[DCRM-L] Format for vellum?

Fri Nov 30 15:58:13 MST 2007

I am forwarding relevant bits of my correspondence with Paul Needham re
my query about whether books printed on vellum have bibliographical
format. With permission. In direct (not reverse) chronological order.
The answer to this simple question turned out to be not simple at all.
__________________________ 
Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. 
Head of Cataloging 
Folger Shakespeare Library 
201 East Capitol St., S.E. 
Washington, D.C. 20003 
202.675-0369 
djleslie at folger.edu | http://www.folger.edu 

-----Original Message-----
From: Deborah J. Leslie 
Sent: Friday, 16 November, 2007 18:18
To: 'Paul Needham (needham at princeton.edu)'
Subject: FW: [DCRM-L] Format for vellum?

Dear Paul,

<...> I am appending a little query I posted to the rare materials
cataloging group. The book in question is a French book of hours, STC
15889.

Cheers, 
Deborah

 -----Original Message-----
From: Paul S. Needham [mailto:needham at Princeton.EDU] 
Sent: Monday, 19 November, 2007 16:27
To: Deborah J. Leslie
Subject: RE: [DCRM-L] Format for vellum?

<...> I see I will follow this up with a question in return.

Let me give my immediate response to the issues below, and especially re
STC 15889 / Goff H-422 / Duff 195.

Those bibliographies all describe this edition as an 8vo, but I am
uncertain whether this is correct. It seems that all the surviving
copies are on vellum (you, Rylands, Morgan, Princeton [a wreck, 55
leaves only]) [ISTC also cites a copy at Stonyhurst College - if so, it
was apparently not in the sale of Stonyhurst incunables, Soth. London 18
June 2003], and the diagnosis of format for books printed on vellum can
be quite difficult. There are a good many Paris-printed Horae with
issues both on vellum and on paper; STC 15889 may well have had a paper
issue, but if so, it seems not to survive. Where there are both vellum
and paper copies, we can say confidently that the paper format defines
the vellum format.

One example I know well is Goff H-359, possibly the earliest Pigouchet
Book of Hours: I catalogued a copy sold Soth. NYC 6 June 1993, lot 26,
and PML bought it. That copy was printed on paper (and is also entirely
unrubricated, so it makes an excellent "study piece" on how a Book of
Hours is more or less unusable without rubrication). In the standard
literature, such as IISTC etc., this edition is always referred to as an
8vo; but because I could study the paper, I can say definitively that it
is a 4to, each quire of 8 leaves consisting of 2 sheets.

As for STC 15889: I do wonder whether this might be a 4to, with each
quire of 8 leaves made up of 2 sheets of vellum / paper. The Princeton
"wreck" is very unrevealing, but its leaf height is difficult (for the
incunable period) for an 8vo: 17.4 cm, and with the upper margin
somewhat close-cut so that the uncut leaf would definitely have been
larger. That is too large for Chancery, and I think also too large for
Median. And yet, if it had been printed on Royal sheets, the leaf ht.
would be 25 cm or more, and this copy has certainly not been cut down
that much! On the other hand, this dimension is easily understandable
for a rather cut-down (Chancery) 4to.

So, my question: what are the leaf dimensions of the Folger copy, and
how wide are the margins at top, side and bottom?

Because it is a Paris Book of Hours with movable borderpieces, one can
actually, in principle, "diagnose" whether it is a 4to, with 4-page
formes, or an 8vo, with 8-page formes, even without a paper copy. If you
find the same borderpiece used twice in a putative 8-page forme, then
that forme never existed, and so you have to conclude that the edition
was a 4to (though here too you have to test to make sure that you don't
get the same borderpiece(s) twice in one forme.) If you're tempted,
please have a go. The Princeton "wreck" is difficult for this, because
there is not a single fully intact quire in the entire volume.
Nonetheless, there are (quite ugly) photostat replacements for all the
missing leaves, so I just might make my own investigation, then we can
compare results.

Paul Needham

Scheide Library

Princeton University Library

1 Washington Road

Princeton NJ 08544

609-258 3241

needham at princeton.edu
[DJL] 

-----Original Message-----
From: Deborah J. Leslie 
Sent: Tuesday, 27 November, 2007 17:41
To: 'Paul S. Needham'
Subject: RE: [DCRM-L] Format for vellum?

Paul,

I've had a go with a measuring tape. 

Leaf size: 172 x 103.5 mm

[measured i3r] Top and fore-edge borders: 4 mm

Border bottom: 29 mm

Deborah

  _____  

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul S. Needham [mailto:needham at Princeton.EDU] 
Sent: Friday, 30 November, 2007 17:31
To: Deborah J. Leslie
Subject: RE: [DCRM-L] Format for vellum?

Deborah,

Very many thanks, this is very helpful. I will add leaf dims. of the
Rylands and PML copies. I'm getting the *ghost* of an idea, but first
have to see if those copies fit the rather "slender" pattern of the
Folger and Princeton copies.

I now think this ed. really has to have been printed as an 8vo - I've
just started doing some tests, based on the appearances, page by page,
of the various borderpieces, and I'm getting the sense that there are no
"forme conflicts".

Mostly, I'm glad the overall question arose. I've been shifting around
for some while with the general question of formats for books printed
(only, or as fart as we know) on vellum, and this one test case is
helping me to concentrate a bit.

<...>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20071130/57ba671a/attachment.htm 