Log InRegister
Quick Links : The Mindat ManualThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryMindat Newsletter [Free Download]
Home PageAbout MindatThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusWho We AreContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatCorporate SponsorshipSponsor a PageSponsored PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryGeologic Time
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralRandom LocalitySearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
Keyword(s):
 
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
Mining CompaniesStatisticsUsersMineral MuseumsClubs & OrganizationsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice SettingsThe Mineral Quiz
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesSearch by ColorNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day GalleryPhotography

GeneralHelp identifying old crystal plate

30th Jul 2018 15:06 UTCJohan Kjellman Expert

00838380016030536865843.jpg
I might have asked this before. I need help to identify the following plate:



Some info. The plate, numbered Tab. I., seems to depict quartz only. It was found in a copy of Prodromus Crystallographiæ from 1723 by Cappeller, but it is not any of Cappeller's three plates. Fig's 49-52 are versions of fig's 1-5 on the classic Steno plate from 1669.


I have searched a lot so I'll need "refined" advices or direct info.


thanks

10th Mar 2020 03:08 UTCGabriel Plattes

03741010016030536861678.jpg
Pardon me for reviving an old one, but I found this quite fascinating.
The plate is very similar stylistically to plate III of the Prodromus. However, the plate and its numbered figures are indeed not discussed in the text (the other three are). But, the similarity got me thinking, what if it belongs to another work by Cappeller? I've attached an entry from Poggendorf, I 373. Might the plate come from 'De crystallorum generatione,' Act. Acad. Nat. Cur. Vol. IV? I tried to find this article on google books, but could not locate it. The serial is: Acta Academiae Caesareo-Leopoldinae Naturae Curiosorum (according to Agassiz's Bibliographia Zool. et geol.).
Do you own this work? 

10th Mar 2020 09:06 UTCKeith Compton 🌟 Manager

I can't comment specifically as I am not familiar with that historic book. But there are numerous historic books that have differing plates, lithographs, or coloured plates. So conceivably there may be differing versions of the same book. It's not like they were printed en mass like modern books.

Equally you may be correct in your assumption of it being from a different book by the same author.

You say that "Fig's 49-52 are versions of fig's 1-5 on the classic Steno plate from 1669". However Cappeller was born 9 June 1685 so that would mean that if it was from 1669, it is not his, unless you mean that he copied those figures for his book.

Also, perhaps it is from the later German translation in 1922 and collated by Ludwig Burmester.

See: Burmester, "Geschichtliche Entwicklung des kristallographischen Zeichnens und dessen
Ausführung in schräger Projektion, "Zeitschrift fur Kristallograpohie 57 (1922-1923) p 706.

 




10th Mar 2020 09:46 UTCGabriel Plattes

09528350016030536876127.jpg
Very good indeed, now we are having some fun exploring this fascinating plate.
Of the Prodromus there was only a single edition, other than the German ed., 1922. 
What Johan mentioned, figures 49-52, were indeed 'copied' or matched, to figs. 1-5 of Steno's De Solido, 1669 (please see attached). This happened on occasion for a number of titles. For example, figures from  De Boodt's Gemmarum et Lapidum, 1609, are seen in a number of other publications, copied. Diderot's Encyclopedie, as another example, draws from numerous older editions for many of their illustrations, for the section that covers mining, mineralogy, &c.; drawing on Hooke, Leigh, Loehneyss, &c., &c. 
Hrmm, it won't be a plate from the 1922 ed., that plate looks contemporary, the paper. Also, it is tipped in, just as many plates were in those days.
It is an educated guess only, that it might be from another work/article by Cappeller, on account of the similarity of the plates; or, perhaps he had intended to expand on the work, and that plate had been prepared for it, but no more was issued. 

10th Mar 2020 09:54 UTCKeith Compton 🌟 Manager

Gabriel

Johan mentions "It was found in a copy of Prodromus Crystallographiæ from 1723 by Cappeller".  I'm not sure if Johan means that the plate was simply found loose in the publication or was bound into it. If loose then it could easily be from a later publication.

More info from Johan needed.



10th Mar 2020 10:09 UTCGabriel Plattes

00452660016030536884193.jpg
It is tipped in, judging from that image; if that is an image of a copy of the Prodromus, with that plate tipped in to it (I would assume it would be, otherwise Johan's posting is strange). But indeed, point taken. This does not, however, take away from the close similarity to plate III of the Prodromus, in how that plate was executed (please find attached). That it is from another publication other than the Prodromus, of that, there is no doubt.  

10th Mar 2020 23:34 UTCJohan Kjellman Expert

06364200016030536888781.jpg
It is tipped in in the copy at the university library here. As I was preparing an exhibition on the history of crystallography some years ago, I ordered out several books for copying images etc.  The colleagues preparing the layout for our catalogue had found a picture that they really liked, and wanted on the catalogue cover, this was it. When I was going to add the bibliographical information to the catalogue, I realized that the image was "extra" and couldn't find it in any other copies of the 'Prodromus', which always have three plates. But as you caan see here for yourself, the copy here in Uppsala have four.

10th Mar 2020 23:42 UTCGabriel Plattes

Most fascinating indeed. Do see if the university can source a digital copy of Bourguet + Cappeller's De crystallorum generatione, along with any of its plates. I'd say it is a good bet. Volume 4 of that serial, I believe, 1730. 

11th Mar 2020 00:33 UTCJohan Kjellman Expert

I just discovered this, Weber 1923:
It actually shows images from 'my odd plate', page 125, supposedly as an original, so the copy Weber has worked with apparently has the plate as well. However in Cappeler's text I can only find references to the three common plates.
The Bourget-Cappeler seems to be a printed letter, I haven't found any info that it should have any plates, have you?

cheers

11th Mar 2020 01:26 UTCGabriel Plattes

Hrmm, very good indeed, fascinating, how I read that (so far) it would appear that the manuscript for the work, was longer than the Prodromus, and that it included data on quartz. When the Prodromus was issued, the section on quartz was not included. However, some material had been printed (presumably, that dealing with qtz), but was not included, or removed prior to issue. Possibly, the plate for that section was also printed (yours here), and that did make it in to some copies. The extra leaves were removed from all copies (as far as we know; it'd be interesting if copies exist, where those leaves had not been removed), and some copies retained the plate. A fascinating issue, this Prodromus
Ah yes. Many articles in scholarly journals, and even books, were epistolary; Ferber's reise durch das Temeswarer bannat; Agricola's Bermannus; Pliny the Younger; &c. That article could have a plate or two. Not that I know of, of course. I've no access to it. It would be a good one to get a hold of though, I reckon. I might place an order at a local university. But, after receiving your Weber article, I incline to that plate belonging to the Prodromus - part of its publishing history. Changes made through publication, and that plate - for some unknown reason - being included in some copies, even though its text was not included/removed.

11th Mar 2020 01:34 UTCGabriel Plattes

It ought be remembered that a prodromus is an 'introduction' to a far larger work (the base of which was that manuscript). As they printed the prodromus, they changed their mind, they had intended on including the section on qtz, but did not do so for some reason. Some material was printed, but it was not included/removed, as the prodromus was set. But, the plate to that section, also ready, did made it into some copies. As I guess it, so far.
I thought you owned that copy - lucky bugger! I thought.
Oh, question, the other plates are tipped in the exact same fashion? Onto blank leaves, folding?

11th Mar 2020 01:37 UTCGabriel Plattes

That it is from another publication other than the Prodromus, of that, there is no doubt. 
 Keith,

Och... ;)
 
Mineral and/or Locality  
Mindat Discussions Facebook Logo Instagram Logo Discord Logo
Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: April 19, 2024 22:15:35
Go to top of page