University of Virginia Library

Search this document 


  

collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
 5. 
 6. 
 7. 
 8. 
 9. 
 10. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
 01. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
Notes
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  

collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Notes

[1]

The table of contents appears on e2r and e2v.

[2]

A second edition was printed in St. Louis in 1840 by Churchill and Harris. The text alone was reprinted by B. F. French in Historical Collections of Louisiana . . . Part II (Philadelphia, 1850). In 1940 a mimeographed reprint was made under the auspices of the W.P.A. by the Sutro Branch of the California State Library (Occasional Papers No. 11).

[3]

A Dictionary of Books Relating to America (1873), V, 46.

[4]

G. W. Cole, A Catalogue of Books Relating to the Discovery and Early History of North and South America (1907), No. 886. Before Sabin and Cole, Henry Stevens in Historical Nuggets (1862), pp. 199-201, had listed the issues of 1722, 1727, and 1741, but had been under the impression that they were three different editions which were "the same, except for title-pages." Winsor's History of America (1873), V, 69, n. 1, states that the 1722 issue "was reprinted in 1726, again in 1727, and with a lengthened title, in 1741."

[5]

The title-page of the 1726 issue identifies it as "The Second Edition."

[6]

The 1722 issue was printed, according to the title-page, for B. Cowse (Course), the 1726 for A. Bettesworth, the 1727 for Edward Symon, and the 1741 for Oliver Payne.

[7]

Two title-pages of the 1727 issue have been observed, which, for convenience, are designated A and B. Typographically they are nearly identical in appearance, although a close comparison of the letterpress and the spacing reveals that they are products of different settings. They may be most readily distinguished by the following characteristics:

  • A. 1. The "s" in the word "Esq.", five lines from the bottom of the page is nicely rounded and the type definitely has been kerned.
  • 2. A line drawn diagonally across the page from the right vertex of the "N" in "DESCRIPTION" (second line) to the head serif of the "P" in "Printed" (penultimate line) will just nick the last "E" in "MESCHACEBE" (about the middle of the page).
  • B. 1. The "s" seems to have been damaged — the descender bends up sharply. It appears that the type was not kerned.
  • 2. The line will pass through the "o" in "or" in the same line as "MESCHACEBE".
It should be noted that both title-pages are set to the same measure (84 mm.). It is likely that they were set at the same time in the same shop for convenience in machining — that the printing was done "two up." A summary of the number of title-pages examined is: 1722 (6), 1726 (5), 1727A (3), 1727B (5), 1741 (11). The writer was able to see only eleven of these; the other nineteen were compared by the librarians of collections with photostats of the ViU title-pages (1722, 1727A, 1727B, and 1741) and CtY (1726).

[8]

Heawood, No. 1074.

[9]

Only two 1722 copies (ViU and DLC) were examined by the writer and in neither case was a watermark found on the title-leaf. It should be noted that although both of these title-pages were produced from the same setting of type, the ViU is on paper so much lighter in weight than the paper used in the rest of the book that one is tempted to think it a cancel. The title-leaf of the DLC, however, is normal enough, leading to the conclusion that the ViU is an aberrant copy.

[10]

In seven copies 85 watermarks were found in leaves other than those in e, I, and K. Of this number six appeared on leaves 2 and 3, seven on 1 and 4, 35 on 6 and 7, and 37 on 5 and 8.

[11]

The positions of I2 and I3 are fixed as octavo positions 3 and 6 by the presence of the stubs. It may be argued that I2 and I3 were in positions 2 and 7 and I1 and I4 in positions 1 and 8 and that there could have been four leaves in the center of the fold instead of two as the presence of the stubs indicates. This argument is precluded if K and e occupy head-to-head positions in the forme. In gathering I of ViU 291418 it was observed that the chain lines of the paper appeared depressed on I1r, I2v, I3r, and I4v and raised on I1v, I2r, I3v, and I4r. If I1 and I4 had been imposed in the octavo 1 and 8 positions and if the sheet had been fed into the press with the same side up, depressions would have been seen on I1v, I2v, I3r, and I4r.