MANUAL
OF
Library Cataloguing

BY
J. HENRY QUINN,
LIBRARIAN, CHELSEA PUBLIC LIBRARIES, LONDON.
(Formerly Principal Cataloguing Assistant, Liverpool Free Libraries.)

LONDON.
LIBRARY SUPPLY COMPANY,
4, Ave Maria Lane, E.C.
1899

Printed by Marlborough, Pewtress & Co., London, E. C.

PREFACE

This little book does not claim to be a comprehensive treatise on the art of cataloguing books, nor is it intended for the use of the expert in bibliography. The rules embodied are those generally recognized as necessary for the proper cataloguing of a collection of books. By simple illustrations the author has endeavoured to deal with those difficulties which he has found most frequently arise and call for careful consideration. Information concerning the printing of catalogues has been added in order to make the book more complete.

If this Manual should prove a help to the better understanding of the true principles of cataloguing, and is found to be of practical assistance to those engaged in library work, the object of its compilation will have been attained.

J. H. Q.

March, 1899.

CONTENTS.

Manual of Library Cataloguing.

CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTORY.

1.—Most people are satisfied to believe that there is no department of a librarian’s work so easily managed as that of compiling catalogues. The catalogue of a library is often regarded as a mere list of books, calling for no more mental effort in its production than is required in that of a furniture auctioneer, or similar trade list. Professor John Fiske, in his essay on “A Librarian’s Work,”[1] says “Generally I find a library catalogue is assumed to be a thing that is somehow ‘made’ at a single stroke, as Aladdin’s palace was built, at intervals of ten or a dozen years, or whenever a ‘new catalogue’ is thought to be needed,” instead of, as he proceeds to show, being a never-ending work calling for the exercise of all the power and knowledge at the command of the cataloguer.

2.—There are varieties of library catalogues, from the simple inventories made by private persons for their own collection of books, to the mammoth “Catalogue of Printed Books in the British Museum,” so great in its size and extensive in the field it covers that its entries have to be almost exclusively limited to a single item for each book.

The catalogues to be compiled upon the lines laid down in this work come between these two extremes, and are intended to serve as a key to the treasure-house of knowledge and disclose its contents in a ready, but orderly, manner to all inquirers. Carlyle says, “a big collection of books, without a good catalogue, is a Polyphemus with no eye in his head.”

3.—A good library is virtually useless without an adequate and properly compiled catalogue, but even an indifferent collection of books can be made to render good service by means of a good catalogue. In order to compile such a catalogue it is necessary that certain particulars be given descriptive of the books, but in such a way that, while the entries afford all needful information to the person well-versed in books, they shall at the same time be so simple in character as to be understood with very little effort by anyone of average intelligence. At the same time the particulars given should be so comprehensive that a searcher in the catalogue may be able to obtain a clear idea of the nature and scope of the book described without actually examining it, though the descriptions in this respect are not expected to be of the very full order looked for in special bibliographies intended only for the use of experts.

The value of a good catalogue does not depend upon its extent or size any more than does a good book, but rather upon the exactness of the method by which the information given is digested and concentrated. There are library catalogues so elaborately compiled that they are most imposing in appearance, and very often, as a consequence, are considered to be most erudite productions by those who do not understand the art of cataloguing, whereas the persons who have to use them too often find out that they are so ill-arranged as to be little better than a hotch-potch of book titles—pedantic without being learned. “Infinite riches in a little room” might, on the other hand, be often adopted as the motto for many an insignificant-looking catalogue.

4.—It is a common occurrence to find a small library with quite a big catalogue. This does not always arise from the wish to make the most of the library, but often from the fact that the compilation has been undertaken by some over-zealous member of a committee who fancied he had a penchant for such work, or that it has been compiled by an amateur with no experience, whose friends have secured him his appointment as librarian. Such people do not know that it is as easy, if not easier, to over-catalogue a library as to do it judiciously, and a fearful and wonderful work is often the result. There would not be much trouble in giving illustrative examples of this, but that catalogue may be cited where Green’s “Short History of the English People” obtained five entries, viz., under Green, Short, History, English History, and People (English), instead of the two entries that would have sufficed. Many of the first catalogues of the smaller free libraries are of this order. This, however, is not always the result of the above-named causes, but as often as not is brought about by committees of new libraries postponing the appointment of a librarian, to save his salary, until a few weeks before the library is announced to be opened, and then expecting him to purchase the books and produce a printed catalogue in the meantime. The conception of the matter is, far too often, that books can be selected, arranged, and listed in bulk, as groceries are bought, displayed, and ticketed, and in as short a time. The result, of course, is that the librarian, being rushed, must select and buy the books as quickly as he can, and relegate the work of cataloguing them to an assistant, who most likely has no training, and the best has to be made of a bad job. In very few instances can it be considered that the first catalogue of a new library fairly represents the ability of the librarian as a cataloguer.

5.—With the rapid rise of the standard of education more exact and better work is at present demanded in libraries than was the case during the first quarter of a century after the Public Libraries’ Act came into operation. The slipshod rule-of-thumb cataloguing at one time in vogue does not pass muster unnoticed now, as it did then, and consequently there is less use than ever before for the bald lists of books, compiled upon no principle in particular, sent forth to bewilder and hinder rather than help an inquiring public. The student, and that interesting personage, “the general reader,” are each year coming to a better understanding of the uses and peculiarities of books, and so look for more precise information concerning them. No better evidence is needed of the manner in which the demand for information about books has grown than is found in the large place which the reviewing of them now takes in the columns of the newspaper press, so that even minor journals cannot afford to ignore it. The dictum that a cataloguer has no right to go behind the information contained on the title-page of a book does not now find acceptance, as it did in the past.

Those persons who are possessed of even a little experience in the matter know that it is impossible to compile a catalogue in a hap-hazard fashion, and that clear and definite rules must be laid down before any part of the work is attempted, otherwise confusion and want of proportion will result. Happily of late years the rules governing the proper compilation of catalogues have been codified, particularly those for the form at present in most general use, known as the “dictionary catalogue.”

CHAPTER II.
THE DICTIONARY CATALOGUE.

6.—The dictionary catalogue is not the idea or invention of any individual, but has developed gradually from the requirements of librarians in dealing with readers. The earlier catalogues were limited to entries given under the authors’ names, as in the British Museum Catalogue, or were in classified form, either under the large classes into which a library was divided, or with very little other sub-division. These were followed by what may be termed “dictionary index catalogues” containing the first principles of the dictionary catalogue as now understood. They consisted of very brief entries under authors, and the simple turning about of a title to bring a certain word in it to the front as conveying its subject, in this manner:—

England under Victoria. Michelsen.

Englefield (Sir H. C.) Walk through Southampton.

English Antiquities. Eccleston. 1847.

Ennui. Edgeworth.

Entomology, Exotic. Drury. 1837.

Episodes of Insect Life. 1851.

Errand to the South. Malet.

By this method the real subject of the book was often missed, more especially if the author had made use of a fanciful title, and one subject would be found under many different entries, according to the word used on the title-page, and without cross references to bind them together. It must be confessed that to-day many of the dictionary catalogues of public libraries are no more than this “index catalogue” under the newer name. The entries may be a little fuller, but the principles of compilation remain the same.

7.—Prior to 1876 there was no complete code of rules for the preparation of a subject as well as author catalogue, though Prof. C. C. Jewett’s “On the construction of Catalogues of Libraries” (Washington, 1853), with its subsequent modifications, was a step in this direction. There were rules for author catalogues, for the most part based upon the British Museum rules, as well as schemes of classification for classified catalogues. In that year was published the now well-known “Rules for a Dictionary Catalogue,” by Charles A. Cutter, Librarian of the Boston Athenæum. It appeared as the second part of the “Special Report on the Public Libraries in the United States of America,” issued under the auspices of the United States Bureau of Education. A second edition of these rules was separately issued in 1889. The third edition, with further corrections and additions, appeared in 1891, and has been most liberally distributed by the United States Government to the libraries of the world. Since 1876 other rules have been formulated, principally with Cutter’s as a basis. A consensus of these will be found in the “Eclectic Card Catalog Rules, Author and Title Entries,” by K. A. Linderfelt, Librarian of the Milwaukee Public Library, Boston (Charles A. Cutter) 1890. This most useful compilation, “based on Dziatzko’s ‘Instruction’ compared with the rules of the British Museum, Cutter, Dewey, Perkins, and other authorities,” is not as well known to English librarians as it should be. The present Manual is intended to serve as an introduction to these two codes, and the instructions contained in it are based upon them. When these have not been adhered to the changes made have obtained authority in library practice. Mr. Henry B. Wheatley’s interesting little book, “How to Catalogue a Library” (Stock, 1889), must also be mentioned, and should be read as an introduction to the subject.

8.—The great merit of the dictionary catalogue is that it can be made to supply most of the information usually asked for by those using libraries, and by immediate reference without any preliminary study of its arrangement. It obtains its name from the circumstance that all the entries, irrespective of their nature, are put into a single alphabetical sequence, and consulted as one would consult a dictionary. It is considered to be the most acceptable form to the majority of those making use of popular libraries, and experience has proved it to be so.

The dictionary catalogue is intended to answer all of the following questions:

What books are contained in the library by a given author, as, Hall Caine? The answer to this is called the author-entry.

What books have you upon a specific subject, as the dynamo; or upon a particular topic, as the Eastern question? The entries answering such enquiries are the subject-entries.

Have you a book called, “A Daughter of Eve?” The entry supplying this information would be the title-entry.

Have you any volume of a series, as, “English men of letters?” This it will also answer, and the reply may be termed the series-entry.

There are questions, however, that the dictionary catalogue does not ordinarily answer. It would not tell what books were in the library in a particular language, say French, and it will not provide a complete and definite list of books in a particular form, as fiction, or poetry; or in a class of literature as distinct from subject. For example, it will not group together all the theological works, or the scientific books, but will distribute them throughout the entire alphabet, according to the divisions of these subjects, and these divisions will in their turn be distributed according to lesser divisions and monographs.

A catalogue compiled upon the lines requisite to group such classes completely, so that a general treatise and a monograph upon a minute division will follow in natural order, would be a classified catalogue, and that form is dealt with separately in Chapter XII.

To effect a combination of both forms in such a way that they would answer any question, reasonable or otherwise, would necessitate so large a number of entries for each book that its compilation would be barely feasible, and if carried out it would be unsatisfactory, because the simplicity of the alphabetical order would be destroyed, and the result would not be worth the labour expended, to say nothing of its size and costliness.

9.—Therefore choice must be made at the very outset between the two forms, dictionary or classified. The point to be first considered is, which form is most likely to best suit the needs of the particular class who use the library; as a catalogue which would be most useful for a college library, or that of a scientific society, would be unsuitable for a free library in the midst of a working-class population. Then the question of cost enters into the matter, and here the classified form has the advantage, as apart from the brief index entries, one entry per book mostly suffices, whereas in the dictionary form the average is three entries. There is a still more important matter which materially affects the older libraries, and that is the impossibility of keeping the dictionary form within reasonable compass, even with curtailed entries and closely-printed pages of small type. Borrowers from a public lending library prefer to carry their catalogues with them when exchanging books, but they cannot do so if it is in two or three volumes, or so bulky as not to be portable. For this reason librarians with unbounded belief in the superior advantages of the dictionary catalogue have been compelled, against their will, to adopt the classified form. They had no alternative, except the very unsatisfactory one of extensively weeding their stock of books, and only those who have undertaken that responsibility know how difficult it is to decide whether a book is worth retaining or not. A very judicial statement of the merits of the two styles of catalogues will be found in a paper by Mr. F. T. Barrett, of the Mitchell Library, Glasgow, entitled “The Alphabetical and Classified Forms of Catalogues Compared,” in the “Transactions of the Second International Library Conference,” 1897. Mr. J. D. Brown’s views, as set forth in Chapter v. of his “Manual of Library Classification” (Library Supply Co., 1898), should also be carefully considered.

PRELIMINARIES.

10.—Presuming that the student is for the first time undertaking the work of cataloguing a library, he will require to provide himself with a supply of cards or slips of paper cut uniform in size. Almost any size will do, but the most convenient and more commonly used measures 5 inches by 3 inches. If the catalogue is to be written for the use of readers, then cards are necessary as they are more convenient for turning over than the paper slips which serve well enough for “copy” for a printed catalogue. If the cards or slips are to be written upon with a pen they should be ruled “feint” across and have marginal rulings to mark the “indent.” These rulings are only upon one side, as in no case should an entry be continued to the other side. If an entry is so long that it cannot be put on one card then it must be continued on the face of a second, with the author or other heading repeated. For the cataloguer’s own use or as printer’s copy, the card or slip may be lengthened as required by pasting to it a strip of paper of the same width, and folding it up within the compass of the size of the card, but exposing the heading. This cannot be done when the cards are held in place by a rod running through them. It need hardly be pointed out that for a card catalogue meant for the use of many persons the quality of the cards is of great importance, as those of a cheap, inferior material will not bear much turning over without tearing. Card catalogues are not invariably appreciated by the public, as some persons seem to experience difficulty in turning over the cards. For this reason some librarians prefer the sheaf form because it maintains the book shape, which everyone understands, and it has the same advantages as the card catalogue in allowing the insertion of additions in proper order at any time, and permits unlimited expansion, besides taking up less room.

Upon each card or slip a separate entry of each book is made, and by “book” is meant a work that may be in a single volume or in many volumes. Two works even by the same author, appearing under his name, should be entered on separate cards, as, if written together, it is usually found that another book will later have to be inserted between them.

11.—Printers are acknowledged, as a class, to be the most exact and patient of men, but to those beginners who have not any large experience of their ways it is well to say “be careful to write boldly and plainly,” remembering always that it is a much more difficult work for a compositor to set a catalogue than probably any other form of book, because the matter does not “run on” and various types and languages commonly enter into it. Apart from the mistakes easily made when the “copy,” as the manuscript is called, is not clear and distinct, there is the risk incurred of an extra charge for “author’s corrections”—a well-known item in all printers’ bills. To write clearly is of even more importance if the catalogue is to remain in manuscript for use by readers. A handy little brochure upon this subject is “Library Handwriting,” issued by the New York State Library School, April 1898, and the style of handwriting therein shown should be studied and imitated. The specimen on the next page is taken from it.

12.—It is in the preparation of “copy” and in writing card catalogues for public use that the great value of the typewriter is experienced, as clearness and uniformity are insured by its use as well as economy of space. While it is hardly within the scope of this Manual to say anything by way of recommendation of any particular make of typewriter, yet experience shows that it would be a mistake to overlook the “Hammond” when considering the merits of different machines. In cataloguing it is found useful because a variety of types of a distinctive character, including the accented letters most commonly required, can be used upon a single machine.

SPECIMEN ALPHABETS AND FIGURES

Joined hand

Disjoined hand

CHAPTER III.
THE PRINCIPAL ENTRY.—THE AUTHOR ENTRY, I.

13.—Whatever difference of opinion may exist upon various points that arise in cataloguing books all authorities are agreed that the principal or main entry giving the most particulars concerning a book should be that under its author’s name. This, then, is the first entry to be made, and the cataloguer having selected the book to be dealt with ignores any title upon the binding and, passing by the preliminary, or “half title,” turns to the title page proper, that containing the most information and with the imprint (place of publication, publisher, and date) at foot, and copies from it the following particulars, adding those not given upon the title-page by an examination of the book, and in this order, viz.—

1. The author’s surname.

2. The author’s Christian name (or prenom).

3. Titles of the author (when required for distinctive or distinguishing purposes).

4. The title of the book.

5. The editor’s name (if not the author or compiler) or the translator’s name (if to be given).

6. The edition.

7. The name of series (if any), or, if part of a book, the name of the book it is contained in.

8. The collation (if to be given), or

9. The number of volumes, when more than one.

10. The size (if to be given).

11. The place of publication.

12. The place of printing or name of printer (when the book is typographically interesting only).

13. The date of publication.

14. The shelf, press, or other location or finding mark.

15. Descriptive or explanatory note (when thought desirable).

16. Contents (if set out).

The order is that most usually adopted, but Nos. 8 to 13 may be varied at pleasure, if such variation is made at the commencement of the work and adhered to in all cases afterwards.

14.—As the surname of the author leads, the Christian name must follow, either enclosed in parentheses, as

Dickens (Charles),

or preceded by a comma, as

Emerson, Ralph Waldo.

The parentheses are more commonly used, but they have not so good an appearance as the comma, and their use necessitates what a printer calls “a run on sorts”—that is the use of a particular piece of type to such an extent as to require a special supply beyond that ordinarily furnished with a fount of type. This, after all, resolves itself more into a question of taste than of expediency, and the cataloguer will choose as he thinks best. It may be remarked in passing that the “cult of the trivial” is not to be altogether despised in cataloguing, as careful attention to apparently minor details ensures good and exact work.

15.—The points to be observed in copying the title-page and preparing the author-entry can be shown more clearly by illustration than by description. Let it be supposed that the title-page of the book in hand reads in full:

The Personal History of David Copperfield. By Charles Dickens. With eight illustrations. London: Chapman & Hall, Piccadilly.

We proceed to write the principal entry to read:—

Dickens, Charles. The personal history of David Copperfield.

From the “fly-title” we learn that this is the “Charles Dickens’ edition.” We examine the book, and find it contains six prefatory pages, these being paged in Roman numerals, and 533 others paged in Arabic, with a portrait and seven other illustrations. This statement of the number of pages and illustrations is known as the “collation,” as to examine a book for the purpose of ascertaining that it is perfect is to collate it. As the place of publication is London, it is the practice in English catalogues to omit it from the entry, such omission signifying that London is understood. The date of publication not being given, and as there are no means of finding it out with certainty, the initials “n.d.,” meaning “no date,” are added, and the full catalogue entry will be:

DICKENS, Charles.

The personal history of David Copperfield. (Charles Dickens’ ed.) pp. vi., 533, port., illus. 8vo. n.d.

K 1200

The author’s name should be written at the outside left hand of the card at the top, the rest of the entry following with an indent at each side, the press mark alone coming outside at the right hand, as shown in the printed entry above.

16.—It is of the utmost importance that care be taken in transcribing a title, as it is much easier to make a mistake than to detect it afterwards, even at the time of printing. Errors of the hand and of the eye creep in imperceptibly. Besides, a mistake having once been made is likely to be repeated in all other entries, when copied from the first one. A very common cause of error is to let the mind become so absorbed in the consideration of a book in hand, that when a second comes to be dealt with some word from the first will unwittingly be written into its title, and if the result is not very obvious from its absurdity it escapes notice altogether until printed, and bears permanent witness against the cataloguer.

17.—The signs and abbreviations of words made use of in the above illustration, and all others to follow, are those customary in cataloguing, and as there is a number of well-understood abbreviations used in connection with books, a list of the most useful of these is given in [Appendix A].

It is a commendable plan to take note of those it is intended to use, and to keep a list of them written on a card always at hand for reference. The list could then be put in the preface to the catalogue when printed, as a help to its better understanding by those not versed in book abbreviations. It is as well to remember that there is not very much gained in the long run by abbreviating too closely, as “illus.” is easier understood than “il.” or “ill.” and “transl.” than “tr.”

18.—In copying a title-page it is required that the spelling of it should be closely followed, more especially if peculiar, but not the punctuation. The punctuation in the illustrative entries throughout this Manual is that most frequently made use of in catalogues, and will be found convenient in practice. But if personal preference for other forms comes in, and a change is made, all that is needed is that such change should be uniformly carried out. Besides the ordinary rules of punctuation there are but four well-defined which can be considered to govern the matter, and these are:—

A.—That alternative titles take a semi-colon after the first title, and a comma after the word “or;” as

St. Winifred’s; or, the world of school.

B.—That explanatory sub-titles be preceded by a colon; as

The foundation of death: a study of the drink question.

C.—When additional matter in the book occupies a subsidiary place in the title-page, in order not to detach it altogether from the rest of the title, that the word “with” be preceded by a semi-colon; as

Life of Luther; with an account of the Reformation.

D.—That when an editor’s or translator’s name appears upon the title-page the word “ed.” or “transl.” be preceded by a semi-colon, as

Epictetus. Discourses; transl. by George Long.

Green fairy book; ed. by Andrew Lang.

It is necessary to point out that in cataloguing it must not be left to the printer to supply the punctuation, as is customary with other books, and therefore the cataloguer must carefully supply it as he proceeds, and not when the time comes to prepare the work for the press.

19.—The same rule holds good with respect to the use of capital letters. Until recently it was the general fashion in printing book-titles to give every word, or almost every word, an initial capital, but the custom has fallen into disuse. Like other old-fashioned customs it dies hard, and if not advised that the “copy” must be closely followed in this respect, the printer will as likely as not put in the capitals all the same, and this in spite of the fact that he may have to wait until he has one sheet printed off before he can set another, on account of the run on the capitals. All that is now expected is that capital letters should be used in catalogue entries as they would be in any ordinary book, viz., to proper names; to words coming after a full stop; and to words derived from proper names. In the last-named a lower-case (i.e. small) initial letter is sometimes used in catalogues, but such words as “christian,” “pauline,” “lutheran,” “darwinism,” “ibsenism,” have not a good appearance and should be avoided. In foreign titles the usage of the language should be followed, so that there will be fewer capitals used in Latin, French, or Italian than in English, and more in German.

20.—All dates and numbers should be transcribed in Arabic figures, even if they are in Roman numerals upon the title-page. Thus, “from the XVIIth Century to the Present Time” becomes “from the 17th century to the present time;” “MDCCCXCIX” becomes “1899;” and “Volume xliv.” is simply “v. 44.” The only reasonable exception to this rule is that numbers to the names of potentates be always in Roman, though in American catalogues these also are put into Arabic. We on this side of the Atlantic are not yet well enough accustomed to “Charles 2,” or even “Edward 6th,” to adopt it.

21.—Sometimes figures form part of the title of a book, when it is desirable for the sake of appearance to write them out in words: the transcript, of course, being kept in the language of the title-page, though “50 études pour le piano” has been seen entered in a catalogue as “Fifty études pour le piano.”

22.—So far as languages printed in Roman are concerned, it is the invariable rule to adhere to the language of the title-page, and not to make a translation. In ordinary libraries Greek is usually transliterated into Latin; if a Greek classic has both Greek and Latin titles, as is commonly the case, then the Latin title is taken rather than the Greek.

23.—Upon this point of the translation of title-pages the question of utility, in popular libraries especially, might very well be considered. It does not often happen, but it is possible, that a person may be a capable musician and not know a word of French, German, or Italian, and it is likely therefore that many of the lesser-known compositions would be made acceptable if a translation of the title-page were given as well as the original. It is very certain that in the public libraries there are many valuable foreign books upon ornament and the decorative arts, consisting almost exclusively of illustrations, that are not used as they should be. The catalogue entries of such books convey no meaning whatever to many an artisan or craftsman, and a free translation might very well be given for their benefit. If such a translation is not given, a note descriptive of the nature of the book should be added.

24.—It is a safe rule that the date of publication should be given in every case and in every entry, as it serves in some measure to show the particular edition of the book, and more important still in scientific and technical works, to show if the editions in a library are of recent date or obsolete. It will, however, be found quite useless in popular libraries to give the dates of publication in the entries of works of fiction, for the simple reason that many of the books in this class of literature are so often worn out and then replaced with new copies, which are very seldom of the same dates as those printed in the catalogue, and it soon becomes incorrect in this respect. Happily it is a matter of no importance, as very few fiction readers are concerned about the date of publication, and therefore it may be safely omitted from all entries. This statement does not apply to first or other editions of novels of special value, such as the first edition of “David Copperfield,” as these would be fully described as well as carefully preserved.

25.—A suggestion worthy of consideration has been made that the original dates of publication should be added to the entries of reprints. This would increase the information given, and might prevent persons mistaking an old book for a new one, though librarians are familiar with the fact that old books are read with as much pleasure as the newest, if got up with modern attractive illustrations and pretty bindings.

26.—In the illustrative entry we have marked the book as 8vo.—that is octavo in size. This we learn either by experience in the sizes of books, or by actual measurement, and it may be at once admitted that the question of size notation is a vexed one and no absolute rule can be laid down for guidance. Those who have studied the matter know that there is no satisfactory solution of the difficulty beyond that of measuring the book and giving its size in centimetres or in inches. But this encumbers the catalogue entry too much, and for ordinary every-day purposes the old signs suffice of 8vo. (octavo), 4to. (quarto), and fo. (folio), and they give a rough idea of the size. These may be qualified, if thought necessary, by la. (large), sm. (small), or obl. (oblong), if the books are of a special size. The terms 12ᵒ., 16ᵒ., 32ᵒ., &c. are sometimes used, but they do not convey any very precise information and the additional terms of “demy,” “royal,” “imperial,” and others have varying meaning nowadays, as there is no fixed standard in the sizes of paper or books. [Appendix B] consists of a table taken from the “Report of the Committee on Size Notation of the Library Association of the United Kingdom,” and this may be studied as an introduction to the subject, but is not to be taken as decisive. The full report of the Committee is to be found in the Library Association Monthly Notes, vol. 3, 1882, pp. 130-133. A scale made from this table will be found convenient to cataloguers, as will also the handy and better known book-size scale prepared by Mr. Madeley of the Warrington Museum. The pages of books are to be measured and not their bindings. The sizes of books are not always shown in the printed catalogues of free libraries and if they were it is most likely that the signs would confuse rather than help, as the majority of the public do not understand anything of the matter, besides the proportion of books other than octavos is not large in a lending library. The reference library usually contains a considerable number of quartos and folios and the information upon this point would be more useful in the catalogue of that department.

27.—The immense value of occasional explanatory or descriptive notes to the entries in a catalogue is well known, but they are not as often inserted as they might be. They should be added to author, subject, or title entry, where necessary, desirable, or in any way helpful, as far as possible briefly and to the point, and printed under the entry in a smaller type, to show they are not part of the title. The following are a few examples taken from various catalogues:

Albert, Mary. Holland and her heroes. 1878

Adapted from Motley’s “Dutch Republic.”

Ball (Sir Robert S.) Elements of astronomy. 1886. ill.

Knowledge of mathematics required for the study of this book.

Ball, (William P.) Are the effects of use and disuse inherited? 1890. Nature series.

Note.—The author taken a negative view and attempts to prove that no improvement in mankind can take place without the aid of natural or artificial selection.

Boccaccio, Giovanni. Il decamerone; nuovamente correto et con diligentia stampato. pp. xii, 568. 8o. Firenze, 1527 [Venice, 1729.]

This is the counterfeit of the Giunta or “Ventisetana” Decameron of 1527.

Dupont-Auberville, M. Art industrial: L’ornement des tissus. 1877

Coloured designs suitable for all purposes taken from textile fabrics.

Mariette, A. E., called Mariette-Bey. Outlines of ancient Egyptian history. 1890

The best brief manual.

Persia.

Morier, J. Hajji Baba. 1895

Remains yet a standard book upon Persian life and manners.

In adding notes of this nature it is a wise plan to keep to statements of fact, and not indulge in expressions of opinion.

CHAPTER IV.
THE PRINCIPAL ENTRY.—THE AUTHOR ENTRY, 2.

28.—Having laid down some of the general principles to be followed in making the author-entry in a complete form, we proceed to take further examples selected because they happen to be at hand and not for any difficulty they present. Any batch of ordinary books will contain some that are troublesome to the beginner in cataloguing, and for this reason nothing that can be regarded as of an out-of-the-way character has been taken in illustration.

The next book is:

Historic survey of German poetry, interspersed with various translations. By W. Taylor, of Norwich. London: Treuttel, &c.

The work is in three volumes, the first being dated 1828, the second 1829, and the third 1830. We ascertain by reference to a biographical dictionary, or other likely work, that the author’s name is William, and as Wm. Taylor is a somewhat common name we retain the description “of Norwich,” so that he may be distinguished from any other author of the same name. The author-entry then is:

Taylor, William (of Norwich).

Historic survey of German poetry, interspersed with various translations. 3 v. 8o. 1828-30

This book being in more than one volume a collation of each is not given, as the statement of the number of volumes is considered to give sufficient idea of its extent. If the work were illustrated this fact would still be stated, not usually as “3 v., illus.” but “Illus. 3 v.” or “illus. 3 v.” It will be seen that the date of publication of each volume is not given but the first and last dates only. It is necessary to point out that the earliest and latest dates are not always those of the first and last volumes of a set, as it sometimes happens that they are not the first or last issued. Often enough the volumes of a set are made up of two or more editions with long intervals between the dates. In all cases the earliest and latest dates are to be given, and any peculiarities of the edition can be stated in the form of a note at the end of the entry.

Taking another book we find that the title-page reads:

Life of Ralph Waldo Emerson, by Richard Garnett, LL.D. London, Walter Scott, &c. 1888

and after an exhaustive examination the entry comes out as

Garnett, Richard.

Life of Ralph Waldo Emerson. (Great writers.) pp. 200, xiv. sm. 8o. 1888

With a bibliography by John P. Anderson.

29.—The desirability, or otherwise, of using initials instead of giving the Christian name in full in an author-entry depends largely upon the requirements of the library and the space taken up.

There seems to be a growing practice to search out from any available source all the names that an author was ever saddled with. The object of this for catalogues, other than those of great libraries of national importance, is not very obvious, and it should not concern the cataloguer why Dickens chose to be known as Charles simply instead of Charles John Huffam, or Du Maurier preferred to be called George rather than George Louis Palmela Busson, or even why Hall Caine has dropped the use of Thomas Henry from the fore part of his name. Yet these and other persons have appeared with all the names set out at length even in minor catalogues, and sometimes with the titles of the books cut down to the finest limit in order that the whole name might be got in. The spirit of infinite research is not always an advantage to the cataloguer.

30.—On the other hand, bare initials have a meagre appearance, and the middle course should be adopted even when expense is a consideration, as it adds very little to the cost of printing to give at least one name in full. It must be admitted that in many instances where there are two or more Christian names, the initials are distinctive enough for all reasonable purposes, as E. A. Abbott, A. K. H. Boyd, E. A. Freeman, and can be so used. Well-understood abbreviations, like Chas. Dickens, Geo. R. Sims, Robt. Browning, Thos. Carlyle, can also be used, but the gain is so trifling as not to be worth consideration. The first Christian name in use should be given in full, unless it happens that some other is better or specially known, as W. H. Davenport Adams, J. Percy Groves, J. Cotter Morison, R. Bosworth Smith.

31.—With the commoner surnames, as Smith, Brown, Jones, and the rest, there will be a number of authors who will have also the same Christian name, when particular care must be exercised not to mix the works together, and so attribute books to a wrong author. Some distinction must be given, like that shown in the “Taylor of Norwich” entry (p. 27), and these are better printed in italics. Examples of these, taken from a catalogue, are

Smith, John, A. L. S.

Smith, John, of Kilwinning.

Smith, John, of Malton.

Thomson, James (poet, 1700-48).

Thomson, James (“B. V.”)

Thomson, James (Traveller).

When father and son with the same name are authors, and the difference between them appears in the book as “the elder,” “jun.,” “fils,” “aîné,” &c., it should be given at the time the entry is made, even though not then required for distinguishing purposes, the library only possessing the works of one or the other. Frequently such a distinction is not shown on the book, and the cataloguer must add it. Strange to say, entries like the following have been seen in catalogues:—

Frères, P. Modes et costumes historiques.

Nassau, W., sen. Journals kept in France and Italy.

The first book being by the Paquet frères, and the other by Nassau W. Senior.

32.—Biographical dictionaries of all kinds are useful to the cataloguer, but for making distinctions like those referred to above, and for general use, the most serviceable and handiest, because concise and comprehensive, is “The dictionary of biographical reference, containing one hundred thousand names,” by Lawrence B. Phillips (Sampson Low, 1871.) There is a later edition of this work, but it is merely a reprint with no new matter. It should be superfluous to name the valuable and indispensable “Dictionary of national biography” for British names. Allibone’s “Critical dictionary of English literature and British and American authors,” with its supplement by Kirk, is an every-day book of reference for cataloguers. For German biography the “Allgemeine deutsche Biographie” (Leipzig, 1875-98), is the most important, and for French names the “Biographie universelle” (Paris, 1842-65) is very serviceable, as well as for names generally. It should be supplemented by Vapereau’s “Dictionnaire des contemporains.”

33.—The form for author-entry is clear and simple enough, and seems easy to put into practice, but difficulties soon arise, and the amount of knowledge the cataloguer possesses upon men in general and authors in particular will be early put to the test. The next book coming before us is

Vice versâ; or, a lesson to fathers. By F. Anstey. New and revised ed. London, Smith, Elder, &c., 1883.

The author’s name in this instance is a pseudonym, and the mode of treating such names has given rise to differences of opinion, and consequently of practice. In many catalogues the real name of the author, when known, is taken for the author-entry, and a reference given from the pseudonym to it. This may be a good rule to follow in very special catalogues, but there is no doubt that it is against the convenience of the great majority of persons who use libraries; and therefore the best, because most convenient and useful, plan is to make the entry under the best known name, whether it be assumed or real. It has been often said, and with much truth, that it is not the business of librarians to discover the identity of an author by proving his use of an alias unless for some sufficient reason. It has become quite a mania with some cataloguers to hunt and pry until they find out whether a name is real or not, and their zeal in this direction sometimes misleads them, as witness the fact that “George Eliot” has been entered as Mrs. Lewes in quite a number of catalogues, and Marie Corelli is called Marion Mackay. The cataloguer, besides putting himself to the bother of being ever on the look-out for real names, gives readers the trouble and vexation of looking in several places in the catalogue before they can find the author’s works they are in search of. People wanting books by “Ouida” do not care to be told on turning to that name to “see De la Ramé,” or “Ramée, L. de la,” or even “La Ramé.” It would be equally absurd, on the other hand, to refer from Dickens to “Boz,” or Thackeray to “Titmarsh;” therefore use the best known names. When the pseudonym is the most familiar name, and the principal entry is accordingly given under that form, then it is desirable, but not absolutely essential, to also give the real name, when known with certainty, enclosing it in parentheses, as

Anstey, F. (T. Anstey Guthrie).

Hobbes, John Oliver (Mrs. P. M. T. Craigie).

Sometimes the pseudonym is printed in italics in all entries, but this only serves to emphasise the name, without indicating that it is a known pseudonym. If it is wished to point out that the name is assumed, then the customary form of printing it in inverted commas is better understood, as

“Twain, Mark” (Samuel L. Clemens),

but this need only be in the author-entry. Upon these lines the book before us appears as

“Anstey, F.” (T. Anstey Guthrie).

Vice versâ; or, a lesson to fathers. New ed. 1883

To perfectly complete the author-entry and to prevent any possibility of mistake, we require a cross-reference pointing from the real name to the pseudonym under which the entry is found, thus:

Guthrie, T. Anstey. See Anstey, F.

If space is of no consideration, and it is wished to make the entry as exact as possible, then the form is

Anstey, F. (pseudonym of T. Anstey Guthrie),

and the reference reads

Guthrie, T. Anstey. See Anstey F. (pseud.)

34.—Before leaving this question of the treatment of pseudonymous books attention may be directed to other phases of it. There is the difficulty that occasionally arises of an author publishing under a pseudonym and under his real name and being equally as well-known under both. Instances of this would be the Rev. John M. Watson, whose theological works appear under his own name, and his stories under “Ian Maclaren;” and J. E. Muddock, who publishes some stories under that name and, it is said, his detective stories under the name of “Dick Donovan.” Common-sense might offer the suggestion to adhere to the rule already laid down and enter under both names, but this violates one of the first principles of dictionary cataloguing, viz., that all works by an author must be brought together under a single name. Therefore in such cases there is no option but to adopt the real name, at the same time taking care to remove all occasion of difficulty by giving cross-references, as

“Maclaren, Ian.” See Watson, John M.

“Donovan, Dick.” See Muddock, J. E.

35.—Then there are books that have a phrase for the pseudonym, like “One who has kept a diary,” or “A whistler at the plough.” These, while nominally pseudonyms, are virtually anonyms, and it is customary in full and special catalogues to make the entry under the first word not an article of such a phrase-name. It may be considered as very likely that such an entry in the majority of catalogues would be quite superfluous. Books like:

“Five years penal servitude, by One who has endured it.”

“Three in Norway, by Two of them.”

would be better dealt with if the title-entries, such as these, were taken as the principal entries and the pseudonym ignored. This is a case where the cataloguer will use his discretion as to the best course to pursue, being guided by the requirements of the library, but it is a mistake on the right side to give both forms if there is the least doubt.

36.—Books with initials only instead of the author’s name come between the pseudonymous and anonymous. The initials may be those of a name or indicate a title or profession. In all cases where the name veiled by the initials cannot be discovered, or their meaning ascertained, then the entry is given under the last letter, but if the letters stand for a known pseudonym, as “A.L.O.E.,” or a title or degree, as “by an M.P.,” or “M.A. (Oxon),” then the first letter is taken instead of the last. Occasionally an initialism will be given like, “by B.H.W., D.D.,” when, the meaning being clear, the entry will be under the W., as

W., B.H., D.D.

If it is known what the name is that is covered by the initials, as A.K.H.B., or L.E.L., then the entry is given under the name in full,

Boyd, A.H.K.

Landon, L.E.

but it is requisite that cross-references be given from the initialism, as

B., A.K.H. See Boyd, A.K.H.

L., L.E. See Landon, L.E.

The remark as to whether it is worth while in minor catalogues to give an entry under a phrase-pseudonym applies equally to the initials, and is open to the same doubts.

37.—In arranging the entries in alphabetical order it should be noted that initials take precedence of all other names in each particular letter, as

B., A.K.H.

B., G.W.

Baar, Thomas.

“Bab.”

The works most useful to the cataloguer in revealing real names are Halkett and Laing’s Dictionary of the anonymous and pseudonymous literature of Great Britain, Cushing’s Initials and pseudonyms, and Les supercheries littéraires dévoilées, par Quérard. A list of pseudonyms, mostly modern instances, with the real names, will be found in [Appendix C], by those who may require it.

38.—The next illustration is selected because it is distinctly anonymous, that is the author is not shown in any form in the book, either by a pseudonym or initialism, and the ordinary sources of information do not enable the authorship to be discovered.

Times and days: being essays in romance and history, pp. viii, 215. sm. 8o. 1889

Upon such books, if they are worth it, the industry of the cataloguer may very well be exercised, as librarians and the public feel that they are fully justified in finding out who the author is if they can. If the book is of any importance the name of the author is sure to be revealed for general information sooner or later, and the possibility of this adds zest to the search for the name at the moment it is needed by the cataloguer. Besides the works of reference mentioned already, Watt’s Bibliotheca Britannica should be consulted (for the older books), Barbier’s Dictionnaire des ouvrages anonymes, and any special bibliographies or catalogues within reach, not forgetting the great British Museum Catalogue of Printed Books. Local catalogues often prove valuable in this work, as the identity of an author may be well-known locally but not further. It is as well to point out that if a work is merely “ascribed,” or “said to be” by a particular person it is better to regard the book as altogether anonymous. To name a case in point, Halkett and Laing ascribe the authorship of the, at one time, celebrated “red pamphlets” on the Mutiny of the Bengal Army to a Major Bunbury, whereas the author is now known to have been the late Colonel G. B. Malleson.

In the event of the search after the author’s name proving futile, the rule is that the principal entry be given under the first word of the title not an article, in the same way as the entries follow in the work of Halkett and Laing. Should the library be a small one of a general character it would be somewhat pedantic to adhere rigidly to this rule, more especially if the subject of the book is clearly stated upon its title-page. For example, books like, A short history of Poland, and The rambler’s guide to Harrogate, would be amply and satisfactorily dealt with if entries were alone given under “Poland” and “Harrogate” respectively, instead of under “Short” and “Rambler’s,” as required by the rule.

39.—When books are said to be “by the author of —” and it cannot be ascertained who the author is, then they are treated as altogether anonymous and dealt with accordingly, as

N. or M., by the author of “Honor bright.”

No entry would be made under “Honor bright” except, of course, for that book itself if it happened to be in the library.

CHAPTER V.
THE PRINCIPAL ENTRY—THE AUTHOR-ENTRY, 3.

40.—There are further difficulties that arise from time to time in making the author-entry owing to the great variety in the form of authors’ names. The first book we take to illustrate one of these is:

M. Tullii Ciceronis Orationes; with a commentary by George Long. (Bibliotheca classica; ed. by George Long and A. J. Macleane.) 4 v. la. 8o. 1855-62

The rule is to transcribe Greek and Latin names either into the English form, as Cicero, Horace, Livy, Ovid, or into the Latin nominative as M. Tullius Cicero, and therefore the entry will be:

Cicero, M. Tullius. Orationes; with a commentary, by George Long. (Bibliotheca classica). 4 v. la. 8o. 1855-62

Greek names are not simply transcribed in Roman characters, as Homeros, but into the English or Latin form, as Homer, Homerus. All forms of the name, irrespective of the language of the original book or its translations, must be concentrated under the form adopted; thus the following three books,

The odes of Horace; transl. into English by the Rt. Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P. pp. xvi., 154. 8o. 1894

Quinti Horatii Flacci Opera omnia; with a commentary by the Rev. Arthur John Macleane, M.A. 4th ed., revised by George Long, M.A. (1869). (Bibliotheca classica.) pp. xxxii, 771. la. 8o. 1881

Q. Orazio Flacco. Odi, epistole, satire; traduzione di Diocleziano Mancini. pp. 64. sm. 8o. Castello, 1897

are entered either under Horace or Horatius Flaccus (Quintus), and therefore would appear as

Horace. Opera omnia; with a commentary, by Arthur J. Macleane. 4th ed., revised by Geo. Long (1869). (Bibliotheca classica.) pp. xxxii, 771. la. 8o. 1881

⸻ Odi, epistole, satire; trad. di Diocleziano Mancini. pp. 64. sm. 8o. Castello, 1897

⸻ Odes; transl. into English by W. E. Gladstone, pp. xvi, 154. 8o. 1894

It is very rarely required to give cross-references from the one form of name to the other, especially in the case of the classical authors. It should be noted that absolute uniformity is necessary in the style of such names in a single catalogue, be the form Latin or English, as it would be inconsistent to have, say Virgilius in one place, and Livy in another—in other words, it should be Virgil and Livy or Livius and Virgilius, popular libraries adopting the English form as most suitable.

41.—The customary mode of arranging the entries in such a case as the Horace given above, is to give first the whole works in the original, then the whole works in translations, afterwards the portions in the original followed by translations of these in their turn, the greater parts taking precedence of the lesser, and those in the language of the original coming before translations without regard to alphabetical order.

42.—There are classes of persons whose names come oftener under the notice of the cataloguer for subject-than for author-entry, such as sovereigns, princes, saints, and popes; but as one rule governs both forms of entry, it may be referred to at this point. All such personages are entered under the Christian names by which they are known and not under family or titular names. With these names are included those of ancient or mediæval use before the days of fixed surnames, or when they were merely sobriquets. Omitting titles of books in illustration examples of all these with the correct form would be:

Albert, Prince Consort.

Albert Edward, Prince of Wales.

Augustine, St.

Giraldus Cambrensis.

Leo XIII., Pope.

Paul, St.

Thomas a’Becket.

Thomas a’Kempis.

Victoria, Queen.

William of Malmesbury.

It would be safer to provide cross-references for such names as Thomas a’ Becket and Thomas a’ Kempis, thus:

Becket, Thomas a’. See Thomas a’ Becket.

Kempis, Thomas a’. See Thomas a’ Kempis.

43.—Strange to say, it is quite a common mistake in catalogues to enter all the saints together under “Saint,” instead of under their names, and it has even been attempted to justify such an obvious absurdity by the contention that people naturally turn to the word “Saint” for such names. This is very likely, but it would be just as reasonable to expect to find Lord Beaconsfield’s books under “Lord” or “Earl,” and Mr. Gladstone’s under “Mr.” Besides, if such a rule were logically carried out in the case of every person canonized, Sir Thomas More would now be entered under “Blessed,” and Thomas a’ Becket under “Saint.”

44.—In the case of noblemen who are authors, the entry should be under the title, and not under the family name, though it may be necessary in some instances to give a cross-reference from the family name. Illustrative examples of these would be:

Beaconsfield, Earl of. Coningsby.

Disraeli, Benjamin. See Beaconsfield.

Argyll, Duke of. The reign of law.

In full catalogues it is usual to give more particulars, as

Beaconsfield, Benjamin Disraeli, Earl of.

Argyll, George D. Campbell, 8th Duke of.

but even in concise catalogues, if the library happens to possess books by noblemen of the same title, the distinction must be clearly shown as

Albemarle, 6th Earl of. Fifty years of my life.

Albemarle, 8th Earl of. Cycling.

or fuller still, as

Derby, Edward, 14th Earl of. The Iliad of Homer, translated.

Derby, Edward H., 15th Earl of. Speeches and addresses.

45.—In some exceptional and well-defined cases, it is better to place the entries under the family name, for the reason that it is more in common use and so is better known, as

Bacon, Francis, Lord Verulam.

Walpole, Horace, Earl of Orford.

It is important to remember that the title of the author to be used is not that of the time when the book happened to be published, but the highest attained to at the time the catalogue is prepared or issued.

46.—This brings us to the question as to the extent in which titles of honour, of professional rank, or of scholastic attainment are to be used in cataloguing, particularly in connection with authors’ names. This is a matter that has been settled more by convenience and usage than by fixed rules. It is usual to omit all titles of rank below that of a knight, all such distinctions to a name as “Baronet,” “Knight,” “Right Honourable,” and “Honourable,” as well as the initials of the various orders of knighthood, as K.G., K.C.B., C.B., &c. University degrees and initials of membership of learned or other societies, as D.D., M.A., F.R.S., F.R.Hist.S., &c., are ignored, and so are professional titles, as Professor, Colonel, Doctor, Barrister-at-Law. For example, in the “republic of letters,” as exemplified in cataloguing,

The Right Honourable Sir Charles Wentworth Dilke, Bart., M.P.

becomes simply

Dilke, Sir Charles W.

and

The Right Honourable Professor F. Max Müller.

is

Müller, F. Max.

Upon the same plan most of the ecclesiastical titles are passed over, or at anyrate all under the rank of a dean, and all the prefixes as “Right Reverend,” “Rev.” are left out. Thus

The Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London, Mandell Creighton, D.D., &c.

is reduced to

Creighton, Mandell, Bp. of London.

or shorter still, if desired, to

Creighton, Mandell, Bp.

It has been found that simple treatment of this kind meets every requirement, and it is quite unnecessary to waste space in a catalogue by adding superfluous matter of this kind, besides the line must be drawn somewhere, and, as the cataloguer has no reason, even for politic motives, to indulge in snobbery, there is no occasion to swell a catalogue to undue proportions.

47.—If it is desired, however, to include degrees or other distinctive affixes, they must follow the Christian name, as

Jones, Thomas, LL.D.

and not

Jones, LL.D., Thomas.

Prefixes would be inserted in their proper order, as

Jones, Dr. Thomas.

Anything not actually part of the author’s name should be made distinctive by being printed in italics as here shown.

48.—It cannot be too often impressed on the young cataloguer how important it is to keep himself well posted in all changes occurring in the world around, and, more particularly, in the literary and social world. While many sources of information are available in a well-equipped library, yet none of these can compensate for a retentive memory and a mind keenly alive even for the comparatively trivial affairs that need to be constantly noted if error is to be avoided, or at least if the catalogue is to show the latest information. For instance, as each New Year and Queen’s Birthday comes round the lists of new honours gazetted have to be read, as an author or two may be among those raised to the peerage or be made baronets or knights and their style in the catalogue has to be altered accordingly. This may be considered unnecessary advice because catalogues of libraries are supposed to, and do, cover the whole field of human knowledge in all directions, and it is part of the cataloguer’s business to keep his knowledge modernized if his services are to be worth much. It is as well, however, to point this out to beginners, otherwise, if attention be not paid to such details, they will very soon find, or others will for them, that they have books written by the same person under two names, sometimes three, in a single catalogue. Many examples could be given of how this can be brought about, but it will suffice to give one. The first edition, 1887, of the book on cycling in the “Badminton Library” series has the names of Viscount Bury and G. L. Hillier as the authors, and the new edition of 1895 is by the Earl of Albemarle and G. L. Hillier. It would not do for a library possessing the first edition only to now enter it under “Bury,” nor for a library with both editions to enter one under “Bury” and the other under “Albemarle.”

49.—This point may be further emphasized by stating that ecclesiastical changes in the higher orders of the clergy have to be carefully observed from time to time, so that the very latest office is shown at the time the catalogue is printed, or that the alteration is made if in manuscript. It would not look well to continue to describe Frederick Temple as Bishop of Exeter or even as Bishop of London, Mandell Creighton as Bishop of Peterborough, or Frederick W. Farrar as Archdeacon, though their names may so appear upon the books being catalogued.

Occasionally books will be found by authors whose ecclesiastical office and not their names appear upon the title-pages, as “by William, Bishop of Chester,” “by the Archbishop of York,” when the name must be sought out and care taken to give the credit of the book to the right person. For instance, there is a book upon the Riviera, published in 1870, “by the Dean of Canterbury,” which might easily be credited to Dean Payne Smith instead of Dean Alford, and a very careless or unthinking cataloguer might even add it to Dean Farrar’s books. In this connection a very useful book of reference is The book of dignities, by Joseph Haydn, continued by Horace Ockerby, 1894, and of course any back volumes available of clerical directories or diocesan calendars will prove useful.

50.—But the ladies have to be watched with much greater care, as they are so much more apt to change their name, and that without any evidence of such change being given upon the title-page. Many examples might be given of ladies who have written under both their maiden and their married names. If the ladies continue writing under their maiden names, then the rule given for pseudonymous books would fitly apply, and the more familiar name should be used, as M. E. Braddon, and not Mrs. Maxwell, Florence Warden, and not Mrs. James. Where women authors are better known under their husbands’ names with the prefix “Mrs.,” as Mrs. Humphry Ward, Mrs. Coulson Kernahan, &c., it will be found that the best known form is also the best for use in a general or popular catalogue, though it would be more exact to give the ladies’ own names. If exactness is of prime importance, then the distinction can very well be shown, as

Ward, Mary A. (Mrs. Humphry Ward).

Kernahan, Jeanie G. (Mrs. Coulson Kernahan).

When both the maiden and married names are given upon a title-page, as “Katharine Tynan (Mrs. H. A. Hinkson),” then it is better to adopt the married name for the entry, but a cross-reference should be given, especially if books have been issued under the maiden name alone. Accordingly the entry would be

Hinkson, Katharine (Katharine Tynan).

and the reference

Tynan, Katharine. See Hinkson, Katharine.

51.—Peculiarities of form in surnames will next demand consideration, and probably the first of these will be names with patronymic or other prefixes. If the author is English, or has virtually become so (and “English” is to be here understood in its widest sense), then the prefix is simply regarded as a part of the name, and as such it will lead off. The following are some examples of names in this form:

St. John, Percy B.

De Crespigny, E. C.

D’Israeli, Isaac

Fitz George, George

Le Gallienne, Richard.

L’Estrange, A. G.

M’Crie, Thomas.

MacDonald, George.

O’Brien, William.

Ap John, Lewis.

Van Dyck, Sir A.

52.—In French names the entry should not be made under the prefix “de,” but under the name next following it, unless the “de” has become so much embodied in the surname as to be an integral part of it rather than a prefix. If the prefix happens to be the definite article “le” or “la,” or the article is comprised in it, as “du,” then the entry is to be given under the prefix. The following names show the part of the name which leads off:

Maupas, C. E. de.

Decourcelle, A.

Delaroche, Paul.

La Bruyère, Jean de.

La Sizeranne, Robert de.

Le Monnier, L.

Du Boisgobey, F.

Du Camp, Maximè.

In arranging such names for alphabetical order they are placed as if the prefix were part of the name, and the last five would come in place as Labr., Lasi., Lemo., Dubo., Duca. The English names are treated in much the same manner, but contractions are to be placed as if spelt out in full, and letters omitted by elision are to be ignored. In this way the English names given above would come in order: St. John as Saint John (not as Saintj, however, but before Sainte, as Sainte-Beuve), De Crespigny as Decre., D’Israeli as Disra., Le Gallienne as Legall., L’Estrange as Lestr., M’Crie as Maccrie, Mac Donald as Macdon., O’Brien as Obri., Ap John as Apjohn, and Van Dyck as Vandyck. Of course, the names must in no wise be altered from the form appearing upon the title-pages even for the purpose of harmonising them with neighbouring names in the alphabetical sequence.

53.—In German and Dutch names the “von” and “van” are entered after the name similarly to the French “de” as:

Ewald, G. H. A. von.

Beneden, P. J. van.

Some cataloguers keep these and the French “de” in their place as prefixes, at the same time ignoring them for alphabetical order, thus:

von Ewald, G. H. A.

van Beneden, P. J.

de Cuvier, Georges, Baron.

of course, placing them under Ewald, Beneden, Cuvier. The effect is not wholly satisfactory and it breaks the running line in the alphabet.

54.—The next difficulty is that of the compound names. It has been already hinted that stereotyped uniformity is not always to be recommended, but in dealing with names of this type it is as well to fix a rule and adhere rigidly to it. In the case of English compound names the best course to adopt is to give the entries under the last name in all cases. Examples of such names would be

Phillipps, J. O. Halliwell.

Turner, C. Tennyson.

Dunton, Theodore Watts.

These are so well known to most people as changed names, that it would not be quite correct to give merely an initial for the first name, as

Phillipps, J. O. H.

Turner, C. T.

Dunton, Theodore W.

though in most cases of compound names, this would not signify.

Under some rules for cataloguing, it is recommended that where the author has added to his name at a late period of his life, as the above-named persons have, then the entry should be given under the first part of the name. The objection to adopting this course is that two methods would be in use, and they would likely lead to confusion, for the reason that it is not always clearly or generally known that a compound name consists in reality of the addition of a name to the original surname. It is more frequently the case, owing to fashion or foible, that two names already belonging by right to a person have simply been joined by a hyphen, and so become “compounded.” Again, it is not always shown or known that a new name has been taken, as for instance J. F. B. Firth so described himself upon his books on London Government, and not as J. F. Bottomley-Firth, though he was born Bottomley, and took the name of Firth afterwards. Therefore, all things considered, it is wiser to adhere to the last name, more especially as it is so easy to safeguard it in doubtful cases by the useful cross-reference, such as

Tennyson-Turner, C. See Turner.

Halliwell-Phillipps, J. O. See Phillipps.

Watts-Dunton, Theodore. See Dunton.

Even these cross-references are seldom necessary, as it may reasonably be presumed that if a person fails to find the entries under the one name he turns to the other, thus if he wants books by the Rev. S. Baring-Gould, and fails to find them under Baring, it is unlikely that he will conclude they are not in the library without first looking under Gould.

55.—But while this rule for making use of the last part of a compound name holds good for English authors, the reverse method must be adopted as correct for foreign compound names, and the entry given accordingly under the first part of such a name, as

Dreux-Brézé, Marquis de.

Martinengo-Cesaresco, Countess.

Merle d’Aubigné, J. H.

Tascher de la Pagerie, Comtesse de.

It will be seen that this form is principally governed by the custom of the country to which the author happens to belong, and cataloguers will make themselves acquainted with the usages of each country as far as they can, either by reading or by constant reference to native biographical dictionaries and authoritative catalogues.

56.—In an average British library oriental names will only occasionally come under the notice of the cataloguer, and then for the most part attached to English books. A general rule may be laid down that the first part of such names should be taken for the author-entry, as

Omar Khayyam. Rubàiyàt; transl. by Fitzgerald.

Wo Chang. England through Chinese spectacles.

Dosabhai Framji Karaka. History of the Parsis.

but a rule of this kind must not be blindly followed, as it is sure to have exceptions. Some other part of the name may be the best known or even correct form, as:

Ranjitsinhji, K. S. The Jubilee book of cricket.

remembering always that the surname according to Western ideas, handed on from one generation to another does not exist in the East. In every case it is a wise plan to consult any available catalogues that have been compiled by experts in oriental language and custom. Care is also necessary in dealing with these names lest it should be found when too late that the entry has been given under a title and not a name. On pages 76-97 of Linderfelt’s Eclectic card catalog rules will be found a list of oriental titles and occupations with their signification, and the use of this will do much to prevent mistakes of the kind. Beale’s Oriental biographical dictionary; revised by H. G. Keene (W. H. Allen, 1894) is also a helpful work in this connection.

CHAPTER VI.
THE PRINCIPAL ENTRY.—THE AUTHOR-ENTRY, 4.

57.—When books are written in collaboration, the customary procedure is to make the entry under the first-named author, if not more than two are given on the title-page, followed by the name of the second. If there are more than two authors, then the name of the first only is given, followed by “and others,” or “&c.,” as

Woods, Robert A., and others. The poor in great cities.

It is desirable to give a cross-reference from every joint-author to the name under which the entry is placed, but it depends greatly upon the style of the catalogue whether this is done or not. In most cases it will be found that the references can be dispensed with if more than two authors, and often enough from the second when but two. It is unlikely, for example, that a reference is necessary from Rice to Besant for the novels by Besant and Rice, or from Chatrian for those by Erckmann-Chatrian. If, however, the second-named author is also the single author of other books in the library, the reference is unavoidable and must be given. In the principal entry it is unnecessary to reverse the names of any author but the first, though this is sometimes done, as

Besant, Sir Walter, and Rice, James;

but the better form is

Besant, Sir Walter, and James Rice.

58.—The order of arrangement for books written by an author who is also a joint-author is to give first those books written by him alone; then those books in which he has collaborated, with his name occupying the leading place upon the title-page; and lastly the references to other authors with whom he has joined, but with his name in a secondary place. The entries would be separately alphabetical in each of these divisions. The following illustrates this point:—

Stevenson, Robert L. The black arrow.

⸻ Weir of Hermiston.

⸻ and Fanny. The dynamiter.

⸻ and Lloyd Osbourne. The ebb-tide.

⸻ The wrecker.

⸻ See also Henley, W. E.

59.—As in this illustration the repeat dash has been used, it may be here stated that its purpose is to save the repetition of the author’s name in each entry after the first, and, as shown in the case of “The wrecker,” it is unnecessary to give more than a single dash in any instance, as the position of the entry denotes that it is by the same authors as the preceding book. It was owing to the misuse of this dash that the old catalogue joke arose of

Mill, J. S. On liberty.

⸻ On the Floss.

and others equally ridiculous are to be found in catalogues where the dash is not limited in use as a repeat for authors’ names, or as a repeat to a subject-heading, but this point is further dealt with under subject-cataloguing (Section 102). It must be noted that in the case of authors’ or editors’ names the dash is strictly limited in use as a repeat for second and further books by the same author, and not to repeat all authors with the same surname, as

Fletcher, Andrew.

⸻ Banister.

⸻ C. R. L.

⸻ Giles.

⸻ J. S.

⸻ J. W.

This bad form should be avoided, and the surname of each person given in full, as

Fletcher, Andrew.

Fletcher, Banister.

Fletcher, C. R. L.

60.—Music is not usually treated upon the supposition that the librettist is joint-author with the composer. The latter is always regarded as the author and the entry given under his name only. The reason for this is that in the case of operas, oratorios, and the like the libretto is a mere secondary matter and the books are placed in libraries for the music only, and in the vocal scores of operas there is seldom a complete libretto. In this way the Gilbert-Sullivan operas are entered only under Sullivan, and if thought desirable a reference may be given from Gilbert, but it is not essential. The following is from the title-page of one of these operas.

“An entirely new and æsthetic opera in two acts entitled ‘Patience; or, Bunthorne’s bride,’ written by W. S. Gilbert, composed by Arthur Sullivan, arranged from the full score by Berthold Tours. London.”

Properly adapted this would appear in the catalogue as

Sullivan, Sir Arthur S.

Patience; or, Bunthorne’s bride: opera; arranged by Berthold Tours. (Vocal score.) pp. 117. 4o. n.d.

It is hardly necessary to say that if on the other hand the libretto only of an opera or similar work were in the library, the entry would be given under the librettist, and the composer would be ignored, as there would be none of his work in the book.

Occasionally an exception to these rules will arise, and would be found in a book like

Moore’s Irish melodies; with accompaniments by M. W. Balfe.

because it is likely enough that an edition of Moore’s Melodies with music would be called for without regard to the composer, though the book may have been placed in the library more on account of the music. Therefore, both entries must be given, that under the arranger’s name being the principal, as

Balfe, Michael W.

Moore’s Irish melodies; with accompaniments. pp. viii., 192. la. 8o. n.d.

Moore, Thomas.

Irish melodies; with accompaniments by Balfe. n.d.

61.—When a book consists of a collection of essays or articles by a number of authors, gathered together by an editor, it is proper to give the principal entry under the editor’s name rather than under that of the first-named author in the contents. If a book of this nature is of sufficient importance, each of its divisions can be treated as a separate work, and author-entries given, each author being credited with his share only. As to how far books of the kind are to be so dealt with must rest entirely with the cataloguer, space and utility being the two important points for his consideration. It frequently happens that a single essay or section of a book contains the essence of many volumes, and to a busy man such essays may be of more real value than a whole book. Again, if a person is interested in the work of a particular author, he will be glad not only to have the complete books, but also his contributions to miscellaneous works as well, and these are shown by indexing the contents. To do this will add to the extent and cost of a catalogue, but it will, at the same time, add to its value and usefulness. Of course there are many volumes of this miscellaneous nature, the contents of which are of a very slight or ephemeral value, and to so index them would be a waste of energy and of space. It is quite as easy to overdo this indexing of contents as to carry it out judiciously, as witness the fact that some librarians have gone to the trouble of indexing the principal contents of such obvious works of reference as the Encyclopædia Britannica, and the Dictionary of National Biography. In this matter, then, it will be seen that no fixed rule can be laid down. Sometimes the setting out of the contents under the principal entry will be sufficient. This does not imply that the contents of volumes of magazines, reviews, and the like should be so treated, as is sometimes seen attempted, of course with sorry results so far as completeness is concerned, because at best but a selection can be given, and even this necessitates wading through pages of closely-set small type; in fact, the only real purpose it serves is to show what serial stories are in a particular volume. No one can gainsay the fact that an enormous quantity of valuable material lies hidden away in back volumes of magazines, but librarians must depend upon such works as Poole’s Index to Periodical Literature, with its supplements, and the Review of Reviews’ Annual Index to Periodicals to reveal it.

62.—In some libraries the contents of miscellaneous books are set out as well as indexed, but it is doubtful if it is worth while doing both in the majority of cases. The following entries show a well-known book fully treated in this way so far as the principal and author entries only are concerned:—

Essays and reviews, pp. iv., 434. la. 8o. 1860

Contains:—The education of the world, by Temple. Bunsen’s Biblical researches, by Williams. On the study of the evidences of Christianity, by Powell. Séances historiques de Genève: The national church, by Wilson. On the Mosaic cosmogony, by Goodwin. Tendencies of religious thought in England, 1688-1750, by Pattison. On the interpretation of scripture, by Jowett.

Temple, Frederick, Archbp.

The education of the world. (Essays and reviews). 1860

Williams, Rowland.

Bunsen’s Biblical researches. (Essays and reviews). 1860

Powell, Baden.

On the study of the evidences of Christianity. (Essays and reviews). 1860

Wilson, Henry B.

Séances historiques de Genève: The national church. (Essays and reviews). 1860

Goodwin, C. W.

On the Mosaic cosmogony. (Essays and reviews). 1860

Pattison, Mark.

Tendencies of religious thought in England, 1688-1750. (Essays and reviews). 1860

Jowett, Benjamin.

On the interpretation of scripture. (Essays and reviews). 1860

As these items would each require at least one subject entry besides, it will be seen that this book must have fifteen distinct entries to be effectually catalogued.

63.—The contents of collected works in more than one volume must be set out in order that the catalogue may show in what volume a particular work is to be found, in this way:—

Hawthorne, Nathaniel.

Complete works; with introductory notes by Geo. P. Lathrop. (Riverside ed.) Illus. 12 v. 1883

v. 1. Twice-told tales.

v. 2. Mosses from an old manse.

v. 3. The house of the seven gables. The snow image, and other twice-told tales.

and so on through the rest of the volumes. Wherever possible, the tabulated contents of such works should be summarised when considered sufficient for all reasonable purposes, as

Gray, Thomas.

Works; ed. by Edmund Gosse. 4 v. 1884

v. 1. Poems, journals, and essays.

v. 2-3. Letters.

v. 4. Notes on Aristophanes and Plato.

To give a list of the essays contained in the first volume is unnecessary, as all Gray’s miscellaneous essays are in that volume.

64.—There are books, or rather editions of books, of a composite nature, where an editor has joined together works by different authors into one volume. Examples of these are

The poetical works of Henry Kirke White and James Grahame; with memoirs, &c., by George Gilfillan. Edin., 1856

The dramatic works of Wycherley, Congreve, Vanbrugh, and Farquhar; with biographical and critical notices by Leigh Hunt. 1875

To be exact, the cataloguer may give the principal entry under the editor, as already stated, but it does not obviate the necessity under any circumstances of a separate entry under the name of each author. There is no need to include the names of the other authors in the entries, and just the same principle would apply as illustrated in the Essays and reviews above. It is as well, however, to add the name of the editor to each author-entry, as it shows the particular edition. The entries in full would appear as

Gilfillan, George (Ed.)

The poetical works of Henry Kirke White and James Grahame; with memoirs, &c. 8o. Edin., 1856

White, Henry Kirke. Poetical works; ed. by George Gilfillan. 1856

Grahame, James. Poetical works; ed. by George Gilfillan. 1856

The second book would be dealt with after the same manner, but with the Christian names supplied to the sub- or author-entries, as

Hunt, Leigh (Ed.)

The dramatic works of Wycherley, Congreve, Vanbrugh, and Farquhar; with biog. and critical notices. la. 8o. 1875

Wycherley, Wm.

Dramatic works; with biog., &c. notices by Leigh Hunt. 1875

and similar entries under Wm. Congreve, Sir John Vanbrugh, and George Farquhar. The entries may be made a little more concise, as

Congreve, Wm. Dramatic works; ed. by Hunt. 1875

It will be observed that neither of the above books would properly admit of a principal entry under the first-named author, as it would bring the authors’ names together in such a way as to lead to the supposition that they were joint-authors, as

White, Henry Kirke, and James Grahame. Poetical works.

Wycherley, Wm., Wm. Congreve, and others. Dramatic works.

It is true that any person with the least knowledge of English literature would know better than that these authors had collaborated, but the cataloguer has to put himself in the position of the man who knows nothing of the matter. Cross-references from one author’s name to the other in such a case would be absurd.

65.—Anthologies or other compilations are to be entered under the names of the editors or compilers, with the abbreviation Ed. (Editor) or Comp. (Compiler) following the name, as

Palgrave, Francis T. (Ed.) Golden treasury of songs and lyrics. 1887

The artist of a collection of drawings or other illustrations is to be regarded as the author, and the writer of any descriptive text accompanying them placed subordinately, as

Burgess, Walter W.

Bits of old Chelsea: a series of forty-one etchings; with letterpress descriptions by Lionel Johnson and Richard Le Gallienne. fo. 1894

It would be as well to give cross-references from the writers of the text, as

Johnson, Lionel. See also Burgess, W. W.

Le Gallienne, Richard. See also Burgess, W. W.

66.—The difference in references between “See” and “See also” must be noted. If there are entries of any kind already in the catalogue under the names of the persons referred from, then the reference is “See also,” and not “See.” The best form for writing a cross-reference is

Johnson, Lionel.

⸻ See also Burgess, W. W.,

and, if it should happen that by the time the “copy” of the catalogue is being got ready for printing there was no other entry under this author’s name, it would be altered to

Johnson, Lionel. See Burgess, W. W.

67.—It occasionally happens that both the work of the artist and of the writer of the text are of sufficient importance to warrant separate entries, but only one of the entries should be the principal entry giving the fullest particulars. A book of this kind is Ruskin’s edition of Turner’s Harbours of England. As this particular edition is published as one of Ruskin’s works, and Turner is more subject than author, then the main entry is

Ruskin, John.

The harbours of England; with … illustrations by J. M. W. Turner; ed. by Thos. J. Wise. pp. xxvi, 134. sm. 8o. Orpington, 1895

and the subordinate entry is

Turner, J. M. W.

The harbours of England; [text] by John Ruskin. 1895

68.—When a word not on the title-page is added to an entry by the cataloguer, it is customary to show this by enclosing it in brackets [ ] as the word “text” in the above example. On the other hand, if words have been left out from the transcript of the title-page as unnecessary the omission is denoted by three points … as shown in the Ruskin entry where the word “thirteen” has been passed over. In the smaller libraries it will be found that it is unnecessary to denote either additions or omissions in this way, but where perfect exactness is of importance this is the understood form for the purpose.

This Ruskin entry also shows that if it is already stated in the title that the book is illustrated there is no occasion to repeat “illus.” in the collation. There are many books of which the value lies more in the illustrations than in the text, such as those illustrated by Blake, Bewick, Cruikshank, “Phiz,” and others. It is often found sufficient in such cases to give a cross-reference from the artist to the author illustrated, like

Cruikshank, George, Works illustrated by. See Ainsworth, W. H.; Maxwell, W. H.

it being, of course, understood that it is stated in the author-entry that the particular edition is illustrated by the artist from whose name the reference is given, as

Maxwell, W. H.

History of the Irish Rebellion, 1798; illus. by Geo. Cruikshank.

otherwise the reference would be worthless.

The extent to which these references are given depends altogether upon the editions, as the cheap modern reprints of books like Ainsworth’s novels do not call for notice of the illustrations, and there are not many illustrators of books—especially in these days of “process” reproduction—whose work calls for the special attention of the cataloguer.

In making references like the foregoing, or of any kind, care should be exercised to give all the names necessary, and not, as is sometimes done, but two or three, and then finishing with a comprehensive “&c.” which is less than no use, inasmuch as it only serves to show that there are other books in the library illustrated by this particular artist, but what they are the cataloguer has neglected to state and the inquirer is thus left in vexatious doubt.

CHAPTER VII.
THE PRINCIPAL ENTRY.—CORPORATE AND OTHER FORMS.—EDITORS AND TRANSLATORS.

69.—In cataloguing the transactions, memoirs, proceedings and other publications of the learned societies, the societies in their corporate capacity are regarded as the authors and so treated, the principal entry being placed under the first word of their names not an article, provided they are societies of a national or general character, as

Royal Society of London.

Library Association.

Linnean Society.

Royal Geographical Society.

Society of Antiquaries.

Societies of a strictly local character are to be entered under the name of the place of meeting or publication, as for example the publications of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Newcastle-on-Tyne are not entered under “Literary,” but

Newcastle-on-Tyne Literary and Philosophical Society,

such an entry of course being kept quite apart from the subject-heading Newcastle-on-Tyne.

There are antiquarian and other societies whose work covers a much larger area than the particular locality in which they hold meetings or their offices happen to be situated, and they could not be fitly entered under the name of the place. For instance, the publications of the Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire emanate from Liverpool, but the place of meeting or publication might be changed to Manchester or Chester without in any way affecting the nature or scope of the Society’s work. Therefore the entry in such a case should not be under Liverpool or even “Historic,” but

Lancashire and Cheshire, Historic Society of.

Almost similar are the publishing societies dealing with a limited area, as the Chetham and Surtees Societies, but the specially distinctive name settles the matter, and the entries would accordingly be under those names. Societies of this class, however, are simply the publishers of collections of books, and so, in addition to the entries under the societies’ names, each book must have a separate author-entry. The entries would be after this manner:—

Navy Records Society, Publications of the. v. 1-9. la. 8o. 1894-7

v. 9 The journal of Sir George Rooke, Admiral of the Fleet, 1700-2; ed. by Oscar Browning.

(The first eight volumes would be set out in the same way in their place as are the contents of collected works).

Rooke, Sir George, Admiral of the Fleet.

Journal, 1700-2; ed. by Oscar Browning. (Navy Records Soc., v. 9.) 1897

It would be within the scope of most catalogues to separately enter under authors and subjects any exceptionally important monographs published with or supplementary to, the transactions of scientific or other societies, but to go further than this and to catalogue in this way each separate contribution to such transactions opens up so vast a field of work that it need not be attempted. Special libraries used only by special classes of the community will have to settle the length to which they can go in this direction according to their several requirements and the means at their disposal. Something towards this end of making available the contents of transactions, proceedings, and the like has been accomplished in the Royal Society’s Catalogue of Scientific Papers, but there is infinitely more yet to be done and the majority of libraries will choose to wait for the promised great International Catalogue of Scientific Literature rather than attempt to index the contents of whatever transactions they happen to possess in their libraries, though this great catalogue has up to the present got no further than the conference-and-dinner stage of compilation.

The publications of foreign societies are usually entered under the names of the countries if of national importance, or places where they meet if of local importance, unless they have a specially distinctive title. Government publications are entered under the names of the countries or places, as

France. Chambre des Députés.

Paris. Prefecture de la Seine.

United States Bureau of Education.

The publications of the home government cannot be grouped under one head or title in this way, and must be distributed under the names of the various departments as Board of Trade, Local Government Board, Historical Manuscripts Commission, Charity Commission, &c.

The reports of Church Councils and official publications of religious denominations occasionally call for some consideration. Important ecclesiastical councils as the Council of Trent or the Westminster Assembly of Divines are entered under the names of the places of meeting, but in the case of denominational assemblies where the place of meeting is a mere incident, the entry is to be made under the name of the denomination, and not the place of meeting. Examples of such publications are

Official report of the Church Congress, Cardiff, 1889.

Report of proceedings of the Presbyterian Alliance held in Philadelphia, 1880.

Minutes of proceedings of the yearly meeting of Friends held in London, 1896.

and the form of entry is

Church of England. Official report of the Church Congress, Cardiff, 1889.

Presbyterian Alliance. Report of proceedings, Philadelphia, 1880.

Friends, Society of. Minutes of proceedings of the yearly meeting, London, 1896.

In the same way reports or publications of particular societies meeting in annual or occasional congress as Freemasons, Good Templars, Trades Unions, or professional associations are entered under the names of the societies irrespective of the places of meetings.

70.—There is still one form of principal entry to be considered, and that is when there is no author, editor, or compiler whose name can be used and a title-entry becomes a principal entry. The commonest form is that of newspapers, magazines, and periodicals. These are invariably entered under the first word of the title not an article, and never under the editor’s name. The first and last volumes of the series contained in the library with the earliest and latest dates (i.e. years) are given, as

Chambers’s Journal, v. 1-20. la. 8o. 1854-64

Strand Magazine. Illus. v. 1-14. la. 8o. 1891-7

Times, The. 47 v. la. fo. 1881-91

If the series is incomplete then the volumes wanting must be shown by the entry, as

Chambers’s Edinburgh Journal. New ser., v. 9-15, 17, 19-20. la. 8o. 1848-54

this showing that volumes 1 to 8, 16, and 18 are not in the library.

71.—Another form of principal title-entry is that for the sacred books, especially for the Bible in its various editions and translations. It is customary to enter all editions in all languages of the complete scriptures, or of portions of them, under the word “Bible,” arranging the entries in this order in the first place—

1 Old and New Testament (whether inclusive of the Apocrypha or not).

2 Old Testament only.

3 Parts of Old Testament.

4 New Testament.

5 Parts of New Testament.

Each of these divisions are then arranged according to language, and each of the languages again chronologically according to the edition. When a library contains a fair collection of versions and editions of the scriptures it is as well to keep to the rule to place those first which are in the original languages, but in the average English library it will be found most convenient to lead off with the English versions, followed by those in the original texts, and afterwards with those in modern languages other than English. The entries would be after the following style, but with such distinctive bibliographical particulars as may be desirable according to the importance and interest of the collection.

Bible, The

Old and New Testaments.

English. The Bible in Englishe according to the translation of the great Byble. 1561

⸻ The parallel Bible. The Holy Bible: being the Authorised Version arranged in parallel columns with the Revised Version. 1885

French. La sainte Bible. Ed. Ostervald. 1890

Old Testament.

Greek. The Septuagint version of the Old Testament; with an English translation, notes, &c. n.d.

This arrangement and sub-division is only applicable to the text, and then only if the edition is simply a version or translation and is not accompanied by a commentary. Commentaries are treated as any other original work would be and entered under the author’s name, unless they happened to be of a collective character, as The Cambridge Bible for schools and colleges; ed. by Perowne, when the principal-entry would be under “Bible” (Subject sub-division “Commentaries”) preferably to “Cambridge Bible,” with the contents of each volume of the series set out, not alphabetically, but in the order of the books of the Bible, as

Bible, The:

Commentaries.

Cambridge Bible for schools and colleges; ed. by Perowne.

Old Testament.

Joshua, by G. F. Maclear. 1887

Judges, by J. J. Lias. 1886

Ezra and Nehemiah, by H. E. Ryle. 1893

A cross-reference would be necessary from

Cambridge Bible for schools, &c. See Bible (Commentaries)

and, if it were deemed desirable, references could be given from the editors’ names in this form

Maclear, G. F. See Bible (Cambridge Bible).

72.—Sometimes the commentaries in a series are of sufficient importance, or of such a character, that each is virtually a book quite apart from its place as one of the series. The volumes of the Expositor’s Bible, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll, are of this class, and, while they should in the first place be dealt with as shown in the Cambridge Bible above, yet a mere reference under the author’s names hardly suffices—they are not merely editors as in the Cambridge Bible series—therefore, besides this principal-entry under Bible, entries are required, as

Farrar, F. W., Dean. The first Book of Kings. (Expositor’s Bible). 1893

⸻ The second Book of Kings. (Expositor’s Bible). 1894

⸻ The Book of Daniel. (Expositor’s Bible). 1895

or in a style more concise

Farrar, F. W., Dean. Expositor’s Bible:

I. and II. Kings. 2 v. 1893-4

Daniel. 1895

Though coming more correctly under the remarks on subject-headings it may be here noted in passing that commentaries in a series are regarded as a single book and not entered separately under the name of each book of the Bible throughout the catalogue, therefore the above items would not have entries under “Kings” or “Daniel.” If, however, Dean Farrar had written a separate work dealing with the Book of Daniel, it should be entered under “Daniel,” and not under “Bible.” So commentaries, or any other works upon the whole Bible, like the entire series of the Expositor’s Bible, go under “Bible,” but if the commentaries deal with the Old or New Testament, or any particular book of the Bible separately, such works are placed under the headings of “Old Testament,” “New Testament,” or under the name of the particular book dealt with, as the case may be, and not under the heading “Bible,” as in the case of the text alone, or any portion of it. There are exceptions even to this rule with regard to translations, if special, and more particularly if accompanied by an exposition, as in a case like

Jowett, Benjamin. The epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, Galatians, and Romans. 3rd ed., ed. and condensed by Lewis Campbell. 2 v. 1894

v. 1, Translation and commentary.

v. 2, Essays and dissertations.

This work would not be put under “Bible” as its subject, but would be entered either under “Paul, St.” (where all books upon his Epistles, not part of a general commentary or including any other parts of the Bible, might very well be grouped), or under the names of the churches to which the Epistles were addressed, as

Thessalonians, St. Paul’s Epistles to the.

In either case a cross-reference would be needed under the heading “Bible,” sub-division “Commentaries,” thus:

Bible.

Commentaries.

See also Paul, St.

or

See also Thessalonians.

73.—The extent to which editors and translators are to be noticed in cataloguing is a very important one, but it also depends largely upon the requirements of the case. It should be taken for granted in large reference libraries intended principally for use by scholars that every name appearing upon a title-page, whether as author, editor, translator, compiler, or adapter, would be noticed and receive an entry, either in full or by way of cross-reference. But for an average library, and particularly lending libraries, it would be waste of energy and of space to adopt this system and fully carry it out. Thus, a work like

Easy selections adapted from Xenophon; with a vocabulary, notes, and a map, by J. Surtees Phillpotts and C. S. Jerram.

would in the former case have references from Phillpotts and Jerram to Xenophon, under which the principal entry should appear. But in most cases a single entry will be found ample, as

Xenophon. Easy selections; adapted, &c. by Phillpotts and Jerram.

On the other hand, there are famous translations or editions that should have in every case entries under the translator’s or editor’s name, as

Chapman, George. Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey.

Jowett, Benjamin. The Republic of Plato.

These are instances where two principal entries might be given with advantage, firstly under “Homer” and “Plato,” and secondly under “Chapman” and “Jowett,” as above.

Almost in the same category come those books which have been revised and enlarged by an editor to such an extent as to leave but little of the original author’s work. Sometimes the revision and additions may not be so extensive, but still be important enough to command a separate entry under the reviser’s name. Examples of these are

Prescott, Wm. H. History of the reign of the Emperor Charles V., by Wm. Robertson, extended by W. H. P.

Tilden, Wm. A. Watts’ Manual of chemistry. v. 2, Organic chemistry. 2nd ed. 1886

these entries being in addition to those under “Robertson” and “Watts.”

74.—It occasionally occurs that a prefatory essay or biographical or critical introduction to a book is of so much value as to be worth a separate entry, as

Courthorpe, Wm. J. Life of Alexander Pope. (Pope’s Works, v. 5.) 1889

The careful cataloguer will rarely overlook these important points, though it too often happens that sets of books are lumped into a catalogue without the least attention to details of this kind, leaving it incomplete and so making the library less useful.

CHAPTER VIII.
SUBJECT, TITLE, AND SERIES ENTRIES.

75.—The form of author-entry, or its equivalent, having been settled, the subject-entry now commands attention. The importance of the author-entry is recognised, but it is well known to librarians that, leaving fiction out of the question, most inquiries are made in libraries for books upon a particular subject, or for a special class of literature, rather than for the works of a particular writer, the people who know many authors not being so numerous as might be supposed. Therefore it is essential in all cataloguing work that the utmost attention be paid to the subjects. Every volume dealt with should be thoroughly examined for the purpose of ascertaining generally the nature of its contents, and definitely the subject or subjects of which it treats. This course should be pursued in every case, even if the subject is so clearly defined upon the title-page that to go beyond the statement there made would seem to be a sheer waste of time, otherwise the “pitfalls” that lie in the cataloguer’s way cannot be avoided. Besides, there may be some particularly valuable feature of the book hidden away in an appendix, or even a separate book bound up in the same cover, which the first title-page will not reveal.

76.—When the subject of the book has been clearly ascertained, an entry taken from the book itself or from the principal entry already written, is made under the name of the direct and definite subject of the book, not under the class of literature to which it belongs or even the form in which it is written. It is of the first importance that the cataloguer should definitely decide the particular subject-name he will adopt in order to avoid the somewhat common blemish in catalogues of synonymous headings. Having so decided, it will prevent future mistakes if a cross-reference is immediately written and sorted into place with the first lot of slips alphabetized when it at once serves as a pointer in the right direction by preventing books upon a single subject being placed under two headings. Thus if the book in hand is

Newth, Samuel. A first book of natural philosophy. pp. viii., 136, illus. sm. 8o. 1867

and the cataloguer has decided in favour of the heading “Physics,” he will at once write a cross-reference

Natural philosophy. See Physics.

which when put in its alphabetical sequence will point out if slips have been inadvertently written under “Natural Philosophy” that the chosen heading is “Physics,” and that the entries must be so altered and arranged. The subject-entry in this instance would be

Physics:

Newth, S. First book of natural philosophy. 1867

It will be here noted that under the subject-heading the author’s surname leads off as it directs to the principal entry where the fullest particulars concerning the book are to be found, and consequently it is most unusual to give the collation, size, and other information in all sub-entries. It is advisable, however, to give the date of publication in every entry excepting in the case of works of fiction under the circumstances referred to in paragraph 24.

77.—The forms of subject entries in dictionary catalogues can be much better shown by means of example with explanations than by statement alone, and for this reason a number of ordinary books, not selected for any difficulty they present, are given. These have been fully worked out in the dictionary system, and are accompanied in each case by the principal entry, so that the complete series of entries can be seen. The styles of types in printing commonly made use of to mark distinctions are also shown.

Abney, W. de W.

Colour measurement and mixture. (Romance of science ser.) pp. 207, illus. sm. 8o. 1891

Colour.

Abney, W. de W. Colour measurement and mixture. 1891

Romance of Science series:

Abney, W. de W. Colour measurement and mixture. 1891

Science.

See also Romance of science series.

It is an excellent rule to follow that a subject must have at least two books upon it before it is entitled to a “heading,” such as the second of the above entries has. In the event of the library possessing but this one book upon the subject by the time the “copy” has to be sent to the printer, it would then be reduced to title form, as

Colour measurement and mixture. Abney, W. de W. 1891

78.—The third entry is under the name of the series. Where space is a consideration, and only brief entries can be given, the cataloguer can omit either the name of the series from the principal entry and retain the entries under the title heading of the series, or he may reverse the process and leave out this third entry, as he may deem most expedient, but if possible both should be retained, as they afford useful information—in the first entry showing that the book is one of a particular series, and thereby giving some idea of its character and scope, indeed it would not be amiss for the same reason to include it in the second entry, and the third entry form furnishes a list of the books of this particular series in the library.

79.—Baillon, Henry E. The natural history of plants; transl. by Marcus M. Hartog. Illus. 8v. la. 8o. 1871-88

This work should neither be placed under “Natural History” nor “Plants,” as some might suppose, as its subject is “Botany,” and the further entries would therefore be

Botany:

Baillon, H. E. The natural history of plants. 8v. 1871-88.

Plants. See Botany.

Hartog, Marcus M. (Transl.) See Baillon, H. E.

Besides the curtailment of information given in the principal entry already shown, the Christian names of authors are reduced to simple initials, and the names of translators and editors are omitted in all sub-entries. It is important to notice the difference between “See” and “See also” in cross-references; the first would prevent any entries being placed under the subject-heading where it is given, as already stated, but the second is intended to guide to lesser or closely-related divisions of the subject under which it appears. There may be a number of these see alsos under a single heading by the time the catalogue is ready for printing, when they are to be embodied into one entry, as in the following illustration, where nine are so amalgamated

Botany.

See also Algæ. Cryptogamia. Ferns. Flowers. Fungi. Grasses. Lichens. Mosses. Trees.

Of course, references of any kind must never be made in anticipation, but at the moment when the book to which they refer is being catalogued; otherwise a series of references will be the result that lead nowhere, as would be the case in the above example if the library had no books upon Algæ or the other subjects named.

80.—Taylor, Wm. (of Norwich). Historic survey of German poetry. 8 v. 8o. 1828-30

The subject-entries for a book such as this call for careful consideration. A title-entry under “Historic” is uncalled for, as the subject is clearly defined in the full title. But a choice of headings must be made under which the entries are to be given. The mind will waver between some of these:

German poetry.

Poetry, German.

German literature.

Literature, German.

Germany. (Sub-division Literature)

and upon a right decision hangs the usefulness and correctness of the catalogue, as it is possible that other entries will be affected by it later. An exact analysis shows that the book is specifically upon the first-named subject, but it is so clearly a part of the third-named as to be entitled to come under it in some form, either by way of entry or cross-reference. It is true that, if treated logically, the book has no absolute right of inclusion under a heading “German literature,” inasmuch as it only deals with poetical literature, but it may be taken for granted that a book with the title of “Historic survey of German prose” would be placed under such a heading without much questioning; and therefore, as concentration and convenience count for something, and are often of more moment than literal exactness, the entries might very well be

German literature.

Taylor, W. Historic survey of German poetry. 8 v. 1828-30.

German poetry. See German Literature.

Catalogued in strict observance of rule, the entries would be

German poetry, Historic survey of. Taylor, W. 3 v. 1828-30

with a possible reference:

German literature.

See also German poetry.

The second and fourth headings would not be chosen, for the reason that the book is neither upon “Poetry” nor “Literature” generally or in the abstract, and it is much better to reserve those headings for books of that nature or of a miscellaneous kind, putting books upon the literature of particular countries under their distinctive name. An inquirer wanting a book upon German literature is more likely to turn to “German” than to “Literature.” A general cross-reference will put the matter beyond possibility of mistake, as

Literature.

See also the names of national literatures, as English, French, German, Greek, Latin.

81.—The fifth heading is merely another form of the third heading, but it is given among the rest because in the larger catalogues of reference libraries the whole of the books upon a particular country are often grouped together under the name of the country, these again being sub-divided for convenience of reference according to the number of entries under the heading, in divisions like these:

Antiquities, architecture, and art.

Description and social life.

Education.

History and politics.

Religion.

Miscellaneous.

82.—The next book coming under notice is

Booth, Wm. (“General” of the Salvation Army). In darkest England, and the way out. pp. 285, xxxi, frontis. la. 8o. [1890]

Whether a title-entry is needed is open to doubt, but as the title of the book is enigmatical it is safer to give one. The rule for all title-entries is to give them under the first word not an article, and it would accordingly be

In darkest England. Booth, W. [1890]

but the probability is that nine men out of ten would remember the book as “Darkest England,” and look for it under “Darkest,” and therefore it might be more useful if the entry were

Darkest England, In. Booth, W. [1890]

83.—The subject of the book requires that it be entered under whatever heading may be adopted for the social question, say

Poor and poor relief.

Booth, W. In darkest England. [1890]

No entry is called for under “England,” unless everything relating directly or indirectly to the home-country is to be brought together under that heading or “Great Britain.” If this is so, and it is to be faithfully and literally carried out, it will become so large as to need very elaborate sub-division, and even then, in the catalogue of a British library at anyrate, its extent will make it of little practical value. In large catalogues page after page would be filled to no great advantage, and therefore the best course to adopt is to make the entry under the exact subject, as shown, ignoring “England” if the book deals with the country generally and not a particular corner of it. By this plan a book upon the “Poor of Essex” would be entered both under “Essex” and “Poor,” but books like

Ruskin. The art of England.

Stephen. General view of the criminal law of England.

Hobkirk. British mosses.

Fairholt. Costume in England.

Oliphant. Literary history of England.

Green. Short history of the English people,

are sufficiently dealt with if, apart from the author-entry, they appear under “Art,” “Law,” “Mosses,” “Costume,” “English literature,” and “English history,” respectively, leaving the headings “England” and “Great Britain” for books descriptive of the country generally and not some special aspect of it. As already shown, books upon even special features of other countries should be entered under the name of the country. In most cases it is also desirable, even necessary, to enter under the subject likewise. Thus the double subject-entries of books, like

Griffis. The religions of Japan.

Perkins. Historical handbook of Italian sculpture.

Gray. Birds of the West of Scotland.

would be under “Japan” and “Religions,” “Italy” and “Sculpture,” and “Scotland” and “Birds.” If space cannot be afforded for both entries, judgment would then have to be exercised in making choice of the best single subject-heading, and it would be found that for the above the most useful are “Japan,” “Sculpture,” and “Birds.”

In catalogues of the larger libraries a heading like “Birds” would have so many items to it that it should be sub-divided to facilitate reference, first the books upon birds generally, followed by those upon the birds of particular countries or localities like that above-named upon the birds of the West of Scotland. The arrangement under the general division would be alphabetically by authors, but it has been found convenient to arrange the “local” by the name of the place, also alphabetically, after this manner

Birds.

Countries and local.

Africa, South, Birds of. Layard, E. L.

Asia, Birds of. Gould, J.

British. Our rarer birds. Dixon, C.

History of British birds. Seebohm, H.

Scotland. Birds of the W. of Scotland. Gray, R.

84.—The desirability, or otherwise, of using scientific terms for subject-headings in catalogues is governed altogether by the people for whom the library is intended. In a library used by all classes of the community, the simpler and more widely known term is the best, and therefore “Birds” is preferable to “Ornithology,” “Fishes” to “Ichthyology,” and “Insects” to “Entomology.” In a library of a college or scientific institution the reverse method would possibly prove the best, but it is essential that perfect uniformity be maintained whatever form is decided upon, as it would be somewhat ridiculous to use scientific terms in some cases and popular names in others. The cross-reference comes in most usefully in any style of catalogue as it removes all doubt, thus

Ornithology. See Birds.

Catalogues compiled upon very exact lines occasionally reserve the popular name for books of a popular or miscellaneous nature, and the scientific for those intended for the scientist, but the dividing line between the two classes of books cannot always be clearly seen, and it is much better to bring all together under the same heading, marking there any differences in the character of the books by means of sub-division.

In some few instances the use of the scientific term is unavoidable as there may be no popular name that meets the case. For example, it would not be correct to put a book upon the fresh-water algæ under a heading “Sea-weeds,” and a book upon the tunicata cannot be put under any other name. The fact may be again emphasised that in a dictionary catalogue a book is entered under its definite subject and never under its class or general subject. Thus a book like

White, W. F. Ants and their ways,

does not go under “Insects,” or even “Hymenoptera,” but directly under “Ants,” though such a book as

Lubbock, Sir John. Ants, bees, and wasps.

would be sufficiently entered in the catalogue of a scientific library, if placed under “Hymenoptera,” but in the catalogue of a popular library should go under all three names, “Ants,” “Bees,” and “Wasps,” just as a book like

Meyrick, E. British lepidoptera.

is better placed under “Butterflies” and “Moths” with a cross-reference

Lepidoptera. See Butterflies. Moths.

It would be a waste of space, however, to enter a work so comprehensive in character as

Bath, W. H. Ants, bees, dragon-flies, earwigs, crickets and flies.

under each of these as, even though it omits the butterflies, moths, and beetles, it would be well enough dealt with if entered under “Insects.”

As it is a well-understood principle that a book must be entered under the exact subject of which it treats, so a work upon the natural history of animals while coming within the popular notion of “natural history,” and may be so called by its author, as

Lydekker, Richard (Ed.) The royal natural history. Illus. 6 v. la. 8o. 1893-6

yet from the cataloguer’s standpoint it would not be altogether correct to enter it under “Natural History,” as that term is properly held to include the flora as well as fauna, and therefore the heading should be either “Zoology” or “Animals.” This last term is frequently reserved for books dealing only with animals, and apart from birds, reptiles, etc., and for books upon animals, not written from the naturalist’s point of view. Correctness is again ensured by cross-references, as

Natural history of animals. See Zoology.

Animals, Natural history of. See Zoology.

85.—The next books are selected for the purpose of showing the difference in treatment of works similar in character:

Milman, Henry H., Dean. Annals of S. Paul’s Cathedral. 2nd ed. pp. xiv, 540, ports., illus. 8o. 1869

Loftie, W. J. Kensington Palace, pp. 76, illus. 8o. 1898

Hiatt, Charles. The Cathedral Church of Chester. (Bell’s Cathedral ser.) pp. viii, 96, illus. sm. 8o. 1897

Routledge, C. F. The Church of St. Martin, Canterbury. pp. 101, illus. sm. 8o. 1898

Those upon buildings of a more national than local character situated in London are entered under the name of the buildings and not the locality, as

St. Paul’s Cathedral.

Milman, H. H. Annals of S. Paul’s Cathedral. 1869

unless the locality is embodied in the title as

Kensington Palace. Loftie, W. J. 1898

Neither of these books should be placed under a heading “London,” but a cross-reference may be given:

London.

See also the names of buildings, as Kensington Palace, St. Paul’s Cathedral.

The other books should lead off with the name of the place where the building is situated, though not entered under the place-heading, as they are not books upon Chester or Canterbury. Therefore the form is

Chester, The Cathedral Church of. Hiatt, C. 1897

Canterbury, The Church of St. Martin. Routledge, C. F. 1898

or in shorter fashion:

Chester Cathedral. Hiatt, C. 1897

Canterbury, St. Martin’s Church. Routledge, C. F. 1898

Upon the same principle a history of a London parish is not entered under “London,” but under its particular name with a cross-reference from London to the places, as

London.

See also the names of parishes, as Chelsea, Kensington, Southwark, Westminster.

Monographs upon buildings of national importance in foreign countries are however always entered under the name of the city where situated and not under the name of the building. Works upon St. Mark’s, Venice, or Notre Dame de Paris being entered under Venice and Paris respectively, as

Venice, St. Mark’s.

Paris, Notre Dame.

To give heed to details of this kind is not “hair-splitting,” as the novice may be disposed to imagine—it is the very essence of good cataloguing. Even with most careful attention the cataloguer may well congratulate himself if at the conclusion of his work, and especially when in print, it comes out faultless, because the perfect catalogue absolutely free from error has not yet been seen.

CHAPTER IX.
SUBJECT, TITLE, AND SERIES ENTRIES (continued).

86.—There remain other varieties of double or treble entries to consider. A book such as

Baker, W. R.

Intemperance the idolatry of Britain. 3rd ed. pp. 62. sm. 8o. n.d.

has no appearance of difficulty, as it is so obviously upon intemperance, but the question of concentration of books pro and con upon such a subject as this must be looked into. It is most undesirable to send an inquirer to a number of headings to find all the books upon the “drink question.” To effectively group them together, developes the heading into a class rather than subject, but even so, it has more justification than the grouping of say “Natural history” would have, because it is more distinctly a single subject regarded from several standpoints, and while “temperance” cannot be “intemperance,” yet to bring the two aspects of the question together adds more to the utility of the catalogue than to separate books with these words upon their title-pages under different headings. In looking into this matter, the subject was followed up in a good catalogue compiled upon strictly orthodox lines, and was found up and down under headings like Alcohol, Drink, Inebriety, Teetotalism, Temperance, Total Abstinence, Licensed Victuallers, Public Houses, Sunday Drinking. Most of the books under these various headings might have been brought together with advantage under a general term-heading like “Drink question,” with cross-references from the other topics to bind the whole together beyond possibility of mistake. There are other questions that admit of concentration in this way, as for example books upon Free Trade, Fair Trade, Reciprocity, and Protection can all safely be entered under “Free Trade” with references from the others.

Some books, on the other hand, must have several entries, as

Ruddock, E. H. Modern medicine and surgery on homœopathic principles. 1874

requires three entries, viz., under “Medicine,” “Surgery,” “Homœopathy.” The only method of avoiding this would be to enter the book under “Homœopathy,” with cross-references from the other headings, as

Medicine. See also Homœopathy.

In a small general library it would be possible to bring together all books upon subjects so closely allied as medicine and surgery under that heading, with a cross-reference,

Surgery. See also Medicine and surgery.

Another example of a book needing several entries, is

Garner, R. L. Gorillas and chimpanzees.

As this is not a work upon Monkeys generally, or even upon Apes, the correct procedure is to enter it under “Gorillas” and “Chimpanzees” respectively, as

Gorillas.

Garner, R. L. Gorillas and chimpanzees.

In a small library there would most likely be other books upon Gorillas, but hardly a second upon Chimpanzees, therefore the second entry would be

Chimpanzees, Gorillas and. Garner, R. L.

To bring this book fully under the notice of those interested in the monkey tribe cross-references are necessary. Presuming that there were already entries under “Monkeys” (generally) and “Apes” (particularly), then all the entries would be bound together by

Monkeys.

See also Apes.

Apes.

See also Gorillas.

No cross-reference being called for to “Chimpanzees,” as they are included in the title of the book under “Gorillas.” In the event, however, of there being a second book upon Chimpanzees, then the cross-reference becomes

Apes.

See also Chimpanzees. Gorillas.

87.—At the risk of repetition, and to make the matter clear, it may be again stated that a book must not be entered under every important word appearing upon its title-page. There is much rule-of-thumb cataloguing done that would cause a book like

Ihering, Rudolph von. The evolution of the Aryan,

to be entered under “Evolution,” whereas not even a title-entry under the word “evolution” is required, and the single subject-entry is

Aryans, The

Ihering, R. von. The evolution of the Aryan.

It may be considered unnecessary advice to say that a book so unmistakably upon the Aryan peoples should not be put under “Evolution,” when the accepted meaning of that term as a subject has nothing to do with it, yet there are catalogues at present in force of important town libraries with much worse forms. One has a heading “Natural history,” under which there are sixteen items that include such diverse matters as “Natural method of curing diseases,” “Natural theology,” “Natural philosophy,” “Nature and art,” “Drawing from nature,” because the word “natural” or “nature” happened to occur in the titles of the books. Another has a heading “School, Schoolmasters, and Schools,” which includes Molière’s “School for wives” and his “School for husbands.” Any number of examples equally ridiculous could be quoted from present-day catalogues to prove the contention that this is a common form of error. Therefore the advice to “get at the subject of the book, and never mind the particular words used on the title-page,” cannot be too often impressed upon the cataloguer.

88.—Books in a number of languages dealing with a single subject must all be entered under the English name for that subject. Books like

Kohlrausch, F. Kurze Darstellung der deutschen Geschichte. 1864

Green, S. G. Pictures from the German fatherland. n.d.

Breton, J. Notes d’un étudiant français en Allemagne. 1895

are to be found entered in a catalogue under Deutschen, Germany, and Allemagne, without a single binding reference. Another has books upon the United States under America, États-Unis, and United States. In one catalogue there is a reference in the following form:

États-Unis—see L’Univers,

which is most flattering to our American cousins. In this connection it should be observed that references of this kind are quite wrong. In the first place there is no occasion for a reference or entry of any kind under “États-Unis” in an English catalogue, and in the second the principle of referring from a lesser to a greater subject is incorrect; the reference must always be from a greater to a lesser. In the same catalogue there are numbers of references from subjects to authors, which are also wrong in principle, as a reference should never be given in this form:

Indigestion. See Douglas (Dr. Jas.),

or its reverse, equally erroneous:

Duncan, Dr. Andrew. See Consumption,

otherwise the curious humour of references of this kind will soon show itself. In both cases entries were required and not references. Therefore the only references to be used are

(1) Subject to subject (connected or synonymous only).

(2) Greater subject to lesser division of the same subject.

(3) Author to author (joint-authors).

(4) Translator, editor, or compiler to author.

(5) Translator, editor, or compiler to title not containing the name of an author or not treated as author (as editor of a series).

89.—The next illustration is

Garnett, Richard.

Life of Ralph Waldo Emerson. (Great writers.) pp. 300, xiv. sm. 8o. 1888

With a bibliography by John P. Anderson.

No entry is needed under the word “Life,” or under “Biographies,” as that is a class-heading and not a subject, and the book goes under the name of its direct subject, making a heading of it, as the library will contain Emerson’s works as well as other biographies of him, as

Emerson, Ralph W.

Garnett, R. Life of Ralph Waldo Emerson. (Great writers.) 1888

An entry is required under the name of the series, and to be strictly accurate the name of the author should lead, as

Great writers; ed. by Eric S. Robertson.

(Note:—Each volume contains a bibliography of the subject by John P. Anderson.)

Garnett, R. Life of Ralph Waldo Emerson. 1888

though it will be found more useful in the case of a series of a biographical nature to lead off with the subject, instead of the author, as

Great writers:

Emerson, Ralph Waldo, by R. Garnett. 1888

References to complete the matter fully may be given as

Robertson, Eric S. (Ed.) See Great writers (series).

Anderson, John P. See Great writers (series).

In case of series like the Bampton, Hulsean, and Hibbert Lectures, the most convenient method is to arrange them in chronological order of the delivery of the lectures (not the date of publication) after this style:

Bampton Lectures:

1876. Alexander. The witness of the Psalms to Christ and Christianity. 1877

1880. Hatch. The organization of the early Christian churches. 1888

1891. Gore. The incarnation. 1891

The question is raised now and then as to whether it is worth while giving the list of works forming a series under the first word, other than an article, of the title of the series instead of under some other leading word. There is no occasion to lay down a hard and fast rule in the matter, but all things considered, it will be found safer to treat all series in the manner indicated and to enter them uniformly under this first word as Great artists, Great writers, Story of the nations, Leaders of religion, International scientific series, under “Great,” “Story,” “Leaders,” and “International” respectively rather than under “Artists,” “Writers,” “Nations,” “Religion,” or “Scientific.” The fact cannot be overlooked that the entry is only given because it is a series-entry and not as a make-shift form of subject-entry, and for this very reason it would be as erroneous to enter all the series of “Great artists” under the subject-heading “Artists” as to put the “Leaders of religion” under “Religion.” The difficulty is fully met by cross-references where required, as

Science. See also International scientific series.

Authors. See also Great writers (series).

Scots, Famous (series). See Famous Scots.

If the series-entry is to be converted into a semi-subject entry, it should be by the simple transposition of the title of the series and then kept altogether apart from the subject-heading.

In a library catalogue, as distinct from a bookseller’s, it is only those series of a special and limited character that receive entries under the names of the series, and this form should not be extended so as to include long lists of books in series under publisher’s names, as Weale’s series, Pitt Press series, Macmillan’s Manuals for students. Where very full information is given, these names may be added to the principal entry and not carried further.

90.—Already it has been stated that in many libraries it is of the utmost importance that a catalogue should be compiled with short entries and within narrow limits so as to reduce both the size and the cost of production. To do this judiciously does not interfere in the least with the principles of good and adequate cataloguing, care only being required in curtailing the entries so as not to lose their correct character. The majority of readers in popular libraries are little concerned with precise bibliographical information provided they get a list of the books by the author, or upon the subject they want. The title of Dr. Garnett’s book mentioned above can, for example, be shortened into entries like these:—

Garnett, Richard. Life of Ralph W. Emerson. 1888

Emerson, Ralph W.

Garnett, R. Life of Emerson 1888

Great writers:

Emerson, by R. Garnett. 1888

The references from Robertson and Anderson can be dispensed with. Shorter entries than the foregoing would not be looked for, and would be worthless. Very brief entries imply little or no information, as witness the following complete entries from the catalogue of a large library:

“Church’s Lament.”

Conspiracy. Ritualistic.

Workhouse. Union. Bowen.

91.—The next illustration is taken to further show the method of regarding a book for its subject-entry:

Saintsbury, George.

A history of Elizabethan literature. 1887

This is neither a book upon literature generally nor in the abstract, nor upon English literature as a whole, but only upon a particular period of it. Such a book could very properly be placed under “Elizabethan literature” with a reference from “English literature.” It might even go under the name of Elizabeth where all books pertaining to her reign in every particular could be gathered, but this is not so satisfactory. After all the most useful place for a book of this kind would be under “English literature,” and its inclusion could be better justified if the books under such a heading were sub-divided, if sufficient in number, into periods arranged chronologically as a heading like “English History” is often usefully divided. This would necessitate a cross-reference like

Elizabethan literature. See English literature.

To further illustrate this point it may be said that a book like

Brewer, J. S.

The reign of Henry VIII. 2 v. 8o. 1884

is better treated in the reverse way and entered under the name of the monarch, in common with other books of a strictly historical nature dealing with a particular reign. In the first case the book is thought to be more usefully catalogued as a contribution to the larger subject of “English literature,” and in the second the book is looked upon as being more particularly concerned with Henry VIII. than with “English history”—hence the difference in the treatment. In this last instance the safe-guarding cross-reference is

English History.

For the histories of particular reigns see under the names of monarchs, as Charles I., Henry VIII., Victoria.

92.—The following group is given (in brief form) in order to show the difference of treatment of books apparently alike in subject:

Farrar, F. W., Dean (Ed.) With the poets.

James, Henry. French poets and novelists.

Johnson, Samuel. Lives of the English poets.

Keats, John. Poetical works.

Shairp, J. C. Aspects of poetry.

Sharp, Wm. Life of Shelley.

Tennyson, Lord. Demeter and other poems.

The first entry would be placed under a heading “Poems,” because it is an anthology. This heading “Poems” should be reserved for collections of miscellaneous poems by many authors and would not include a book like the Keats, which should be entered under the name of the author only. It does not require any entry under “Poetical works,” as that is simply a form, and can no more be justified than a heading “Prose works” could be. If, however, the book has a definite title, like the Tennyson, then a title-entry must be given as

Demeter and other poems. Tennyson, Lord.

Librarians sometimes consider it necessary to give a series of references under the heading “Poems” or “Poetry” to the names of the authors represented in the catalogue, but this is on an equality with the practice of grouping all the fiction under a heading “Novels.” These being class-headings are not strictly accurate but, no doubt, are a convenience to a section of readers. So much cannot be said for all such grouping in a dictionary catalogue, and it is better to avoid it if possible. A catalogue of a very important library has a heading “Essays,” under which an attempt has been made to enter all books written in the form of essays, as well as with the word “essay” upon the title-pages, and the result is a mere jumble of titles, absolutely useless, including as it does works so widely apart in character as Baring Gould’s Old country life, Barrie’s Auld licht idylls, Doran’s In and about Drury Lane, and Lang’s Books and bookmen. To attempt this in a classified catalogue would be bad enough, but in a dictionary catalogue it shows that the first principles governing its compilation are wholly misunderstood.

The book by Henry James would be fitly placed under “French literature” and the words “poets” and “novelists” ignored. Dr. Johnson’s book should go under “Poets,” together with any other lives of poets in collected form, but the life of an individual poet, like that of Shelley, would not be so entered, as lives of individuals are entered under their names, and not under the class to which they belong. Shairp’s book being upon “Poetry” in the abstract would accordingly go under that heading, as would any book of a miscellaneous character upon poetry which could not well be placed under a more definite subject-heading.

93.—Sometimes in the case of biographies it will be found unnecessary to give both author and subject-entries because the biographies are written or edited by a son or other relative bearing the same name, and accordingly both entries come together in the catalogue, therefore, while it is quite correct to give both entries, yet one suffices. If the single entry is adopted it is better to make choice of the subject for the entry, not the author, as

Stokes, William: his life and works, 1804-1878, by his son [Sir] Wm. Stokes. (Masters of medicine.) 1898

94.—Volumes of sermons are dealt with in the same manner as poetical works, avoiding, as far as possible, an entry under the form “Sermons.” An illustration is

Kingsley, Charles. All Saints’ Day, and other sermons. 1890

⸻ The gospel of the Pentateuch: sermons. 1890

⸻ Sermons on national subjects. 2v. 1872

⸻ Sermons for the times. 1890

⸻ Village sermons. 1890

The first and last of these simply require title-entries, as

All Saints’ Day, and other sermons. Kingsley, C. 1890

Village sermons. Kingsley, C. 1890

The second, instead of receiving a title-entry, is better placed as a contribution to its subject, as

Pentateuch, The.

Kingsley, C. The gospel of the Pentateuch: sermons. 1890

The third and fourth will also require title-entries unless there happens to be a general reference under the word, “Sermons,” after this fashion

Sermons. For volumes of sermons with specific titles or upon definite subjects see those titles and subjects. Books with the general title of sermons will be found under the names of the following authors:

(Here follows a list of the names, including Kingsley.)

If this form is not considered suitable then there is no alternative but to give title-entries, because a heading cannot be correctly made. The form then is:

Sermons. Le Bas, C. W. 2 v. 1828

Sermons for the times. Kingsley, C. 1890

Sermons in the East. Stanley, A. P. 1863

Sermons on national subjects. Kingsley, C. 2v. 1872

The arrangement is alphabetically by the words of the titles as in the case of any other title-entries, and not by the names of the authors.

95.—Dramas, Dramatic Works, are also forms calling for similar treatment to Poems, Essays, or Sermons. Collections of letters by individuals are simply entered under the names of the writers with references from the editors.

96.—There is a form of entry occasionally seen in catalogues that is so obviously absurd that it scarcely needs to be more than referred to, viz., a heading “Pamphlets.” Here, presumably, all the thin or unbound books in a library are entered. Under an arrangement of this description, work should be facilitated, as but two headings would be requisite—one “Books” and the other “Pamphlets”—the dividing line between the two to be fixed by the number of pages.

Almost in a line with such a ridiculous heading is the lazy cataloguer’s method of taking volumes consisting of a number of pamphlets bound together, whether upon the self-same subject or as many different subjects as there are pamphlets in the volumes, and lumping them with entries like these:

Miscellaneous pamphlets. v.d.

Pamphlets, Miscellaneous. 37 v. v.d.

Sermons, Miscellaneous. v.d.

Political pamphlets. v.d.

Of course, each pamphlet must be dealt with in precisely the same way as if it were a separate book, the fact that it is a thin book not entering into the question, unless it happens to be of so very trifling or ephemeral a character as to be unworthy of an entry, when it should either be withdrawn from the library (unless the fact of its being bound up with others prevents) or properly catalogued.

97.—The prolix titles of many pamphlets, especially the polemical tracts of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, often need abbreviation. For example:

The succession of Solomon to the throne of David consider’d in a sermon on the occasion of the sudden death of His Majesty King George I., June 18, 1727, by Thomas Bradbury. 2nd ed. 1727

may very well be cut down to

Bradbury, Thomas. Sermon on the death of George I. 1727

and

An ordinance of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, together with rules and directions concerning suspention from the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper in cases of ignorance and scandall; also the names of such ministers and others that are appointed triers and judges of the ability of elders within the province of London. 1645

may be safely curtailed in most cases to

Lord’s Supper. An ordinance of Parliament, with rules and directions concerning suspention from the sacrament. pp. ii., 14. sm. 4o. 1645

Pamphlets are frequently collected and stored in libraries for some special reason—perhaps because they are of local interest—when this fact should be brought out in the catalogue. Accordingly a pamphlet entitled

A sermon preached in Chelsea Church at the funeral of the Hon. Mrs. Elizabeth Roberts, by Thomas Knaggs. 1710

would be entered under

Chelsea Church, Sermon preached in, at the funeral of the Hon. Mrs. Eliz. Roberts. Knaggs, T. 1710

this entry being additional to that under “Knaggs” and another under “Roberts,” if the person happened to be of some local importance in her day.

CHAPTER X.
TITLE-ENTRIES AND REPETITION DASHES.

98.—The extent to which title-entries, as distinct from subject-entries, are called for in a dictionary catalogue has in some measure been already shown. Works of fiction, plays, poems, volumes of essays, and sometimes sermons, nearly all demand such entries, they being for the most part sought for by their titles. Examples of each of these are

Far from the madding crowd. Hardy, T.

Michael and his lost angel: a play. Jones, H. A.

Aurora Leigh: poem. Browning, E. B. 1890

Obiter dicta. Birrell, A. 2v. 1887-96

Discipline, and other sermons. Kingsley, C. 1890

These are apart from the title-as-subject entries, such as

Miners and their works underground. Holmes, F. M. n.d.

Moravian Church, Short history of the. Hutton, J. E. 1895.

There are very few books outside the above classes that really require title-entries, and, as a rule, this feature of cataloguing is overdone. Books like

Finck, H. T. Lotos-time in Japan. 1895

Hollingshead, John. My lifetime. 2 v. 1895

Adams, W. H. D. The Maid of Orleans. 1889

Marsh, George P. Lectures on the English language. 1874

do not require entries under “Lotos,” “My Lifetime,” “Maid of Orleans,” or “Lectures,” besides those necessary under “Japan,” “Hollingshead,” “Joan of Arc,” and “English language,” yet it is quite customary to see such entries.

99.—It must be carefully noted that in title-entries the articles (A, An, The) are absolutely ignored, and any other first word is the leading word under which the entry is to be given. It is often desirable to include the article, especially the definite article, in such entry, when it must be got in as soon as it can be consistent with sense and sound, or at the end of the phrase, as

Guardian angel, The. Not Guardian, The, angel.

Clyde, The, to the Jordan. Not Clyde to the Jordan, The.

Noble life, A. Not Noble, A, life.

Evil, The genesis of. Not Evil, genesis of, The.

The articles are occasionally left out of such entries as

Guardian angel.

Clyde to the Jordan.

Noble life.

Evil, Genesis of.

but this applies only to the article preceding the first word of the title and no other.

Chariot of the flesh, The.

cannot be correctly entered as

Chariot of flesh.

The general omission of the leading article means very little, if any, saving of space, and has a bald effect, reading often like the wording of a telegram. Besides losing the clearness which its inclusion gives, it may alter the sense, as

Day’s ride. Is not the same as Day’s ride, A.

Phyllis of the Sierras. Is not the same as Phyllis, A, of the Sierras.

Soldier born. Is not the same as Soldier born, A.

In transposing the article or any other leading word from the beginning of the title the capital initial letter must be retained, as shown in the above entries, and not in this way,

Animal’s friend, the.

Priestcraft, popular history of.

Primeval life, relics of.

In order to prevent a break in the alphabetical sequence, the articles are sometimes transposed under the authors’ names, as

“Hobbes, John Oliver.”

⸻ Bundle of life, A.

⸻ Herb-moon, The.

⸻ Sinner’s comedy, The.

but so little is gained by this form of entry that it hardly compensates for the awkwardness of it.

It is incorrect in any form, author or title, to leave out the article in foreign languages, and to do so can only be justified by usage rather than exactness. As in English the entry-word is never under the article, as

Petite paroisse, La. Not La petite paroisse.

Aventure d’amour, Une. Not Une aventure d’amour.

Karavane, Die. Not Die Karavane.

100.—Many works of fiction with proper names in their titles are better known by those names, and are rarely looked for under the first word of the title. Books so well known as,

The personal history of David Copperfield.

Mr. Midshipman Easy.

History of Pendennis.

Confessions of Harry Lorrequer.

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

will oftener be sought for under “David,” “Midshipman,” “Pendennis,” “Harry,” and “Huckleberry,” than “Personal,” “Mr.” “History,” “Confessions,” “Adventures,” therefore judgment should be exercised, and either a single entry given under the most likely place, or both title-entries given. If space is a consideration always omit the less-known entry. It will be seen that names in fiction are never regarded as real names, and entries must not be given under the surnames as “Copperfield,” “Easy,” “Lorrequer,” “Finn.”

101.—For the sake of brevity title-entries are sometimes given with the surname only of the author, after this manner

Two hundred pounds reward, by Payn.

Two in the bush, by Moore.

Two kisses, by Smart.

Two little wooden shoes, by Ouida.

and occasionally in this style:

Afloat and ashore. Cooper.

Afloat in the forest. Reid.

After dark. Collins.

In works of fiction like these there is no very great objection to the plan other than the bald appearance of the entries, but to carry it into effect with all other title and subject entries is to revert to the dark ages of cataloguing. The following selected specimens prove that such entries can have very little value for the uninitiated. The complete entry other than the shelf mark is given:

Holland, Through. By Wood.

Horace. By Martin.

Childs, George W. (1874). Grosart.

Christ, With (Sermon). Kemble.

Church, Of the (1847). Field.

Electricity. By Ferguson.

Epic of Hades. By Morris.

Essays. By Cowley.

Faraday. By Gladstone.

102.—This leads to the matter of repetition dashes, to which some reference has already been made in paragraph 59 upon the author-entry, and no better advice can be given to the young cataloguer than that to avoid repetition dashes wherever possible, and, at most, only use them in one of the following instances:

a. To save repeating an author’s name in author-entry (as already illustrated) or under subject-heading.

b. To save repeating a title-entry or title-as-subject-entry where a second copy or another edition of the same work is entered.

c. To save repeating a subject-heading.

Illustrations of the second form are

Condé, Princes de, History of the. Aumale, Duc d’. 2 v. 1872

⸻ (French ed.) 2 v. 1863-4

Food and feeding. Thompson, Sir H. 1891

⸻ (Enlarged ed.) 1898

Household of Sir Thomas More. Manning, A. 1887

⸻ (Illus. ed.) 1896

and of the third form:

Insanity.

⸻ Hill, R. G. Insanity, its past and present. 1870

⸻ Maudsley, H. The pathology of mind. 1895

but most cataloguers are dispensing with this form, as the indent under the heading is sufficient to denote that all the entries belong to such heading. If it is used, a second dash will occasionally be needed in cases similar to this:

Ireland.

⸻ Froude, J. A. The English in Ireland in the 18th century. 3 v. 1886.

⸻ ⸻ Ireland since the Union. 1886.

⸻ Hickson, M. Ireland in the 17th century. 2 v. 1884.

Nothing is lost by avoiding this dash under headings, and some find that the indent alone, even under author’s names, is so clear that the dash can be altogether discarded, and that this will be no disadvantage the following typical and genuine examples of what has been sarcastically called the “dot and dash system” of cataloguing will show:

China Painting. By Florence Lewis.

⸻ Old highways in. By Williamson.

English Church Composers. By Barrett.

⸻ ⸻ History of the. By Perry.

Law and the Lady: a Novel. By Collins.

⸻ International. By Levi.

⸻ Physical and Moral, Difference between. By Arthur.