[DCRM-L] Puzzled by LC note re Hain 1522 / Pellechet 1084

[Noble, Richard]

[Subject designed to facilitate instant deletion by those to whom it means
nothing]

I am puzzled by LC's note in its record for Thomas Aquinas,  Sentencia
libri de anima (Venice: Renner, 1472):

      Agrees with Hain, differs from Pellechet, p. [21], line 1: LC
"spēs", Pellechet "opēs".

Pellechet does indeed quote the first line of that leaf, as a kind of
milepost (it's the first leaf of the third gathering), and gives "opes";
but Hain's entry has nothing to say about this leaf at all. I don't know
whether this is Pellechet misquoting, or accidentally turning up an
isolated press-variant. The correct reading is actually  for the
contraction of "speciem"--the final "letter" is not "s" but the variant
final form of "m": the passage reads, without contractions, "Unde coacti
sunt ponere ideas per quarum participationem et res naturales specium
sortiuntur ...").

Is it worth trying to read this cataloger's mind? I'm working with this
record at present.

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>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20170106/8a942619/attachment.html>