Five ways to obtain a reading — and five different historical claims

British Museum catalogue dates the surviving object broadly c.1800-1850; the catalogue entry alone does not transcribe the oracle paragraph.

Used as visual research evidence; OmenHall should redraw its own production art rather than silently copy a later reproduction.

Secondary web transcription witness, not yet a locally pinned primary-scan diplomatic transcription. Historical mode must retain this limitation in provenance.

Bibliographic identity witness only; it does not supply the card-by-card interpretation text.

Strong historical printed text witness, but edition identity is later American and is not verified as the first Coblenz 1846 issue. Its promotional preamble claiming direct Mlle Lenormand use is not accepted as authorship evidence. The PDF is inspected through external evidence but is not embedded as local source bytes in this successor.

The museum description repeats a direct Mlle Lenormand design attribution that OmenHall does not accept as historical authorship evidence; object/date provenance is used independently from that interpretive claim.

Reception/reproduction witness only; it does not establish first-edition identity.

Institution-grade object record, but the online catalogue does not expose the full leaflet text for line-by-line collation here.

The witness page itself argues that this German side is probably a later bilingual/American transmission and differs in places from the 1846 Coblenz lineage. It is retained as variant evidence, not elevated to first-edition authority.

Still required for first-edition critical-text closure and academic edition claims. Product content/logic may freeze on the adjudicated historical witness family, but no first-edition equivalence or numeric Near/Far threshold may be claimed.