My intention is to use bold
when a shared word appears in its book sense
, and bold italics
when a shared word appears in its picture sense
. Let’s see if I can avoid getting them mixed up. If I do get mixed up, or if you can think of other examples, please speak up in the Comments.
In the picture world, an edition is the number of copies in a print run. The term usually only comes up when the number is artificially capped—for instance, “printed in an edition of ten” or “number fourteen of an edition of twenty-five” (which would be written simply “14/25” in pencil on the print). [Updated to include the following image] See, for instance, the Folger’s copy of J.W. Winkelman’s 1994 etching “Early Stage,” which is number eighteen of an edition of one hundred:
J.W. Winkelman’s “Early Stage” (1994) showing its edition statement
For book people, an edition isn’t a number, it’s the collective noun for all of the copies resulting from (roughly) a single setting of type. Deliberate changes to the settings of type constitute different editions (second edition; revised edition; annotated edition; etc.) and the publisher usually proclaims the difference on the title page.
So how do picture people describe deliberate changes to the same work? Simple. Each visually identifiable stage in the life of a picture’s printing surface is a different state (second state; state 1 of 3; early state; etc.). Prints from the early modern period frequently exist in more than one state, since the printing surfaces were often touched-up as they wore out, or altered to replace one printseller’s name with another’s when the plate (metal printing surface) or block (wooden printing surface) changed hands. The earliest state of this print by Martin Droeshout says “Sold by Roger Daniell at the Angell in lumbard Streete” in the oval near the bottom:
Detail of an engraved title page in the Folger collection (click to go to full image)
In a later state, the text in the oval has been changed to “Are to be sold by Thomas Johnson in Brittaynes Burse.”
Detail of an engraved title page in the British Museum collection (click to go to full image and catalog record)
On the other hand, a state in bibliography is a copy or group of copies within the same impression (i.e., print run) that differs from the others in some way that the publisher does not want to proclaim as different.
However, an impression in picture printing refers to a single copy of a print.
Detail of artist’s note in the margin of a printed image (click to go to full image)
And a copy in picture printing refers to a reproduction of a pre-existing picture. Sometimes a copy reproduces a picture in a different medium. The etching below is Wenceslaus Hollar’s copy of a painting by Hans Holbein:
Etching of a painting of Edward VI as Prince of Wales (click to go to zoomable image)
The original picture is a much larger, and very colorful, oil painting.
Painted portrait of Edward VI as Prince of Wales now in the collection of the National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC (click to go to catalog description)
Other times, a copy in the picture world is a replica. This plate of Boscobel House was removed from a copy of the second edition of Sir Thomas Blount’s Boscobel, or, The history of His Sacred Majesties most miraculous preservation after the battle of Worcester, which was published 1769. It is a close copy of a Wenceslaus Hollar print from the first edition of the book, published in 1660.
Illustration from the second edition of Thomas Blount’s Boscobel: or, the compleat history of His Sacred Majesty’s most miraculous preservation after the battle of Worcester. Worcester : printed for S. Gamidge, 1769 (Click to go to zoomable image)
Why was a copy used rather than additional impressions from the original plate? Presumably, the plate etched by Hollar was no longer available, so the plate in the book was made from a new plate.
Speaking of metal printing plates, sometimes picture terms are simply misunderstood in the book world. You know how an engraving is printed from a sheet of metal with lines cut into it, and how a woodcut is printed from a piece of wood with spaces between the lines cut out of it? (See Woodcut, engraving, or what?.) Long ago, a policymaker at ESTC assumed that if early modern prints from wood are woodcuts, then early modern prints from metal must be metal cuts:
Screen shot from the English Short Title Catalogue (click to go to full record)
But in fact, prints made from metal or wood by cutting out the spaces between the lines are metal cuts and woodcuts, respectively (with metal cuts being quite rare, especially after the 16th century). And prints made by cutting lines into metal or wood are engravings – copper engravings, steel engravings, wood engravings, etc. (with wood engravings being quite rare until the 19th century).
And THEN there’s the too-common assumption that “book” is synonymous with “codex of printed words,” despite the fact that bound manuscripts, bound prints, and bound hybrids of all three are also books… [Erin wanders off down the hall, muttering to herself. Again.]