[DCRM-L] Oddity of bound with/signatures

[Noble, Richard]

Since it has its own title page it should definitely be cataloged as an
independent publication. The fact that it was issued as a supplement or
continuation still doesn't justify a 501 in the record for *Opera omnia*,
which is a complete manifestation as issued without it in 1687; but the
same is also true of *De structura glandularum*, since it can stand alone,
despite the obvious link between the two publications indicated by the
signatures. You should end up with two bib records containing complementary
publication and "with" notes.

Incidentally, the corresponding ICCU OPAC SBN records
are IT\ICCU\UFIE\000616 (*Opera omnia*) and IT\ICCU\PUVE\010106 (*De
structura glandularum*) at

http://www.sbn.it/opacsbn/opac/iccu/free.jsp



RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY
BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187
<Richard_Noble at Br <RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>own.edu>


On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Ted P Gemberling <tgemberl at uab.edu> wrote:

>  Richard,
>
> It does have its own title page, with date 1690.
>
>
>
> Are you saying I should use two records, with the main one with a 500 note
> indicating that *De structura glandularum* is sometimes bound with Opera
> omnia, and a 590 indicating our library’s copy has it? Then on the second
> record, I might use a 501 indicating *De structura glandularum*  was
> issued with the Opera Omnia? That seems like it would cover the situation
> well.
>
>
>
> I notice that #223442238, along with the 501, uses a 740 for the 1690
> work rather than a second record. That seems less accurate to me since the
> date for the entire work, given in the fixed field, is 1687.
>
> Thanks, Ted
>
> *From:* dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Noble, Richard
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:48 PM
> *To:* DCRM Users' Group
> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] Oddity of bound with/signatures
>
>
>
> Off the top of my head: I assume that the 1690 *De structura gladularum* was
> issued as a supplement to *Opera omnia* (which were no longer truly
> "omnia"). Has it a title page of its own, or just a caption title? The only
> independent publication of it that I can find is the London edition
> published by Richard Chiswell--probably the first edition, as was the
> London edition of * Opera omnia*.
>
>
>
> If copies of * Opera omnia* that do contain this supplemental work have
> the original title page, then its presence in any one copy is essentially
> multiple-item-specific (so to speak). One should account for its possible
> presence in a 500 note in the general record; a "with" note relating to it
> would be local 590. An analytic ought to be made for the supplement, and
> since it doesn't appear to have been issued independently by Van der Aa, it
> should have a general note regarding the circumastances of its
> publication--which *could* be a 501, I suppose, though I don't think
> there's a great deal of gain in so tagging it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY
>
> BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187
>
> <Richard_Noble at Br <RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>own.edu>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Ted P Gemberling <tgemberl at uab.edu>
> wrote:
>
> I notice there are a couple of records (#223442238 and 642461646) that
> treats the second work as issued with the Opera omnia since they note it in
> a 501 field.
>
> Ted
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Ted P Gemberling
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 27, 2014 12:41 PM
> *To:* DCRM Revision Group List (dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu)
> *Subject:* [DCRM-L] Oddity of bound with/signatures
>
>
>
> I am cataloging Marcello Malpighi’s Opera Omnia, published at Leiden by
> Pieter van der Aa in 1687. The OCLC record I am using is #4992775. I ran
> into an oddity that I wanted to run by people on the list. The last
> gathering in the 2-volume work is 3F(superscript 4). Immediately following
> leaf 3F4 in my copy is another work of his called De structurâ glandularum
> conglobatarum consiliúmque partium epistola, also published by van der Aa
> in 1690. The odd thing is that the signatures of this work are
> 3G-3H(superscript 4). Do you think it’s just a coincidence that the
> signatures are continuous though the date is later?
>
>
>
> Thanks for any enlightenment.
>
>
>
> Ted P. Gemberling
>
> Historical Collections Cataloger
>
> UAB Lister Hill Library, rm. 234B
>
> 1720 Second Ave. South
>
> Birmingham, Ala. 35294-0013
>
> Phone: (205)934-2461
>
> Fax: (205)934-3545
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20140827/e4e20c8d/attachment.html>