[DCRM-L] Odd signing

[Deborah J. Leslie]

It doesn't look like anyone has responded to this yet, Bob. I don't think you can call it unsigned, so it's up to your 2nd or 3rd options. What does the expert say? (I'm looking at you, Richard Noble.)

Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu | 202.675-0369 | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Steele
Sent: Friday, 07 November 2014 10:37
To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
Subject: [DCRM-L] Odd signing

Collective wisdom:

I think something like this was discussed a few weeks ago, but this time I can see the threads.

Dissertation from Leiden, 1819. Octavo (as I said, I can see the threads). The signings are in this pattern:

A, A2, A3, -, B, B2, B3, - // C, C2, C3, -, D, D2, D3, - // etc. throughout.

I don't think this is a situation of "double signing," since plates are unlikely to have been used for a dissertation in 1819. Also, since the pages are untrimmed, I don't think the sheet could have been cut in half and folded another way. I have no idea why the printer used these signings, but anyway I want to construct a signature statement.
Would you suggest:

Unsigned, [1]-[15]⁸?

or:

A⁸ C⁸ ... 2F⁸?

or:

A/B⁸ C/D⁸ ... 2F/2G⁸?

or something else?

Robert Steele
Jacob Burns Law Library
George Washington University