-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: 2 records for 2 issues of same atlas?
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 14:26:55 -0500
From: Nancy Kandoian <[log in to unmask]>
To: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
<[log in to unmask]>
Silvana --
The New York Public Library Map Division also has 2 copies of Beers's
/Atlas of the Hudson River Valley/, and I have taken a closer look
thanks to your message. Our copies were cataloged back in 1912, and as
a point of interest, though the practices then may not have relevance to
today's rules, they were cataloged on one record, with a printed note of
our holding "a second copy" and handwritten notes for "east shore" copy
and "west shore" copy. Both copies have the index map and the basic 35
"section" "double plates." Then each copy has different additional
plates. One has additional plates numbered (not hand numbered, but
printed) "E1" through "E6" and the other has "W1" through "W6," each
detailing (mostly at the larger scale of 800 feet to the inch) developed
areas along the eastern shore and western shore of the river,
respectively. (Actually, both copies have "W6" and "E6" which together
form a "double plate.") The additional plates are bound in not
together, but distributed among the 35 other plates, sort of in
geographical order. Our copies both look as if they were rebound at
some time in the distant past. The title pages of both copies are the
same (save for pencilled notes for "W" and "East shore"), and there is
nothing mentioning the additional plates on the index map plate. And
yet, from the looks of them, and from knowledge of differences between
our multiple copies of Beers's /Atlas of New York and Vicinity/, I would
guess that these copies were issued this way, as variant editions for
different groups of customers.
If cataloging according to AACR2, might you catalog them separately, and
use the option of rule 1.2B4 to supply an edition statement for each, if
you can sum up the differences in a brief phrase (like for us, perhaps,
[East shore ed.] and [West shore ed.]), with a note explaining the
differences in more detail? Since we don't have a DCRM quite yet for
cartographic materials, I don't know if you'd want to anticipate it by
following DCRM(B) and not supplying an edition statement, and just
explaining the differences in notes in each record. At the same time,
though I don't know what rule to cite, and the various documents about
when to create a new record seem to point to creating new records for
major changes in content (here, scale and physical description), I think
one could cite cataloger's judgment, consider uncertainty about how the
copies were issued, and consider these changes in content minor compared
to the overwhelmingly in-common aspects of the 2 items. In that case,
making one record for both, with local notes explaining the differences
in the 2 copies, doesn't seem wrong.
Nancy Kandoian
NYPL Map Div.
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Angie Cope, American Geographical
Society Library, UW Milwaukee <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: 2 records for 2 issues of same atlas?
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:43:54 -0500
From: Redmond, Edward James <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
To: 'Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship'
<[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
I am not a map cataloger nor do I have any knowledge of cataloging
rules.
The only contribution I can make is a comparison with the LC copy:
Our copy of the 'Atlas of the Hudson River Valley' (F.W. Beers, 1891)
contains a total of 72 maps.
This number is comprised of 35 sequentially numbered plates showing
"sections" of the Hudson River Valley. Each plate covers a 4x6 mile
swath, bisected by the Hudson River, from Jersey City / lower Manhattan
north to Troy, NY. Each of the 35 sections bears the scale statement
"1200 feet to the inch"
Regarding Newburgh, five (5) larger scale maps are located between
sections 15 and 16. Each of these bear the scale statement "200
feet to
the inch". These maps are not reflected on the town index nor are they
included in the graphic index.
In addition to Newburgh, at least 30 additional maps published at "800
inches to the mile" are included in the atlas. These all appear to be
the larger urban areas along the river (i.e., do not cover both
sides of
the river) and also do not correspond to the capitalized text in the in
the town index.
Our atlas was acquired before 1909
and, at some point in its life on our shelves, was rebound.
Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
[mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
On Behalf Of Angie Cope, American
Geographical Society Library, UW Milwaukee
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: 2 records for 2 issues of same atlas?
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: 2 records for 2 issues of same atlas?
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:24:11 -0500
From: Grabach, Kenneth A. Mr. <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
To: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
<[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Silvana
You will surely hear from some experienced map catalogers. However,
what you describe is not unique to maps, and the dilemma you find
yourself in is because of different content in each volume, not so much
that the content is cartographic in nature.
The differences if they get described in separate records are going to
be in fields that for the most part are not unique to the rules for
cartographic materials. It will be in note fields and some others. I
would draw on your rare book cataloging experience to make your
decisions here. As you suggest, the two volumes could represent two
copies of the same work with content added later to one of them.
On the
other hand, based on information from other sources, they could
represent two editions from the same publisher, with similar content in
both, but with added content in one of them. But these all represent
*bibliographic* rather than *cartographic* concerns.
Ken Grabach <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Maps Librarian Phone: 513-529-1726
<tel:513-529-1726>
Miami University Libraries
Oxford, Ohio 45056 USA
-----Original Message-----
From: Maps, Air Photo, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship
[mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
On Behalf Of Angie Cope, American
Geographical Society Library, UW Milwaukee
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: 2 records for 2 issues of same atlas?
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 2 records for 2 issues of same atlas?
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:38:35 -0700
From: <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
To: MAPS-L <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
hello all,
I was hoping someone might be able to help me with this dilemma.
I have 2 copies of: Atlas of the Hudson River Valley from New York City
to Troy / F.W. Beers, NY : Watson & Co, 1891.
Both have 35 numbered "section" double plates of Hudson River Valley,
and both have extra double plates, just not the same ones.
One has 5 extra maps detailing Newburgh, NY and the other has about 10
extra maps detailing Englewood and other sections of NE NJ. so, the
physical descriptions and subject (to an extant) would differ. do these
get separate records? why would they be issued this way? unless they
weren't?
One, with the extra Newburgh maps, is in orignal publishers boards.
the other, with the extra NJ maps, has been rebound.
also, if I don't include the scales for the extra maps, there are 2
consistently used throughout the atlas, so they would be listed in the
record. If I do include the extra plates, it becomes scales differ.
I am a rare book cataloger with a limited experience cataloging maps.
any advice would be appreciated.
-Silvana
|
