I am going to answer from a practical viewpoint, without digging around in the rules. I believe that it would be most useful to users to supply the numbering in the cases that Haymarket omits it, and to use one authority record for both publishers. This would allow a user looking for number x of the series to find either edition quickly.
Hello wise ones,
I am going to ask people on this list a question that I would previously have addressed to my great Vanderbilt colleague Ann Ercelawn, who has, sadly (for me), retired. She knew more about series than me and when she didn’t know the answer she knew the right people to ask.
Brill publishes a series called Historical materialism book series, for which authority record n 2002096283 was made. It is a numbered series. However, Haymarket Books in Chicago has republished many books in this series in paperback, using the same series statement. The Haymarket editions do not always have numbering, however—my first impression is that early on they may have used the same number as Brill at least sometimes, but that the volumes have been unnumbered for quite some time. There are a couple of PCC records for Haymarket editions in which the cataloger bracketed in a series number taken from the Brill website (there is an explicit note to that effect).
Haymarket has been doing this since 2005. Shouldn’t there be a separate authority record for the Haymarket series? There is not; nor is there an additional 643 on the Brill authority record for Chicago and Haymarket. The numbering fixed field is set at “c” on the Brill authority, however, perhaps because of the lack of numbering on Haymarket editions.
Thanks for any help you can give!