[DCRM-L] More signature questions

[Noble, Richard]

Responses interpolated below

RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY
BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187
<Richard_Noble at Br <RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>own.edu>


On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Barbara Tysinger <btysingr at email.unc.edu>wrote:

>  I am cataloging a copy of *Bericht von den wunderbaren bezoardischen
> Steinen* ... by Johann Wittich. Leipzig: Hans Steinmanns Erben, M. D.
> LXXXIX. [1589]
> The chain lines are horizontal with no discernible watermarks. I believe
> it is foolscap 4o. Actual pagination: [16], 146, [16], 147-181, [1] p.
>
> *My first question.*
> The first two gatherings are signed with small letters enclosed in
> reversed parentheses:   )a(    )a( ii   )a( iii  .... etc.
> Do I include the ")(" in the formula, which looks odd and makes it
> difficult to read, or ignore the ")(" and simply record "a-b⁴" ?
> *[I'm inclined to ignore them because it does make the formula difficult
> to read (see NYPL example below)]*
>

Just use the letters in this case, as one would if the parens were not
reversed (though I'd certainly note how they were actually set). I've never
before seen this trick. The usual German prelims simply use )(, )()(,
)()()( etc. or sometimes ):( etc., which one does transcribe,even though
it's a pain to look at (unless you;re in an environment where you can
reduce the transcibed parens by 3 points or so, which does clean things up)


>
> *Second question.*
> One of the gatherings in the main text block is signed with question marks
> enclosed in reversed parentheses ")?("
> Do I use the actual symbol "?" in the formula or treat it as I would an
> unavailable character:  [star]   [dagger]   [par.]  ... etc.
>

I'd yranscribe what I see: )?(. If the symbol is in the basic character set
(low ASCII) it's usable-- so use an asterisk, not "[star]", unless you see
some practical need to differentiate styles of stars; but yes, "[dagger]"
etc. otherwise.


> *Third question,* probably the most difficult. (Maybe even impossible
> without examining the book!)
> The majority of signatures in the volume are fairly straightforward
> through a-b⁴ A-S⁴, then things get odd at T (see below), but normalcy
> resumes U-Z⁴.
> The binding is fairly tight, making it difficult to get a really good look
> at the gatherings, but my initial attempt at the formula looks like:
> a-b⁴ A-S⁴ [superscript chi]T⁶ ?⁴ T⁴ (-T1) U-Z⁴ [$3 signed (+[superscript
> chi]T4; -a1, ?1, T2, Z3)]
>
> Then I found a record by NYPL in OCLC (#363204902) that used:
> )a(-)b(⁴ A-Z⁴ (interpolate: T⁴ chi1 )?(⁴, between T1 and T2)
> Which, if I am reading it correctly means that a singleton "chi1" and a
> full gathering ")?(⁴" has been inserted between T1 and T2 ...
>
> So, short of unbinding the volume, is there any way to determine what is
> going on between S⁴ and U⁴ ?
>

*Conjecture*: The answer depends on whether the presence or absence of T1
is anomalous, which will usually mean figuring out what's being done with
the text. If T1 was meant to be cancelled, in the course of adding content
contained in the chiT and )?( gatherings, that should be obvious when it
has been retained. The NYPL formula would be incorrect. If the leaf was
meant to be cancelled (i.e. is an ideal copy feature) you account for it
exactly as you did; anomalous retention of the leaf would be a copy
specific feature, well worth noting, since one does like to know what
cancellanda contain. If, on the other hand, content is being interpolated
between T1 and T2, the cancellation/insert formula is correct.

*Reality*: Now I've looked at the darned thing on Google Books

http://books.google.com/books?id=iXFVAAAAcAAJ&dq=wittich%20bezoardischen&pg=PR4#v=onepage&q=wittich%20bezoardischen&f=false

and it turns out that there's simply some fudging involved with an appended
work, *Von dem Ligno Guayaco*, with its own special title page and prelims,
which was probably printed concurrently. The main work ends with gathering
T^6, which contains the final leaf of text (T1, p. 145-146), index
(T2r-T5v), and a final blank leaf T6 (present in the copy I'm looking at
online). This is followed by the title leaf and prelims for the second
work--which occupy the whole of )?(^4-- and the text of that work beginning
on T1r, a page of display text from which the signature has been omitted,
though it has been numbered 147, and so the volume proceeds to p. 181, with
second colophon (and the delightful Steinman "Lapis Testimonii" device) on
[182]. There are probably two gatherings designated T because the printer
slightly miscalculated where the first text, etc. would end.

So it's a-b^4 A-S^4 T^6, )?(^4 chiT^4 U-Z^4.

It's a toss-up as to which T gather gets the prefixed chi. The first T
gathering is continuous with the preceding text, and so perhaps should not
be considered anomalous; except that the second T gathering is also part of
an integral unit, signed according to initial calculations that proved
incorrect, so that the first T could be construed as an unanticipated
anomaly. It doesn't matter, really, as long as they're differentiated, and
you provide enough explanation of the textual state of affairs to enable
your reader to see how it all fits together and makes perfect sense. I
don't think printers and readers of the late c16 had any problem with the
interpolation uncounted matter between p. 146 and 147--there's nothing
"weird" about it. NB that *neither* T1 is or was meant to be cancelled;
"-T1" should not appear in the formula.

No hair so fine ...


> Any guidance will be greatly appreciated!
> Barbara
> ...................All opinions are entirely my own....................
>
> Barbara R. Tysinger                                Phone: (919)966-0949
> Health Sciences Library                            Fax:   (919)966-1388
> University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
> 335 S. Columbia Street, CB# 7585
> Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7585
> e-mail: Barbara_Tysinger at unc.edu
>
> ......."Non pilus tam tenuis ut secari non possit."-- St. Minutia......
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20130801/d5c24dec/attachment.html>