can take the skins of as many as 130 calves to produce a 500-page book. Moreover, archival paper is surprisingly durable,” according to The New York Times.

Some animal rights activists have long criticized the use of animal skin, as well, saying that it is cruel. Yet defenders of vellum refute the claim, contending that the skin is from animals that have already been slaughtered for meat.

Despite the scrutiny, proponents of vellum say that the skin has longer-lasting qualities that allows it to last for thousands of years rather than the hundreds of years that paper can survive.

“With vellum, you can roll up a document and leave it on a shelf for 5,000 years. You can handle historic documents that were touched by great artists and kings,” Paul Wright, the general manager of William Cowley, which has been supplying vellum for Parliament, said, according to the Times.

"Had the Domesday Book, and other such historical documents, merely been printed on acid-free paper, would they still be around today?" asked Andrew Gwynne, Labour MP for Denton and Reddish. “I doubt it, which is why I hope the authorities think twice about this. We must leave a lasting legacy for future generations."

The proposals to eliminate the use of the material date back to 1999, when the House of Lords voted to stop the use of vellum, but the proposal was defeated in the House of Commons.

A spokesman for the House of the Lords said, “We took the view a long time ago that we wanted this to stop and as far as we are concerned the decision has been made,” according to the Telegraph.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to UK to scrap centuries-old tradition of printing laws on vellum
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2016/0210/UK-to-scrap-centuries-old-tradition-of-printing-laws-on-vellum
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe