Drew;
I do not have the DGJ, so cannot read Bell's take on this, but other than the inclusion of new patterns & also laminated steel, & the ommision of some patterns which had fallen by the wayside, I really see little difference between W & WW Greener's works of 1834 & 1910 pertaing to terminology of twist/damascus etc. From W Greener's 1834 work pertaining to the "Stub Twist" & "Stub Damascus" I do not get the impression the metal was brought to a melting (puddling) point but that the stubs & chopped coach springs were simply thoroughly mixed & brought to a "Welding Heat". At this point they would stick to an iron bar inserted into the pot & a large mass (bloom) would be withdrawn, put under the hammer thus completing the weld & forming into a bar. For Stub Damascus the mat'l was twisted in the bar, for Stub Twist it was not.
I do not know if is just an "EGO" thing or what, but while Bell has had some valuable info I have been somewhat turned off by his seeming insistance on "Tearing Down" everything early writers have said on various subjects. A prime example was the long shell/short chamber subject, which was fairly well settled just prior to & immediately following WWII & throughly reported on by Burrard. Bell took everything Burrard said totally out of context, made a complete wreck of all the work which had been done by the British Manufactures Which Burrard reported on & strongly Implied that no positive conclusions had been drawn until "He Did It".
In this case, as I see it, WW simply built upon the works W had started, I see nothing contradictory between them. Certainly time & experience had proved W Greener right in that steel was desirable (read that necessary) in the composition of a patterned bbl. W Greener had been emphatic about this in 1834 at a time when, according to him, some others made their bbls of all iron. In the ensuing years with the development of more powerful powder & heavier loads, many of those bbls discussed by W had simply proved inadequate & fallen aside. Also I believe that suitable "Stubs" had become mostly unavailable & so was virtually a thing of the past by WW's times.
By the same token the fact that oil, drained from the head of the Sperm Whale, is unavailable to us today does not mean that firms such as Parker, Lefever, Smith, etal were wrong in recommending it ca 1900 as the best obtainable for oiling their guns.

Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra