How to Catalogue a Library Part 12

It is not easy to calculate the average number of references to a given number of chief entries. If we exclude subject references, it may be roughly put at about a third. If subject references are included, it will be about two to one, or twice as many references as t.i.tles. Many t.i.tles will only require one reference, but others will help to turn the balance,--as, for instance, the following, which will require ten references:--

The Life of Haydn, in a Series of Letters written at Vienna [originally written in Italian by G. Carpani], followed by the Life of Mozart [by A. H. F. von Slichtegroll], with Observations on Metastasio, and on the Present State of Music in France and Italy. Translated from the French of L.

A. C. Bombet, with Notes by the Author of the Sacred Melodies [W. Gardiner]. London, 1817. 8vo.

In the first place, Bombet is a pseudonym for Henri Beyle; therefore, according to the rule adopted in the catalogue, there must be a different reference. If the t.i.tle is placed under Beyle, then there must be a reference from Bombet; and if under the pseudonym, there must be a reference from Beyle. There must be references from Haydn, Mozart, and Metastasio, from Slichtegroll, Carpani, and Gardiner, from Music, and possibly from France and Italy.

The specimen page here given will show how a subject index may be incorporated in one alphabet with an author's catalogue:--

================================================================== | Case. | Shelf.| | Size. | Date. | |-------+-------+--------------------------------+-------+-------| | II | 2 | SHUTTLEWORTH (Philip N.). | | | | | | The Consistency of the | | | | | | whole scheme of Revelation | | | | | | with itself and with | | | | | | Human Reason. | | | | | | London. | 12 | 1832 | | LL | 3 | -- Paraphrastic Translation | | | | | | of the Apostolical Epistles, | | | | | | with Notes. | | | | | | London. | 8 | 1840 | | | | | | | | | | SIBERIA | | | | | | Travels: _Dobell_ (1830) | | | | | | | | | | | | SICILY | | | | | | Travels, etc.: _Brydone_ | | | | | | (1790), _h.o.a.re_ (1819), | | | | | | _Swinburne_ (1783), _Smyth_ | | | | | | (1824) | | | | | | | | | | | | -- Volcanoes of: _Hamilton_ | | | | | | (1772) | | | | | | | | | | | | -- Vestiges of Ancient Manners:| | | | | | _Blunt_ (1823) | | | | | | | | | | | | SIDMOUTH (Viscount) Life: | | | | | | _Pellew_ (1847) | | | | | | | | |

It will be noticed that in the case of references the word _see_ is omitted. If the names to be referred to, which follow a colon, are printed in italic, or, in the case of a ma.n.u.script catalogue, are underscored with red ink, they will be clearly distinguishable without the word _see_, and a wearisome repet.i.tion will be avoided. In the case of cross-references at the end to some other heading [see also], it will be more convenient to use the word than to omit it.

Panizzi was an advocate for a Subject Index, or "Index of Matters," as he called it,[30] but he did not venture to recommend such a work officially to the trustees.[31] He was fully examined on this subject before the Commission in 1849, and he referred to a memorandum which he had submitted to the Council of the Royal Society when employed upon their catalogue. He there writes:--

"A catalogue of a library is intended princ.i.p.ally to give an accurate inventory of the books which it comprises; and is in general consulted either to ascertain whether a particular book is in the collection, or to find what works it contains on a given subject. To obtain these ends, cla.s.sed catalogues have been compiled, in which the works are systematically arranged according to their subjects. Many distinguished individuals in different countries have drawn up catalogues of this description, but no two of them have agreed on the same plan of cla.s.sification; and even those who have confessedly followed the system of another person have fancied it necessary to depart in some particulars from their model.... Those who want either to consult a book, of which they only know the subject, or to find what books on a particular subject are in the library, can obtain this information (as far as it can be collected from a t.i.tle-page, which is all that can be expected in a catalogue) more easily from an index of matters to an alphabetical catalogue than by any other means. Here also nothing is left to discretion as far as concerns order. Entries, being short cross-references, are in a great measure avoided; and repet.i.tions, far from being inconvenient, will save the time and trouble of looking in more places than one in order to find what is wanted....

The plan which is proposed was adopted by Dr. Watt in his _Bibliotheca Britannica_, the usefulness of which work must be acknowledged by every one conversant with bibliography. That it would not be so useful had any systematical arrangement been followed seems undeniable. The vast plan of the _Bibliotheca Britannica_, however, did not allow its author to give, either to the t.i.tles of the books or to the index, that extent which ought to be given to both in the Catalogue of the Library of the Royal Society" (_Minutes of Evidence_, p. 704).

Although here Panizzi makes the sound remark that the information to be expected in a catalogue is that which is found in the t.i.tle-page, he had previously expressed a considerably more comprehensive opinion. He wrote:--

"The catalogue of a library like that of the Royal Society should be as complete as possible; that is, it should give all the information requisite concerning any book which may be the object of inquiry. Whether a work be printed separately, or in a collection--whether it extend to the greater part of a folio volume, or occupy only part of a single leaf--no distinction should be made; the t.i.tle of each should be separately entered. Hence every one of the _Memoirs_ or papers in the acts of academies; every one of the articles in scientific journals or collections, whatever they may be, should have its separate place in the catalogue. Thus, for instance, all the letters in Hanschius' Collection should be entered in their proper places under the writers' names. It is only by carrying this principle to the FULLEST extent that a catalogue can be called COMPLETE, and a library, more particularly of books relating to science, made as useful as it is capable of being. This, however, would make a great difference in the expense, and take considerable time."

A little consideration will show that such an extensive principle of action could not be practically carried out, and we may well ask whether it would be advisable to adopt such a plan even if it could be carried out. We regret the waste of labour spent in cataloguing the same book over and over again, but how much greater would be the waste of labour and money if the managers of every library which contained the _Philosophical Magazine_ thought it necessary to include the whole contents of that periodical in its catalogue! The labour of cataloguing these series is the work of bibliographers, and such valuable books of reference as the _Royal Society Catalogue of Scientific Papers_ and Poole's _Index of Periodical Literature_ are suitable for all libraries.

To return to the mode of carrying out a subject index, it may be again remarked that it is not necessary to follow the t.i.tles textually, and if the t.i.tles are so followed there can be no advantage in making the references longer than in Watt's _Bibliotheca_. In primary entries the t.i.tles must be accurately followed, but in references it is often much more convenient to dispense with the wording chosen by the author. Two books with totally different t.i.tles are often identical in subject, and the indexer saves the time of the consulter by realizing this fact and acting upon it.

I think that any one who compares the system adopted in the indexes to the Catalogues of the Library of the Athenaeum Club and of the London Library with that of, say, the Catalogue of the Manchester Free Library, 1881, will at once see how much more readily the former can be used.

Mr. Parry, in his answer 7351 (_Minutes_, p. 470), advocates the plan of having a separate index of subjects, and in spite of all that has been said in favour of dictionary catalogues, I hold that this is the simplest and most useful for students; although for popular libraries there is much to be said in favour of dictionary catalogues. One of the most elaborate indexes I know is that by my brother, Mr. B. R. Wheatley, for the Catalogue of the Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society. By this plan he who knows what he wants finds it without being confused by, to him, useless references, while he who does not know can consult the index.

In an index the headings will of course be in alphabet, and the sub-headings may be so also; but often some system of cla.s.sification will be better. No hard-and-fast rule can be made for all cases. But it is usually better to bring the subjects of the books together, regardless of the wording of the t.i.tle.

[Decoration]

FOOTNOTES:

[29] Always use the word _see_ in preference to _vide_.

[30] This expression is often used, although it can scarcely be considered as English.

[31] See his answer to question 9892, _Minutes of Evidence, Commission_ 1849.

[Decoration]

CHAPTER VI.

ARRANGEMENT.

Rule II. of the British Museum is: "t.i.tles to be arranged alphabetically, according to the English alphabet only (whatever be the order of the alphabet in which a foreign name might have been entered in its original language);" and this rule has been generally followed. Mr.

Cutter (rule 169) adds to this, "Treat I and J, U and V, as separate letters;" and every consulter of the British Museum Catalogue must wish that this rule was adopted there, for anything so confusing as this unnecessary mixing of the letters I and J and U and V it is scarcely possible to imagine. Mr. Cutter goes on: "ij, at least in the olden Dutch names, should be arranged as y; do not put Spanish names beginning with Ch, Ll, n, after all other names beginning with C, L, and N, as is done by the Spanish Academy."

The Museum rule (XIII.) is: "German names in which the letters a, o, or u occur, to be spelt with the diphthong ae, oe, and ue respectively."

Mr. Cutter follows this, and adds to it (rule 25):--

"In Danish names, if the type is not to be had, use its older equivalent _aa_; in a ma.n.u.script catalogue the modern orthography a should be employed. Whatever is chosen should be uniformly used, however the names may appear in the books.

The diphthong ae should not be written ae, nor should o be written oe; o, not oe, should be used for .

"In Hungarian names write o, u, with the diaeresis (not oe, ue), and arrange like the English o, u.

"The Swedish names, a, , o, should be so written (not ae, oe), and arranged as the English a, o."

The Cambridge rule (10) is as follows: "German and Scandinavian names, in which the forms a, o, u, , occur, to be treated, for the purpose of alphabetical sequence, as if spelt with ae, oe, and ao respectively. In German names a, o, u, to be printed ae, oe, ue."

The Library a.s.sociation rule (44) is: "The German a, o, u, are to be arranged as if written out in full ae, oe, ue."

The first part of the Cambridge rule and the whole of that of the Library a.s.sociation is likely to lead to confusion. The only safe way to deal with these letters is either to spell them out, or to arrange them as if they were English letters. The English alphabet must be pre-eminent in an English catalogue.

The rule that M', Mc, St., etc., should be arranged as if spelt Mac, Saint, etc., stands on a different basis from the above, and the reason is, as stated by Mr. Cutter (rule 173), "because they are so p.r.o.nounced." When we see St., we at once say Saint, and therefore look under Sa.

The Index Society rule enters fully into this point, and explains what is a difficulty to some: "6. Proper names with the prefix St., as St.

Albans, St. John, to be arranged in the alphabet as if written in full, _Saint_. When the word _Saint_ represents a ceremonial t.i.tle, as in the case of St. Alban, St. Giles, and St. Augustine, these names to be arranged under the letters A and G respectively; but the places St.

Albans, St. Giles, and St. Augustine will be found under the prefix _Saint_. The prefixes M' and Mc to be arranged as if written in full, Mac."

When several t.i.tles follow one heading, it is necessary to use a dash in place of repeating the heading, and there are one or two points worthy of attention in respect to this dash.

The Library a.s.sociation rule is: "35. The heading is not to be repeated; a single indent or dash indicates the omission of the preceding heading or t.i.tle."

The Index Society rule is rather fuller: "17. A dash, instead of an indentation, to be used as a mark of repet.i.tion. The dash to be kept for entries exactly similar, and the word to be repeated when the second differs in any way from the first. The proper name to be repeated when that of a different person. In the case of joint authors the Christian names or initials of the first, whose surname is arranged in the alphabet, to be in parentheses, but the Christian names of the second to be in the natural order, as _Smith_ (John) and Alexander _Brown_, not _Smith_ (John) and _Brown_ (Alexander)."

The reason for the last direction is that the Christian name is only brought back in order to make the alphabetical position of the surname clear; and as this is not necessary in respect to the second person, the names should remain in their natural order.

Dashes should be of a uniform length, and that length should not be too great. It is a great mistake to suppose that the dash is to be the length of the line which is not repeated. If it is necessary to mark the repet.i.tion of a portion of the t.i.tle as well as the author, this should be indicated by another dash, and not by the elongation of the former one; thus:--

Milton (John), Works in Verse and Prose, Printed from the Original Editions, with Life by the Rev. John Mitford. 8 vols. 8vo. London, 1851.

---- Poetical Works, with Notes, Life, etc., by the Rev. H. J.

Todd. 6 vols. 8vo. London, 1801.

---- ---- ---- Second Edition. 7 vols. royal 8vo. London, 1809.

---- ---- with Notes, edited by Sir Egerton Brydges. 6 vols.

small 8vo. London, 1853.

All the dashes except the first, which represents the author's name, can be got rid of by using the words [the same] or [another edition], etc.