<html>
<body>
<font size=3>I'm grappling with a newly discovered (so far as I can tell)
concealed edition of Edmé-Sébastien Jeaurat, <i>Traité de perspective à
l'usage des artistes</i> (1750), and have run smack into the dilemma of
how to wedge this knowledge into OCLC. The principal OCLC master
record-there's the usual raft of duplicates-is 13455452, which now
stands as it did after I had dressed it up a bit with all-options-applied
dcrmb, before I knew too much. Fatal curiosity!<br><br>
Now, having discovered that I actually have the second edition in hand,
completely reset except that the title alone appears to have been printed
from standing type-the evidence for priority being primarily the
correction of 1st-ed. errata and consequent absence of an errata
slip--I'm not sure how to proceed. I could simply create a new master
record for the [2nd ed.] as such; but I'm not sure to what extent my copy
is typical of that edition in all respects; and of course I can't do
anything about the 50 holdings attached to 13455452, nor can I construct
a corresponding record for the [1st ed.] as such, not having a copy in
hand.<br><br>
I have drafted a revision of 13455452 that includes the 10 leaves of
plates in the 300, modifies the pagination statement in the collation
note to read "misprinting 96 as 69 (1st ed.only), 120 as 180 (2nd
ed. only)", and adding a 1st 500 note that currently reads:<br><br>
"This record represents two distinct concealed editions, printed
from entirely different settings of type except for the title page; the
2nd ed. follows the 1st page for page, though not uniformly line for
line. Notable variations, based on comparison of the Brown University
copy of the 2nd ed. with the Sackler Library copy of the 1st ed.
(reproduced in Google Books) include: 1st ed. has colophon, "De
l'Imprimerie de J. Chardon, rue Galande, 1750", 2nd ed. has none;
1st includes an errata leaf omitted in the 2nd, in which the errata have
been corrected (except that the misspelling "parallepipede"
persists in some instances); recto headlines in 1st end
"Part.", in 2nd "Partie." The placing of plates and
tailpieces (which could potentially vary within an edition) is the same
in the copies compared, except that Brown copy (2nd ed.) omits many of
the smallest tailpieces as well as the large tailpiece on otherwise blank
p. 173, and switches those found on p. 140 and 142. Many copies,
including Brown University, lack the 10 leaves of plates at the end; it
is not certain whether this is abnormal in 1st ed., nor how common it is
in the 2nd ed., which does include the "avertissement sur les
planches suivantes" on p. 232. Brown also mistakenly places pl. 15
on p. 43, 14 on p. 47, 100 on p. 225, and 99 on p. 229. Holdings for this
record, as cataloged, represent copies of 1st and 2nd eds., as well as
copies whose description is insufficient to distinguish one from the
other. $5 RPB"<br><br>
Also I've added that spiffy new 655 "Concealed editions
(Printing)".<br><br>
The book is fairly well known to art historians, and seems worth
"getting right", which I'm able to do, or mostly do, thanks to
Google Books. In any case, the two editions are NOT the same
manifestation. There is the possibility of using OCLC's comment function,
I suppose, though that operates in a weird environment where the notes
actually in the record are not displayed.<br><br>
Comments?<br><br>
</font><tt>RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY :
BROWN UNIVERSITY<br>
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-3384 :
RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU </body>
</html>