ERDNASE

Discuss general aspects of Genii.
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27047
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » September 26th, 2022, 12:21 pm

I have seen authors make corrections in a copy of their own book.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » September 26th, 2022, 12:51 pm

I have seen authors make corrections in a copy of their own book.

That was my first thought, too. If the notes corrected or improved some of the descriptions, this might be evidence that the annotator was Erdnase. However, most of the existing evidence suggests The Author didn't attempt to re-print the book himself. In fact, after the initial print run, he appears to have all but abandoned the book. So notes of this nature seem unlikely.

On a related note, I've recently decided to resurrect my old magic blog (ten years after starting the first one). I always planned to include a lot of content on TEATCT but never got around to it. To remedy this, I plan to run an online book club to encourage those new to our art to read more magic books; The Expert at the Card Table will be the first book we read. Full details can be found on my blog, for those interested in participating.

Marty

Jack Shalom
Posts: 1368
Joined: February 7th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Brooklyn NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Jack Shalom » September 26th, 2022, 1:01 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:I have seen authors make corrections in a copy of their own book.


Agreed, which is why I said, "the notes would disqualify him as the author unless they were proofreading notes."

But when I write in a book that I haven't written, the notes are like, "Good idea!" or, "I can't do that" or "What is s/he talking about?" or "that's similar to X" and so on.

User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » September 26th, 2022, 1:45 pm

Well, I for one hope a copy like that exists! Complete with proofreading notes, a detailed inscription and, perhaps, a photograph of Erdnase himself. ;) We can but dream!

User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » September 27th, 2022, 6:26 am

I'm trying to fact-check a few things about the first edition of The Expert at the Card Table. Is there a clean scan of the original 1902 edition available anywhere? This seems like it would be a useful resource to make available to all the Erdnase scholars doing research into the book. Sadly, I don't own the first edition.

To date, the best scan I've found is Houdini's copy of the book made available online by The Library of Congress. This is the 1905 Drake edition of Erdnase. Is this a reasonably accurate copy of the original? Did Drake use the same printing plates for these 1905 reprints?

Another quick question, what was the page count for the original book? I'm assuming it was 205. I want to check this for an Erdnase quiz that I'm creating.

Thanks,

Marty

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 360
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » September 28th, 2022, 4:32 am

I just came up with what might be one of my worst Erdnase-related ideas.

Possibly someone else has already discussed this. If you look at “SWERDNASE,” it obviously can be broken into “SWERD” and “NASE.”

Wiktionary informs us that “swerd” is an alternative word for “sword,” and that “nase” is a type of fish.

User avatar
John M. Dale
Posts: 298
Joined: January 18th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Vancouver, WA

Re: ERDNASE

Postby John M. Dale » September 28th, 2022, 4:55 am


User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » September 28th, 2022, 6:23 am

Doesn't seem much stranger than the Earthnose theory. Was Erdnase fond of using other Middle English words? I've got it! We're not looking for a reformed gambler or a magician. Erdnase was a fisherman! ;)

Wasn't there a similar theory related to reversing RUSE AND from the title to make ANDRUSE or ANDREWS. I've long hoped Erdnase incorporated more wordplay into the text, but I've yet to find anything compelling to take seriously. There's got to be a hidden message in there somewhere!

Marty

P.S. I found the answers to my two questions. Jason England confirmed on another forum that a "proper" edition of Erdnase does indeed have 205 pages (some of the later editions do not). Also, printing errors on the copyright page (on the word "Erdnase" and "Canada") are visible in the Houdini copy. I believe that the same errors are present on the first-edition copies of The Expert. This suggests that the original plates were used to print the 1905 Drake edition (apart from the reformatted title page).

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 360
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » September 28th, 2022, 11:51 pm

The situation regarding the verso of the title page is kind of complicated, and I think a lot of the nuances have been explored on this thread (but probably not all that recently). From information posted long ago by Richard Hatch, and from information John Bodine kindly sent me years ago based on four first editions he checked, I think it is semi-safe to say that most if not all copies of the first edition show significant problems with the words “Erdnase,” “London,” “Hundred,” and “and.” The “rule” under the word “Stationers’” is also in bad shape. Other words are also imperfect.

Sorry to quote myself, but I wrote the following on one of my Erdnase blogs back in 2014. I don’t think I have seen the following ideas discussed by anyone else (I have corrected two typos):

It looks to me as though something heavy and solid has interfered with the type.  There is nothing like simply type that has broken, or become worn, or has shifted in position.  To my mind, it seems more like the damage that might be seen in a plate, as opposed to a “forme” with set type.

But what we are looking at is an image of a printed page.  How did the damage really occur?

It seems to me that it would have happened in one of two ways.  Either the plate was damaged, or the mold that was used in the plate-making process was damaged.  Since the mold would have been softer than the final plate, it would have been more susceptible to damage.

There are basically two different types of plates that could have been used:  stereotype plates or electrotype plates.  In both cases, of course, type would still have to be set, in order for the plates to be made.  The molds would be made from the set type, and the plates would be made from the molds (the processes differing dramatically depending on which kind of plates were made).  The situation gets a little more complicated when you contemplate the possibility of photoengraving, which probably was not used on the text.


—Tom Sawyer

Roger M.
Posts: 1598
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Roger M. » September 29th, 2022, 9:11 am

Very interesting Tom, and good to see your thoughts on Erdnase and his book in posts again!

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » September 29th, 2022, 11:13 am

Agree with Roger -- Good to see you back, Tom.

User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » September 29th, 2022, 12:36 pm

Tom Sawyer wrote:The situation regarding the verso of the title page is kind of complicated, and I think a lot of the nuances have been explored on this thread (but probably not all that recently). From information posted long ago by Richard Hatch, and from information John Bodine kindly sent me years ago based on four first editions he checked, I think it is semi-safe to say that most if not all copies of the first edition show significant problems with the words “Erdnase,” “London,” “Hundred,” and “and.” The “rule” under the word “Stationers’” is also in bad shape. Other words are also imperfect.

Thanks, Tom. This was very interesting and I now know the correct term for this type of page (verso meaning the reverse, back, or other side of something in Latin).

All of the errors you mention are present on Houdini's copy (Drake, 1905), so I'm going to assume that this is almost as good as having a scan of a first edition. Although it would be fantastic to have a proper scan of the 1902 book.

What I find amazing about the title page and verso is that almost all of the solid information we have about the mysterious man came from these two pages.

Marty

P.S. Another aspect of the book I don't think I've ever seen discussed in detail is the use of two acorns with oak leaves as a motif on the book's cover. Was this a standard thing to do? Or does it have some more personal connection to the author?

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » September 30th, 2022, 2:13 pm

It’s not often that there’s new information on TEATCT or the author, so I hope that this will stimulate interest and discussion. I suggest right-clicking on the links embedded below to open images in a new window.

When Samuel White Jamieson from Jamieson-Higgins Co. submitted the copyright application on behalf of Erdnase, he enclosed a money order for $1.00. This fee comprised of 50 cents for the registration of the copyright, and 50 cents as payment for a certificate of copyright. The first page of the original copyright application is annotated in pencil by the US Copyright Office in the top right corner ‘1.00 M.O.’ confirming payment; while the second page of the application is stamped to show that the certificate of copyright was returned to Erdnase, care of McKinney, on February 26th 1902.

The title page that was submitted alongside the copyright application is annotated in thick pencil, highlighting the book’s title, and underlining the tapered ‘inverted triangle’ of text. These sections of the title page were transcribed to the copyright certificate that was returned to Erdnase. The image shown is the copy retained in the records of the US Copyright Office. I don't believe that this copyright certificate has been known about or published previously.

More to follow...

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » September 30th, 2022, 2:55 pm

I wonder if there are other copyright requests made by the publisher on behalf of their authors. Are they all in the same writing? Or did the authors fill out the forms themselves?

Likely an office worker filled it out. But if not, this could be erdnase’s handwriting.

Let the graphology analysis begin!

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » September 30th, 2022, 2:59 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:I wonder if there are other copyright requests made by the publisher on behalf of their authors. Are they all in the same writing? Or did the authors fill out the forms themselves?

Likely an office worker filled it out. But if not, this could be erdnase’s handwriting.

Let the graphology analysis begin!

Hi Brad. If you click on the link I've put on Samuel White Jamieson's name in my post above, it'll take you to the discussion about this. It's 99.99% certain that Samuel White Jamieson filled in the application for Erdnase. Magnus has also posted about this on his excellent page 'Looking for Erdnase'.

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 360
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » October 1st, 2022, 3:51 am

Hi All,

Roger and Bill, thank you for your kind remarks! Much appreciated by me!

Marty Jacobs: Regarding the acorns, I don’t know of any detailed discussions, or at least I can’t think of any. There are a few posts on this thread that touch on the topic, but I doubt whether any of them are earth shattering.

Those interested can probably find most of them (but not necessarily all) by searching this thread for "acorns.” People including John Bodine, Marty Demarest, Bill Mullins, mam, JeffS, and me as well, have at least touched on the subject.

I now hand the thread back to the Richard Evans posts on the copyright certificate (and related documents)! (I may comment on that topic at some point.)

—Tom Sawyer

User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » October 1st, 2022, 6:29 am

Tom Sawyer wrote:Marty Jacobs: Regarding the acorns, I don't know of any detailed discussions, or at least I can't think of any. There are a few posts on this thread that touch on the topic, but I doubt whether any of them are earth shattering.

Those interested can probably find most of them (but not necessarily all) by searching this thread for "acorns." People including John Bodine, Marty Demarest, Bill Mullins, mam, JeffS, and me as well, have at least touched on the subject.

Thanks, Tom. I had found the existing information about the acorns through a search; as you say, nothing earth-shattering. However, it would be worthwhile to establish whether this stylised acorn pair was a typical decoration. Marty Demarest found a very similar double acorn motif used in another publication (6000 Years of History) in the McKinney bankruptcy files. If it was something that Erdnase requested, it might have had some personal significance. Or, he might have selected this embellishment because acorns are considered lucky in some cultures and have ancient connections to witches and magic. So, it could well be another dead end.

I've always found the triple copyright intriguing. We have evidence that the US copyright was filed correctly, so why can we not find similar evidence of the Canadian and English copyright applications? I know Adrian Smith has searched in London (in the 1940s), and David Ben has done a similar exhaustive search in Canada. Maybe these additions were falsified to strengthen the wording of the copyright notice, to put off would-be plagiarisers. Perhaps Erdnase destroyed the evidence in England and Canada to protect his identity! ;)

I'm looking forward to hearing more from Richard Evans about the copyright notices.

Marty

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » October 1st, 2022, 9:22 am

Good to see you back here Tom - I've enjoyed re-reading your works on Erdnase during the lockdowns.

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » October 1st, 2022, 9:35 am

Here's a second bit of new information:

Back in 2015 it was noted that there appareared to be a discrepancy between the title page submitted with the copyright application and the title page of the published first edition. The letters ‘R’ and ‘T’ in the word ‘ARTIFICE’ are spaced further apart in the page submitted with the copyright application when compared side-by-side with first edition title pages. This difference is also evident in other first edition copies, and indeed when compared to the any other first edition copy.

However, a closer comparison of the title pages shows further differences that are not immediately apparent. By setting markers across sections of the first edition title page and seeing how these compare with the title page submitted with the copyright application, it is clear that there are significant discrepancies between the two. While the upper part of the pages align, the lower portion does not. This misalignment is caused by a wider line spacing in the ‘inverted triangle’ of text on the title page submitted with the copyright application, but this fact is obscured by the US Copyright Office's thick pencil underlining. As with the spacing between the ‘R’ and ‘T’ in ‘ARTIFICE’, this discrepancy is consistent when compared to the title page of other first edition copies.

This confirms that the title page submitted to the US Copyright Office was a proof copy and that the final typesetting had not been completed. This is relevant to the timeline of the book’s publication as it strongly suggests that the first copies of the completed book were printed and bound between 15th February 1902 (the date the copyright application was mailed to the US Copyright Office) and 7th March 1902 (since two copies of the bound book were received by the Copyright Office on 8th March 1902).

One further peculiarity of the book, which has been recognised but I don’t think ever explicitly stated, is that even though the application for copyright was made for the title ‘Artifice Ruse and Subterfuge at the Card Table’, the book has always been catalogued by the Library of Congress and the US Copyright Office under the title that appears on the cover – ‘The Expert at the Card Table’ - ever since the book appeared in the catalogue of publications of the US Copyright Office in May 1902. (For some reason, this link doesn’t work with Chrome – better to use a different browser).

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » October 3rd, 2022, 7:11 am

I should add that the above analysis is not based on a copy of the original image, but a screen grab. There is the potential for distortion/artefact as a result -but if anyone has a copy from US Copyright Office I can re-run it. The R & T in 'ARTIFICE' is definitely different and isn't affected by any potential distortion.

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 360
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » October 3rd, 2022, 2:59 pm

Hi All,

Richard Evans, thank you for the nice things you said a few posts back—that was thoughtful of you!

Regarding the proof of the title page, Dick Hatch sent an image of that and (I believe) related images to Bill Mullins, so that Bill could post a link, which he did. I believe this was in a post of March 5, 2015. (I just clicked that link, and I’m not positive it still "works." It seemed to require some kind of an account to find out.)

—Tom Sawyer

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » October 3rd, 2022, 4:37 pm

Tom Sawyer wrote:Hi All,
Regarding the proof of the title page, Dick Hatch sent an image of that and (I believe) related images to Bill Mullins, so that Bill could post a link, which he did. I believe this was in a post of March 5, 2015.


The post in question is here (Mar 7, 2015). I don't know why the files don't show. I'm at work currently, and the IT people here block many filesharing sites, so I can't do much to relink it. I'll try from home tonight.

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » October 3rd, 2022, 4:50 pm

Thanks Bill - that’d be great

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 360
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » October 9th, 2022, 2:44 am

Hi All,

Back on the topic of early non-magic ads for The Expert at the Card Table, I see that the Kernan Mfg. Co., a Chicago company, had advertisements for the book in The Billboard and Variety circa 1910 or 1911 or so. Such ads are findable on the fultonhistory.com website, if you search for Expert at Card Table. (The precise dates were not readily apparent, but the search results and a stray year I noticed support what I said.) I don’t think they come up if you include the “the" before "Card Table."

The ads are quite small and are somewhat similar to some of the little advertisements of the Atlas Trick and Novelty Co.

The Kernan ads under discussion are all similar to each other, but there are at least two different ones among the four I saw. They all advertised Wizard Trick Cards for 35 cents, a book for poker players for 15 cents, and Expert at Card Table for 25 cents.

I’m not sure whether anyone has mentioned those ads before, though the company name didn’t come up when I searched the Genii forum.

The company name does come up if you search the internet for it. A 1901 catalog of the company has been reprinted. One is currently listed on eBay. (If you look for it, you should spell out Manufacturing instead of using the Mfg. abbreviation.)

—Tom Sawyer

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » October 11th, 2022, 5:50 pm

That’s a nice find Tom - the Kernan ads definitely haven’t been mentioned previously.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » October 14th, 2022, 5:00 pm

The Erdnase movie is available for streaming now.

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 360
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » October 16th, 2022, 4:08 am

Hi All,

First, Richard Evans: Thanks for your reply to my preceding post!

Next, a few comments about the Charlier pass! More specifically, some of you are probably interested in semi-precise publication dates for a few possible works that Erdnase might have consulted in connection with his description of that sleight. In this post, my main goal is to set forth a few dates with some specificity, since—when those books are discussed—the dates are not necessarily always stated in a nuanced way.

I suspect that the main candidates as Erdnase’s source (or sources) for the Charlier pass are Hoffmann’s More Magic (1889), Hoffmann’s Tricks With Cards: A Complete Manual of Card Conjuring (1889), and the third edition of Sachs’s Sleight of Hand (1900). (The book mentioned second is completely different from Tricks With Cards from Modern Magic.) The Man Who Was Erdnase mentions those three, but refers to an earlier edition of the Sachs book.

I glanced at Roterberg’s New Era Card Tricks on Google Books, but I didn’t see any mention of the little finger at one end of the pack, and Erdnase does mention that. Of course, Erdnase could have thought of the little-finger bit on his own. It does seem like it should have been a natural development. But at the moment, I’m just considering works that mention the little finger at one end of the pack.

Here is one little preliminary note regarding More Magic. I’ll return to this topic toward the end of this post, but I imagine that most magicians are not aware that More Magic was partially serialized in Every Boy’s Magazine, kinda like Modern Magic was, although the More Magic serialization was truncated, probably because of the cessation of publication of the magazine in 1888. The More Magic articles also appeared over two volumes of Every Boy’s Annual—the annual for 1888 and the annual for 1889. The annuals essentially consisted of bound books made up of the main content of Every Boy's Magazine—though a lot of the omitted material was pretty interesting in its own right.

Sleight of Hand

It appears that Sachs’s first mention of the little finger at the end of the pack was in the third edition of Sleight of Hand (first published in 1900). So, it’s unlikely that Erdnase relied on the first edition or second edition (since, again, Erdnase mentions the little finger).

The Publishers’ Circular, July 7, 1900, on Google Books, discusses the third edition and kind of implies that the third edition was recently published. So, the timing isn’t perfect, given the fact that Erdnase’s book was printed in early 1902.

Also, there is an additional question in my mind as to “when” the third edition of the Sachs book became available in the United States. For what it’s worth, I see on Google Books that The Publishers’ Weekly for March 23, 1901, lists the book and says, “N.Y., Scribner, [imported,] 1901.” The London publisher of the third edition was L. Upcott Gill.

Likelier candidates as possible Erdnase sources are More Magic and Tricks With Cards: A Complete Manual of Card Conjuring. Both of those were published in late 1889.

More Magic:

That 1889 date for More Magic is pretty well an axiom at this point, even though the first edition was dated 1890 on the title page. The Publishers’ Weekly for December 14, 1889 (on Google Books) lists the book under “Weekly Record of New Publications."

The listing was not preceded by an asterisk. Based on what the periodical says, the lack of asterisk indicates that the publication actually received a copy of the book. I suspect that the copy in question was imported, since they state the date as “1890 [1889].” (It seems from the periodical that this is the date of “imprint,” followed by the date of “copyright.”) I’ve never seen an American edition of the book with 1890 on the title page, and I’m guessing they got the 1890 date from the title page.

The Bookseller for November 8, 1889 (on Google Books) lists More Magic under “Games, Sports and Pastimes,” which in turn is under a major heading, “Publications of the Month.”

The Spectator “for the week ending Saturday, October 26, 1889” (on Google Books) lists More Magic under “Publications of the Week.”

Tricks With Cards: A Complete Manual of Card Conjuring:

The first edition of Tricks With Cards: A Complete Manual of Card Conjuring showed 1889 on the title page, and on Google Books you can find an advertisement for that book in The Athenæum, November 2, 1889.

Both of those Hoffmann books mention Charlier in connection with the sleight, and both mention the placement of the little finger at the end of the pack.

Back on More Magic:

Ladies and gentlemen! Draw closer! I will reveal something relevant that quite possibly no one on planet Earth is aware of besides me (until this post is posted)!

With that P.T. Barnum-style introduction out of the way . . .

As far as I can tell, the More Magic version of the Charlier pass was first published:

a. Not in 1890 (the year on the title page of the first edition).

b. Not in 1889 (the year of publication of the first edition).

c. Not in 1888 (the year on the title page and spine of the Every Boy’s Annual in which the portion of More Magic with the sleight appeared).

d. And probably not even in 1887 (the year of publication of most of the issues of Every Boy’s Magazine that were included in the “1888” annual).

No, instead it appears that the issue of Every Boy's Magazine that included the sleight was published in 1886. I didn’t realize this myself until about three days ago.

In any event, the only two realistic options appear to be late 1886 or early 1887. In a nutshell, the cutoff date for inclusion in the 1887 annual would have been late 1886 (maybe September or so).

So the late-in-1886 issues would have been included in the 1888 annual.

The practice of an early cutoff date (which I believe was pretty standard for Every Boy's Annual for most of its existence) would allow the annual for 1888 to appear before Christmas of 1887. At least, this would appear to be the norm.

Here is some support for the 1886 date for the Charlier pass description . . .

The More Magic article that included the Charlier pass began on page 161 of the annual. The last page of text in the annual is 572. So—although I have not made a precise determination—that article could easily have been published in Every Boy's Magazine in late 1886. If not, early 1887 seems to be the only other possibility.

The text of the article with the Charlier pass also suggests pretty strongly that the article dates from 1886. For instance, Hoffmann refers to "the ‘how it’s done’ of 1886."

Of course, this is mainly of academic interest with respect to Erdnase, since the chances of him having seen any version of More Magic other than a book version are practically nil.

As to the three main books mentioned, I would guess that their availability in the United States circa 1900 or 1901 was in this sequence (from most available to least available):

1. More Magic

2. Tricks With Cards: A Complete Manual of Card Conjuring (which was also broken into two separately published sections)

3. Third edition of Sleight of Hand

Of course, Erdnase does seem a bit uncertain as to the origin of the sleight. It seems plausible that the Charlier pass was taught to Erdnase by one of the many magicians hanging out in Chicago in the relevant era. If so, he might just have skimmed over any printed descriptions. If that’s the case, it might be that he didn’t rely on any published description of the Charlier pass.

The fact that Erdnase may have learned the sleight from another person, and not from a book, was delved into in a significant post by Clay Shevlin (on November 3, 2017).

—Tom Sawyer

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » October 16th, 2022, 9:01 am

Bill Mullins wrote:The Erdnase movie is available for streaming now.

There's much to enjoy in the movie and I thought that having the same actor playing each version of Erdnase was a nice idea. My only quibble was that there was too much time spent on the Mid West con man Charles Andrews and no time at all given to W.E. Sanders who, along with Edwin Sumner Andrews, are currently the most credible candidates. It's somewhat ironic that several of the interviewees commented that Erdnase may turn out to be an unexciting character but the film (maybe not surprisingly) focused on the two more colourful candidates Milton Franklin Andrews and Charles Andrews.

User avatar
Richard Evans
Posts: 107
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Evans » October 16th, 2022, 10:09 am

Tom Sawyer wrote:Next, a few comments about the Charlier pass! More specifically, some of you are probably interested in semi-precise publication dates for a few possible works that Erdnase might have consulted in connection with his description of that sleight. In this post, my main goal is to set forth a few dates with some specificity, since—when those books are discussed—the dates are not necessarily always stated in a nuanced way.

I suspect that the main candidates as Erdnase’s source (or sources) for the Charlier pass are Hoffmann’s More Magic (1889), Hoffmann’s Tricks With Cards: A Complete Manual of Card Conjuring (1889), and the third edition of Sachs’s Sleight of Hand (1900). (The book mentioned second is completely different from Tricks With Cards from Modern Magic.) The Man Who Was Erdnase mentions those three, but refers to an earlier edition of the Sachs book.

I glanced at Roterberg’s New Era Card Tricks on Google Books, but I didn’t see any mention of the little finger at one end of the pack, and Erdnase does mention that. Of course, Erdnase could have thought of the little-finger bit on his own. It does seem like it should have been a natural development. But at the moment, I’m just considering works that mention the little finger at one end of the pack.


Thanks Tom - very interesting. Hoffmann's coverage of the Charlier pass is significantly briefer in More Magic than in Tricks with Cards, so the much earlier publication date makes more sense than if both books had been published in the same year. It's also interesting to note that in More Magic Hoffmann comments that he is able to do the pass 50 times per minute and suggests that a diligent student may be able to do more, but in Tricks with Cards he suggests that students should not be satisfied until they can do it 60 times per minute.

Also notable in Tricks with Cards is his comment about the placement of the little finger at the end of the deck "Many performers never thoroughly master the Charlier pass, from neglect of this one item, which, by the way, is carefully ignored in the only descriptions I have seen of it in print". Aside from More Magic, the only other book I'm aware of that described the Charlier pass earlier than 1889 is Roterberg's New Era Card Tricks (1887), in which the little finger placement is indeed omitted. Were there any other descriptions of the Charlier pass pre-1889?

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27047
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » October 16th, 2022, 1:07 pm

Charlier never did the Charlier Pass while his hand was in view of the audience. Hoffmann's claim of doing it 50 times in a minute just shows how little he actually knew and understood about the sleight.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 360
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » October 17th, 2022, 5:26 am

Hi All,

I have a third edition of Sachs’s Sleight of Hand with a little "A. Roterberg" tag or sticker on the title page, showing the address 145 Illinois Street. I’m led to believe Roterberg was at that address in the vicinity of 1897-1900, at a minimum. This is based on several references to Roterberg at that address in works listed on Google Books (basically a few government publications, and New Era Card Tricks, and an ad in Downs’s Modern Coin Manipulation).

This being the case, if Erdnase visited Roterberg, there’s a noticeable possibility he picked up Sleight of Hand (and other books, of course) from Roterberg. In other words, it looks probable that Roterberg carried the book. A Roterberg catalog or catalogs from that era probably list books that he had for sale, and that would be better proof than what I have said here.

Concerning Roterberg’s New Era Card Tricks, the earliest date stated for this is usually 1897. The Hathi Trust Digital Library has digitized versions of two different copies of the book, and both have a page that says, “Copyrighted 1897 by A. Roterberg.” It is an early account that gives credit to Charlier, but it’s not earlier than either of the two Hoffmann books recently mentioned.

—Tom Sawyer

User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » October 17th, 2022, 6:47 am

Of course, if Erdnase was Charlier then he wouldn't need to learn the move from any book! ;)

I think the vague introduction he gives to the sleight suggests that he learnt it from a magician in person, not from a book. Otherwise, he would be more definite about it being the invention of Charlier, perhaps?:

This is known to conjurers as the “Charlier Pass,” and we presume was invented by the famous magician of that name.

I think it is likely that Erdnase added the little finger position to the description himself, given that he also mentions using the little finger in a similar way when describing the position for the shuffle:

This position, and especially that of the first and little fingers of the left hand, is essential for the process of blind shuffling and stocking.

And from the description of the Charlier Pass:

The little finger held at the middle of the end is of great assistance in this shift, giving better control of both portions, and enabling the performer to hold the deck much nearer a vertical position.

Marty

Richard Hatch
Posts: 2095
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Providence, Utah
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Hatch » October 17th, 2022, 11:19 pm

Marty Jacobs wrote:
This is known to conjurers as the “Charlier Pass,” and we presume was invented by the famous magician of that name.

Marty


I believe in the original and Drake editions, Charlier is misspelled as "Charlies". Possibly an innocent typosetting error, possibly an indication that the author was not that familiar with the proper spelling of the originator (perhaps having learned it from verbal communication, rather than a book?)

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » October 18th, 2022, 12:43 am

Tom Sawyer wrote:It appears that Sachs’s first mention of the little finger at the end of the pack was in the third edition of Sleight of Hand (first published in 1900). . . . The Publishers’ Circular, July 7, 1900, on Google Books, discusses the third edition and kind of implies that the third edition was recently published.


The London Standard of 1 Jun 1900 lists, in an article titled "Yesterday's New Books":
"Sleight of Hand," by Edwin T. Sachs. Third Edition. L. Upcott Gill.

It is also mentioned similarly in the Glasgow Herald of 2 Jun 1900.

Tom Sawyer
Posts: 360
Joined: January 7th, 2012, 6:44 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Tom Sawyer » October 18th, 2022, 4:29 am

Bill, nice going on those Sleight of Hand references! Great information.

—Tom

User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » October 18th, 2022, 5:27 am

I believe in the original and Drake editions, Charlier is misspelled as "Charlies". Possibly an innocent typosetting error, possibly an indication that the author was not that familiar with the proper spelling of the originator (perhaps having learned it from verbal communication, rather than a book?)

Ah, yes. That's a good point, Richard. I corrected that mistake in the electronic version of Erdnase I produced and had forgotten about that error. But you're right. It is also odd that he put it in quotation marks; did Erdnase know that the name might be incorrect? The spelling and quotation marks suggest he might have misheard it and was unsure of the correct spelling of the word.

From this error, we can also infer that he never met Charlier. (Henry Ridgley Evans, in his writing, suggested that Charlier might have performed in America under the name Carabaraba, so a meeting is not out of the question.) This means, in no definitive way, I might add, that a magician showed him the move in person. However, Erdnase might have read the instructions in one of the sources mentioned and misremembered the name. He does mention learning from the literature of magic in The Expert. Maybe he borrowed one of the books from a friend?

I know Tamariz put l'Homme Masque forward as a possible candidate for Erdnase. Part of his theory was that Charlier passed on some of the gambling and sleight-of-hand knowledge to him. Although I was joking, has anyone seriously considered that Charlier might have written the book? If this error was a typo by the typesetter, then this is still a possibility. Very little is known about Charlier, much in the same way we know next to nothing about Erdnase. He also reportedly spoke multiple languages, which suggests he was intelligent enough to write the manuscript. He was also a gambler and a magician, which might account for the double-aspect nature of the book. Charlier was also most well-known in England, which might explain the reference to Stationers' Hall in the copyright notice.

Marty

Dr. Solka
Posts: 50
Joined: July 2nd, 2020, 4:58 am
Favorite Magician: Willis Dysart, Willem Bouman, Werner Miller, James Solberg, Jan Forster

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Dr. Solka » October 18th, 2022, 7:16 am

Charlier was a fictional character thought up by Prof. Hoffmann. He never lived. His great model was Robert-Houdin, who invented his master Torrini. Great fairy tales.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » October 18th, 2022, 7:56 am

Richard Hatch wrote:I believe in the original and Drake editions, Charlier is misspelled as "Charlies". Possibly an innocent typosetting error, possibly an indication that the author was not that familiar with the proper spelling of the originator (perhaps having learned it from verbal communication, rather than a book?)

Erdnase refers to Charlier twice. It's misspelled in one instance but correct in the other (in the Acrobatic Jacks trick). So this would seem to indicate that "Charlies" was just a typesetting error. btw, Marty Demerest points out that Sanders' lowercase "r" looked much like an "s", which would make a typesetting error more likely with such an unfamiliar name.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » October 18th, 2022, 8:03 am

Dr. Solka wrote:Charlier was a fictional character thought up by Prof. Hoffmann. He never lived. His great model was Robert-Houdin, who invented his master Torrini. Great fairy tales.

How do you know this? There's quite a bit about him from various sources in Chapter 3 of "Charles Bertram the Court Conjuror" by Edwin Dawes.

User avatar
Marty Jacobs
Posts: 155
Joined: March 24th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Favorite Magician: Alex Elmsley
Location: Essex, United Kingdom

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marty Jacobs » October 18th, 2022, 12:58 pm

Charlier was a fictional character thought up by Prof. Hoffmann. He never lived. His great model was Robert-Houdin, who invented his master Torrini. Great fairy tales.

Really? I also thought that there was significant evidence that he did exist. I know Robert-Houdin fabricated many of the "facts" in his biography. His mentor Torrini, who had a great rivalry with an ageing Giuseppe Pinetti, was proven to be the stuff of fantasy (presumably to make his origin story more interesting). But I've never heard that the same is true of Charlier, or that Prof. Hoffman was fond of making stuff like this up as well.

Maskelyne also met him in London and bought some marked cards from him. Was he in on the ruse as well?

Marty


Return to “General”