[DCRM-L] signature statement question

[Deborah J. Leslie]

Catching up on my email backlog and saw this query.

There are many, many cases where one can strongly suspect that the preliminary and final gatherings are from the same sheet, but shouldn't be recorded unless you have proof, normally of the kind produced by bibliographical analysis of multiple copies.

In cases of odd number of leaves in a gathering, assume the next highest even number and qualify as appropriate. You did this right for gathering A, but for Q, assume 10 and adjust.

Signatures: A⁴ (-A4) B-P¹² Q¹0 (-Q10) [$5 (-A3, Q5) signed]


______________________
Deborah J Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Senior Cataloger | Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 East Capitol Street, S.E. Washington, DC 20003 | djleslie at folger.edu<mailto:djleslie at folger.edu> | www.folger.edu<http://www.folger.edu/> | Opinions her own

From: DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> On Behalf Of Noah Sheola
Sent: Monday, 9 August, 2021 11:56
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
Subject: [DCRM-L] signature statement question

Hello all,

Seems like it's been a while since we've had a good signature statement question - and I've got one. Is the following statement sufficient and correct, or is there a way to convey that the 3 leaves of gathering A and the nine leaves of gathering Q are very likely from the same sheet?

Signatures: A⁴ (-A4) B-P¹² Q¹² (-Q10, Q11, Q12) [$5 (-A3, Q5) signed]

Thanks!

--
Noah Sheola
Special Collections Cataloging Librarian
John J. Burns Library
Boston College
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20210922/fec40e9d/attachment.htm>