[DCRM-L] Advice re late edition of engravings

[Erin Blake]

The 260$c is meant to reflect the first printing of that particular state of the plate (keeping in mind that "state" means something different for engravings than for printed books). I don't know if "[between 1590 and 1600]?" is actually correct in this case, but as written, this example means that the plate was probably last altered at the end of the 16th century, and that this particular impression was struck about 200 years later (keeping in mind that "impression" means something different for engravings than for printed books).

That being said, DCRM(G) also provides an alternative rule: use a single bibliographic description for original and later printings from an unaltered plate, in which case you'd have a local note saying "printed late 18th or early 19th century" with justification for the date.

Now... where's my drink?!

    Erin.

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Noble, Richard
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 6:09 PM
To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Advice re late edition of engravings


On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Erin Blake <EBlake at folger.edu<mailto:EBlake at folger.edu>> wrote:
260  $a [Antwerp?] : $b [Publisher not identified], $c [between 1590 and 1600?] $g ([printed late 18th or early 19th century])

Ah, interesting. Is the $c understood as date of engraving or first publication? In which case the $g, given the frequent importance of date of printing, could be the basis for creating distinct records? Then there's what one might do  with 264 fields ... interesting times.

Home. Ready for drink ... cataloging will do that to you. Take note, neophytes.

RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY
BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187
<Richard_Noble at Br<mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>own.edu<http://own.edu>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20130327/f162224d/attachment-0001.html>