/lit/ - Literature

>Considering using Worldcat in tandem with the unique titles you've posted to track down which library you're working at and filing a suggestion with screen caps of the forum they have an irresponsible handler

>>462340
Are you the idiot that thinks he's a book expert from watching the da Vinci Code?

YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE GLOVES ON MOST 17TH-FORWARD CENTURY BOOKS. STOP BEING STUPID.

>>462340
yeah brah, i hear archives and libraries like to keep their books hidden so nobody knows they exist

>>462340
OP here. I'm not sure what you're so butthurt about, anon. Boss said I could take pics. Don't need gloves.

Why umad?

>>462351
>call names, use all caps

You sure educated me on book handling. I bet you're the only person here with a background in archive materials huh?

>>462340
OP here again, DO IT FAGGOT.

>>462363
If you think that you need to wear gloves when temporarily handling 17th and 18th century books, then you went to a clown college and will look like an idiot when you show up to shelve books with magician gloves on.

>>462363
it's just that guy who shows up in these threads and trolls about having to wear gloves when dealing with durable-as-fuck 1700s books.

guy is either a troll or really stupid

>>462328
Why don't they print title pages like this anymore? I love the illustration, description of the book, and the red ink.

>>462363
Got your Associates eh? Bravo.

Get your PhD in an archivist field and we'll talk about what you know.

>>462395
Yeah, title pages used to be real works of art. The titles always used to be really long too.

>>462363
Misperceptions about White Gloves

by Dr. Cathleen A. Baker and Randy Silverman

http://www.betweenthecovers.com/btc/articles/49

You fail.

>>462411
Do any books from back then have blurbs or endorsements from "celebrities" of the time? Something by Locke with the snippet, "Most excellent. Titillating and elucidating. - Diderot"?

Or is that just a modern thing?

>>462423
From what I've seen, these books don't have those kinds of "blurbs" - certainly not on the covers since paperbacks and paper book covers are relatively new. Inside you don't have them either - you might have a publisher insert in the very back with its own "hype" about other books it publishes though.

Anyone speak Latin or Hebrew? I'd be interested in what these titles say.

>>462325
Bumping for archival content.

>>462444

I know Latin but not Hebrew. Here's what the Latin says (giving transcription of the Latin to see if anyone catches something I misread, the pic is blurry):

Ioachimi Langii Clavis Hebraei Codicis qua praemisso Nucleo Grammaticae, Secondum seriem Librorum, Cap. ac Vers.

Vocum Hebraeorum
Latina translatio ac analysis una cum Radicibus [ex-something] in graciam eorum

qui sine dificultate ac mora,
vel suo [too blurry]

vel sub viva institutione felicius,
in ipsius sacra codicis [can't read it too blurry]

[the other stuff is just about when it was published and by whom etc.]

Translation:

"Ioachamus Langius' Key of the Hebrew Bible [lit: "Hebrew book"], in which, the central points of its grammar having been expounded, follows the series of books [of the Bible] by chapter and verse [i.e. "after I give you the basics of grammar I have detailed grammatical notes on the Bible going through the whole thing sequentially by chapter and verse"]

A Latin translation and analysis of Hebrew expressions is provided along with their origins [not sure what "in graciam eorum" means, it's some sort of idiom but I forget what it means],

which without difficulty or delay
[something, too blurry]

[can't understand the second part without the blurred text above]

Eh I gave it the old college try sorry I couldn't get moar.

>>465869

>in which, the central points of its grammar having been expounded, follows the series of books [of the Bible] by chapter and verse [i.e. "after I give you the basics of grammar I have detailed grammatical notes on the Bible going through the whole thing sequentially by chapter and verse"]

I mistranslated this but I'm still not sure on the right translation. That's "basically" what it says but yeah.

Dammit. I hate it when I can't understand something.

;_;

>>465883

Ah here we are. I was bein' dumb and thought there was a period where there wasn't. Here it is fix'd:

"in which, the central points of its grammar having been expounded, is provided a Latin translation and analysis of Hebrew expressions [i.e. proverbs and such] with their origins, following the series of books [of the Bible] by chapter and verse [not sure what "in graciam eorum" means, it's some sort of idiom but I forget what it means] [i.e. there's a running commentary on difficult phrases/expressions/proverbs that follows the chapters and verses]

which without difficulty or delay
[something, too blurry]

[can't understand the second part without the blurred text above]"

>>465919
>in graTiam eorum

>>465936

Ah yeah you're right.

They're interchangeable though, "graciam" is just a later spelling.

I found it out, "in gratiam eorum" = "with their approval". I assume he's saying that he conferred with Jews on his translations and they backed him up.

To OP: Keep posting your finds. Your threads are definitely some of the most interesting on /lit/ (where it seems the majority has no knowledge that they actually made books prior to 1900).

>>466022
way to be one snobbish bastard.

I support the motion, tho

The first book is called "A Sacred History of Animals". The text below is too blurry but I gather it's basically a Christian work expounding on the implications of the Genesis creation myth.

OP

POAST

MOAR

PLEASE

Seriously dude I love trying to translate shit. Give me something to translate before I die of boredom.

>>466038

Not snobbish, just stating facts.