[DCRM-L] Publication date question

[Noble, Richard]

People enjoyed (one might almost say "got off on") playing with the rules
for constructing roman numerals in just this way. This is a culture that
revelled in chronograms, after all. MDCCIIX is also (right) marginally
prettier than MDCCVIII, which does trail off without the satisfying closure
of X.

RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN UNIVERSITY
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-3384 : RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU


On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Carpenter, Jane <
jfcarpenter at library.ucla.edu> wrote:

> I think when smaller roman numerals precede larger ones, you subtract,
> rather than add.  See also the Wikipedia article on Roman numerals, which
> specifically mentions the use of IIX to represent "8".
> ________________________________________
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of
> Poremski, Molly D [molly.d.poremski at Vanderbilt.Edu]
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 1:54 PM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Publication date question
>
> Ahhh, interesting! Thank you so much!
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
> Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 3:53 PM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Publication date question
>
> I take it back. It doesn't appear to be a typo, but an alternate German way
> of spelling 1708. I did a keyword search in OCLC on the characters MDCCIIX,
> and a bunch of records came up with 1708 in the date field.
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
> Behalf Of Poremski, Molly D
> Sent: Monday, 22 November, 2010 16:41
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Publication date question
>
> It’s: Historia ecclesiastica novi testamenti … / Christiani Kortholti.
>
> There are a few records similar to it in OCLC (#38742277), all with the
> date of 1708, but that makes me think it could be 1712 as well.
>
> Thank you!
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
> Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 3:36 PM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Publication date question
>
> What's the book, Molly?
>
> It must be a typo; if a printer really could realize savings from the
> printing of 7 characters instead of 8, he would have just used an Arabic
> date, which is only 4.
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
> Behalf Of Poremski, Molly D
> Sent: Monday, 22 November, 2010 16:32
> To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
> Subject: [DCRM-L] Publication date question
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I’m currently cataloging a work with the publication date of: “MDCCIIX”
> printed in red ink.
>
> Is this 1708 or 1712? Is it possible that the date was shortened by one
> character (MDCCIIX as opposed to MDCCVIII) to conserve printing costs? Was
> this a normal practice or merely a typo?
>
> Thank you very much,
> Molly
>
> Molly D. Poremski
> Cataloging Librarian
> Jean and Alexander Heard Library
> Vanderbilt University
> 419 21st Ave. S.
> Nashville, TN 37203
> (615) 343-1965
> molly.d.poremskI at vanderbilt.edu
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20101122/16f2d644/attachment.htm