David and list: I have to correct you about the photocopies, David. Any photocopies that bear the stamped numbers you describe derive from a (paper) photocopy of the manuscripts which was made independently of the Robin microfilms and any photocopies derived from \it. This second source of photocopies was created by a team of people from Texas Tech University in the Summer of 1974 (as I recall) who wanted to establish a new set of photocopies taken directly from the manuscripts which would contain information inscribed on them about the original which the black-and-white and relatively primitive photocopies of that time could not pick up from the original. (The participants in that second copying of the originals were Max Fisch, Kenneth Ketner, Charles Hardwick, Joe Esposito, and Christian Kloesel, as I recall.) That photocopy is still at Texas Tech in the Institute for Studies in Pragmaticism, and a copy made from it provided the basis for the copy or copies originally in use at the Peirce Edition Project in Indianapolis, though the latter has long since been augmented by photocopies of other manuscripts located at places other than Harvard. The difference between the two distinct sets of first-generation paper photocopies (and their respective descendants) is that those derived from the Robin microfilm will not show the markings which were made on those derived from the 1974 photocopying project I describe above. The rationale for this second copying was to make it unnecessary to go back to Harvard to pick up that additional information, and also to correct some mistakes made in the Robin microfilming. It resulted in a degree of independence from Harvard not otherwise possible at that time.
I agree with what you say about the situation at the Harvard Library, but it may be possible to bypass the problems there by not depending upon any new scanning of the originals except for a few especially problematic manuscripts. It is not clear to me whether your comment that "The easiest access to Peirce's papers is of course to work directly from the Robin microfilms" is intended o bear upon that or not. But I am running out of time today. Thanks for the input, David, and I hope to hear more from you on these things.. Joe Ransdell ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Lachance" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Peirce Discussion Forum" <peirce-l@lyris.ttu.edu> Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 3:14 PM Subject: [peirce-l] Remarks on manuscripts Dear listers, I hope I am not repeating anything that's been said before, in which case I apologize, but here are just a few remarks on Peirce manuscripts to avoid confusion. (Joseph's reply just arrived, as I was writing this). The two images here are (at least) second generation photocopies of the Robin microfilms of Peirce's papers (held in Harvard's Houghton library). These photocopies bear rubber-stamped numbers in the lower righthand side corner indicating MS (799) and page no. (00002), not found of course on the originals. The MS no. also appears in pencil, top left, in the hand of P. Weiss, written directly on the original. Photocopies such as those submitted here often bear annotations about ink color and such, since this information is lost after filming mss in b/w. In the present case (say, the 1st image), the title "Ten Classes of Signs", the arrows, the indications about brown and red ink, etc. are NOT Peirce's. From what I can make out I would say the numerals are his though. When the Peirce edition Project publish a ms in the Writings, everything that is not Peirce's is of course taken out, and important information (such as the brown-red change in ink color by Peirce) is noted so as to give the clearest possible idea of the appearance of the original. Contrary to the Writings, neither the CP nor EP are critical editions in the strict sense (although the latter are based on the PEP's editorial work done for the Writings). The easiest access to Peirce's papers is of course to work directly from the Robin microfilms. I might be wrong but I think the Bill Gates idea has been tried already (computer switch, name dropping and all). As for digitization, Harvard Libraries are rather reluctant as the rules for the protection of the manuscripts are quite strict; in any case they wouldn't let just anyone bring in a scanner and do it, obviously. Digital microfilm viewers/scanners are the easiest way to view the microfilms onscreen, but there are copyright issues with the scanning of the films, which remain Harvard's property. David --- Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.0/368 - Release Date: 6/16/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.0/368 - Release Date: 6/16/2006 --- Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
