Part 2 — ENTRY.

I. AUTHOR-ENTRY.

CATALOGUE.

A. AUTHORS. (a.) PERSONAL. (i.) Under whom as author. Author, 1. Anonymous, 2. Joint authors, 3, 4. Theses, 5. Pseudonyms, 6. Illustrators, 7. Designer, Cartographer, Engraver, 8. Musical works, 9. Booksellers and auctioneers, 10, 11. Commentaries, 12. Continuations and indexes, 13. Epitomes, 14. Revisions, 15. Excerpts and chrestomathies, 16. Concordances, 17. Reporters, translators, and editors, 18. {16} (ii.) Under what part of the name. Christian name, 19. Surname, 20. Title, 21. Changed names, 22. Compound names, 23. Prefixes, 24. Latin names, 25. Capes, lakes, etc., 26. (iii.) Under what form of the name. Vernacular, 27. Several languages, 28. Masculine and feminine, 29. Various spellings, 30, 31. Forenames, 32. Places, 33–35. Transliteration, 36–38. (b.) CORPORATE. General principle, 39. Places, 40. Governmental bodies, 41. Laws, 42. Calendars, 43. Works written officially, 44–46. Articles to be inquired after, 47. Reports, 48. Congresses, 49. Treaties, 50. Parties, denominations, orders, 51. Their conventions, conferences, etc., 52. Ecclesiastical councils, 53. Reports of committees, 54. Classes of citizens, 55. Societies, 56.

B. SUBSTITUTES. Parts of the author’s name, 57. Pseudonyms, 58. Collectors, 59.

C. REFERENCES, 60, 61.

D. ECONOMIES, 62–67.

A. AUTHORS.

1. Make the author-entry under (A) the name of the author whether personal or corporate, or (B) some substitute for it.

In regard to the author-entry it must be remembered that the object is not merely to facilitate the finding of a given book by an author’s name. If this were all, it might have been better to make the entry under the professed name (pseudonym), or under the form of name mentioned in the title (Bulwer in one book, Lytton in another, Bulwer Lytton in a third; Sherlock, Th., in that divine’s earlier works; Bangor, Th. [Sherlock], Bp. of, in later ones; Salisbury, Th. [Sherlock], Bp. of, in the next issues; London, Th. [Sherlock], Bp. of, in his last works; Milnes, R. Monckton, for “Good night and good morning,” and the nine other works published before 1863, and Houghton, Rich. M. M., Baron, for the 1870 edition of “Good night and good morning,” and for other books published since his ennoblement), or under the name of editor or translator when the author’s name is not given, as proposed by Mr. Crestadoro. This might have been best with object A; but we have also object D to provide for—the finding of all the books of a given author—and this can most conveniently be done if they are all collected in one place.

2. Anonymous books are to be entered under the name of the author whenever it is known.

If it is not known with certainty the entry may be made under the person to whom the work is attributed, with an explanatory note and a reference from the first word, or the book may be treated as anonymous and entered under the first word, with a note “Attributed to ——,” and a reference from the supposed author. The degree of doubt will determine which method is best. {17}

(a.) PERSONAL.

(i.) Under whom as author.

3. Enter works written conjointly by several authors under the name of the one first mentioned on the title-page, with references from the others.

The writers of a correspondence and the participants in a debate are to be considered as joint authors.

Ex.

Schiller, J: Christoph F: v. Briefwechsel zwischen S. und Cotta; herausg. von Vollmar.

— Briefwechsel zw. S. und Goethe. Stuttg., 1829. 6 v. S.

— Briefwechsel zw. S. und W: v. Humboldt. Stuttg., 1830. S.

Cotta. Briefwechsel. See Schiller, J: C. F: v.

Goethe, J: W. v. Briefwechsel. See Schiller, J: C. F: v.

Humboldt, K: W:, Freiherr v. Briefwechsel. See Schiller, J: C. F: v.

Many catalogues adopt the form of heading

Schiller, J: Christoph F: v., and Humboldt, K: W:, Freiherr v. Briefwechsel. Stuttg., 1830. S.

Humboldt, K: W:, Freiherr v. Briefwechsel. See Schiller, J: C. F: v., and Humboldt, K: W: v. But see § 240.

When countries are joint authors it is better to make full entries under each and arrange them as if the country under consideration were the only one. Each country puts its own name first in its own edition of a joint work; and the arrangement proposed avoids an additional complexity under countries, which are confusing enough at the best.

Whether the joint authorship appears in the title or not should make no difference in the mode of entry; if one name appears on the title, that should be chosen for the entry; if none, take the most important.

4. When double headings are used distinguish between joint authors of one work and two authors of separate works joined in one volume. In the latter case, if there is no collective title, the heading should be the name of the first author alone and an analytical reference should be made from the second. (See § 58 b.)

Ex. “The works of Shelley and Keats” would be entered in full under Shelley (both names being mentioned in the title, but Shelley alone in the heading), and analytically (§ 127) under Keats. In such cases a double heading would often mislead.

5. For university theses or dissertations Dziatzko gives the following rules:

I. Until about 1750 a Unless the respondent is known to be the “auctor” (“auctor et respondens,” “scriptor,” etc.) enter under the name of the præses, without reference. b If the respondent is “auctor” enter under him, with reference from the præses.

II. After 1750 enter under the respondent, unless it is known that the præses is the author, when his name will be the heading. In neither case refer from the other name.

For universities where the old custom was kept up beyond 1750, as the Swedish, Rule I applies till the change was made. {18}

Where there are two respondents, neither specified as author, enter under the first, without reference from the second.

6. Enter pseudonymous works generally under the author’s real name, when it is known, with a reference from the pseudonym; but make the entry under the pseudonym, with a reference from the real name, when the writer is better known by the false name.

In the first edition this rule was without limitation, and I added the following note “One is strongly tempted to deviate from this rule in the case of writers like George Eliot and George Sand, Gavarni and Grandville, who appear in literature only under their pseudonyms. It would apparently be much more convenient to enter their works under the name by which alone they are known and under which everybody but a professed cataloguer would assuredly look first. For an author-catalogue this might be the best plan, but in a dictionary catalogue we have to deal with such people not merely as writers of books, but as subjects of biographies or parties in trials, and in such cases it seems proper to use their legal names. Besides, if one attempts to exempt a few noted writers from the rule given above, where is the line to be drawn? No definite principle of exception can be laid down which will guide either the cataloguer or the reader; and probably the confusion would in the end produce greater inconvenience than the present rule. Moreover, the entries made by using the pseudonym as a heading would often have to be altered. For a long time it would have been proper to enter the works of Dickens under Boz; the Dutch annual bibliography uniformly uses Boz-Dickens as a heading. No one would think of looking under Boz now. Mark Twain is in a transition state. The public mind is divided between Twain and Clemens. The tendency is always toward the use of the real name; and that tendency will be much helped in the reading public if the real name is always preferred in catalogues. Some pseudonyms persistently adopted by authors have come to be considered as the only names, as Voltaire (see § 23), and the translation Melanchthon. Perhaps George Sand and George Eliot will in time be adjudged to belong to the same company. It would be well if cataloguers could appoint some permanent committee with authority to decide this and similar points as from time to time they occur.”

I am now in favor of frequent entry under the pseudonym, with reference from the real name. I should recommend the pseudonym as heading in the case of any popular writer who has not written under his own name, provided he is known to the public chiefly by his pseudonym, and in the subject catalogue for any person who is so known. Examples are George Eliot, George Sand, Gavarni, Grandville, Cagliostro, Cham, Pierre Loti, Daniel Stern, in some doubtful cases a card catalogue might profitably make entry both under the real and the false name. This elastic practice will give a little more trouble to the cataloguer than a rigid rule of entry under the real name, but it will save trouble to those who use the catalogue, which is more important.

But entry should not be made under a pseudonym which is used only once or a few times; if the author writes also under his real name, if he is known to the contemporary public or in literary history under his real name, that is to be used for entry. It may sometimes happen that an author is well known under a pseudonym and afterwards is better known by his real name. In that case change the entries from the false to the real name. If any author uses two different pseudonyms enter under each the works written under it, with references both ways, and from the real name, until the real name becomes better known.

It is plain that this practice of entering under the best known name, whether real or false, puts an end to uniformity of entry between different catalogues, leads to inconsistency of entry in the same catalogue, and will often throw the cataloguer into perplexity to decide which name is best known; but for the last objection it must be remembered that the catalogue is made for the reader, not for the cataloguer, and {19} for the first two that references will prevent any serious difficulty; and in the few cases of nearly equal notoriety, double entry is an easy way out of the difficulty.

7. When the illustrations form a very important part of a work, consider both the author of the text and the designer—or in certain cases the engraver—of the plates to be author, and make a full entry under each. Under the author mention the designer’s name in the title, and vice versa.

Such works are: Walton’s Welsh scenery, with text by Bonney; Wolf’s “Wild animals,” with text by Elliot. Which shall be taken as author in the subject or form entry depends upon the work and the subject. Under Water-color drawings it would be Walton; under Wood-engravings, Wolf; under Wales and Zoölogy, the cataloguer must decide which illustrates the subject most, the writer or the artist. E. g., under Gothic Architecture Pugin is undoubtedly to be considered the author of his “Examples,” though “the literary part” is by E. J. Willson; for the illustrator was really the author and the text was subsidiary to the plates. It was to carry out Pugin’s ideas, not Willson’s, that the work was published.

8. The designer or painter copied is the author of engravings; the cartographer is the author of maps; the engraver in general is to be considered as no more the author than the printer. But in a special catalogue of engravings the engraver would be considered as author; in any full catalogue references should be made from the names of famous engravers, as Raimondi, Müller, Steinla, Wolle. An architect is the author of his designs and plans.

9. Enter musical works doubly, under the author of the words and also the composer of the music.

Short and Medium will generally enter only under the composer; Don Giovanni, for example, only under Mozart and not under Da Ponte. This economy especially applies to songs.

10. Booksellers and auctioneers are to be considered as the authors of their catalogues, unless the contrary is expressly asserted.

Entering these only under the form-heading Catalogues belongs to the dark ages of cataloguing. Put the catalogue of a library under the library’s name. (§ 56.)

11. Put the auctioneer’s catalogue of a public library under the name of the library, of a private library under the name of the owner, unless there is reason to believe that another person made it. In the latter case it would appear in the author catalogue under the maker’s name, and in the subject catalogue under the owner’s name.

12. Enter commentaries with the text complete under the author of the text and also under the author of the com­mentary, pro­vid­ed that is en­tit­led “Com­men­tary on * * *” and not “* * * with com­men­tary.”

In a majority of cases this difference in the title will correspond to a difference in the character of the works and in the expectation of the public; if in any particular case the commentary preponderates in a title of the second of the forms above, a reference can be made from the commentator’s name. {20}

13. Enter a continuation or an index, when not written by the author of the original work but printed with it, under the same heading, with an analytical reference from its own author (§§ 164, 194); when printed separately, enter it under each author.

14. An epitome should be entered under the original author, with a reference from the epitomator.

Ex. “The boy’s King Arthur” under Sir Thomas Malory, with a reference from Sidney Lanier.

15. A revision should be entered under the name of the original author unless it becomes substantially a new work.

There will often be doubt on this point. To determine it, notice whether the revision is counted as one of the editions of the original work, and whether it is described on the title-page as the work of the original author or the reviser, and read and weigh the prefaces. Refer in all doubtful cases.

16. Excerpts and chrestomathies from a single author go under that author, with a reference from the excerptor if his introduction and annotations are extensive, or he has added a lexicon of importance.

Ex. Urlichs’ Chrestomathia Pliniana goes under Plinius, with a reference from Urlichs.

17. Enter concordances both under their own author and the author concorded. The latter entry, however, is to be regarded as a subject-entry.

Ex. Cleveland’s Concordance to the poetical works of Milton, Brightwell’s Concordance to Tennyson, Mrs. Furness’s Concordance to Shakespeare’s poems.

18. Reporters are usually treated as authors of reports of trials, etc. [11] Translators and editors are not to be considered as authors. [12] (But see References, § 60.)

(ii.) Under what part of the name.

19. Put under the Christian or forename:

a. Sovereigns or princes of sovereign houses. [13] Use the English form of the name except for Greeks and Romans. {21}

b. Persons canonized.

Ex. Thomas [a Becket], Saint.

c. Friars who by the constitution of their order drop their surname. Add the name of the family in parentheses and refer from it.

Ex. Paolino da S. Bartolomeo [J. P. Wesdin].

d. Persons known under their first name only, whether or not they add that of their native place or profession or rank.

Ex. Paulus Diaconus, Thomas Heisterbacensis.

Similarly are to be treated a few persons known almost entirely by the forename, as Michelangelo Buonarroti, Raffaello Santi (refer from Raphael), Rembrandt van Rhijn. Refer always from the family name.

e. Oriental authors, including Jewish rabbis whose works were published before 1700.

Ex. Abu Bakr ibn Badr. This rule has exceptions. Some Oriental writers are known and should be entered under other parts of their name than the first, as “Abu-l-Kasim, Khalaf ibn Abbas,” or under some appellation as “al-Masudi,” “at-Tabari.” Grässe’s “Lehrbuch einer allgemeinen Literärgeschichte” is a convenient guide in this matter; he prints that part of the name by which Arabic writers are commonly known in a heavier type than the rest.

In Arabic names the words of relationship Abu (father), Umm (mother), Ibn, Bin (son), Ahu (brother), though not to be treated as names by themselves, are yet not to be disregarded, as proposed by Dr. Dziatzko. They form a name in conjunction with the word following (e. g., Abu Bakr) and determine the alphabetical place of the entry. But the article al (changed by assonance to ad-, ar-, as-, at-, az-, according to the letter it precedes) is neglected (al-Masudi).

In all Oriental names the cataloguer must be careful not to take titles, as Emir, Bey, Pasha, Sri, Babu, Pundit, for names.

In regard to East Indian names, Dr. Feigl (Centralbl. f. Bibl., 4: 120) gives the rule: If there are two names, enter under the first, which is the individual name, with a reference from the second; if there are three, enter under the third, which is the family name, with a reference under the second.

The direction “Use the English form of the name” was a concession to ignorance; when it was given, that form was almost alone employed in English books; since then the tone of literature has changed; the desire for local coloring has led to the use of foreign forms, and we have become familiarized with Louis, Henri, Marguerite, Carlos, Karl, Wilhelm, Gustaf. If the present tendency continues we shall be able to treat princes’ names like any other foreign names; perhaps the next generation of cataloguers will no more tolerate the headings William Emperor of Germany, Lewis XIV than they will tolerate Virgil, Horace, Pliny. The change, to be sure, would give rise to some difficult questions of nationality, but it would diminish the number of the titles now accumulated under the more common royal names.

20. Put under the surname:

a. In general, all persons not included under § 19.

In a few cases, chiefly of artists, a universally-used sobriquet is to be taken in place of the family or forename, as Tintoretto (whose real name was Giacomo Robusti). Similar cases are Canaletto (Antonio Canale and also B. Belotto), Correggio (Ant. Allegri), Garofalo (Benvenuto Piero Tisi), Il Sodoma (Giov. Ant. Bazzi), Spagnoletto (José Ribera), Uccello (Paolo Doni). Always refer from the family name.

b. In particular, ecclesiastical dignitaries. Refer.

Ex.

Kaye, John, Bishop of Lincoln.

Lincoln, John, Bishop of. See Kaye.

Bishops usually omit their family name, canons their forename, on their title-pages, as “by Canon Liddon,” “by the Bishop of Ripon,” “by Henry Edward, archbishop of Westminster,” i. e., H: E: Manning. Care must be taken not to treat Canon as a forename or Edward as a family name. {22}

c. Married women, using the last well-known form. Refer.

Wives often continue writing, and are known in literature, only under their maiden names (as Miss Freer or Fanny Lewald), or after a second marriage retain for literary purposes the first husband’s name. The cataloguer should not hurry to make a change in the name as soon as he learns of a marriage. Let him rather follow than lead the public.

21. Put under the title:

British [14] and foreign [15] noblemen, referring from earlier titles by which they have been known, and, in the case of British noblemen, from the family name.

Ex.

Chesterfield, Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl of. Refer from Stanhope.

Saint-Simon, Louis de Rouvroi, duc de.

22. Put the works of authors who change their name under the latest form, provided the new name be legally and permanently adopted.

Do not worry about the proper form of changed and transliterated names, nor spend much time in hunting up facts and deciding. If the necessary references are made, it is of little importance which form is chosen for the main entry, provided, of course, that the library always chooses the same heading.

If the change consist in the addition of a name the new name is to be treated by the next rule. {23}

23. Put compound names:

a. If English, under the last part of the name, when the first has not been used alone by the author.

Ex. Gould, Sabine Baring-; but Halliwell (afterwards Halliwell-Phillipps), J. O., because the author wrote much under the first name.

This rule secures uniformity; but, like all rules, it sometimes leads to entries under headings where nobody would look for them. Refer.

b. If foreign, under the first part.

Both such compound names as Gentil-Bernard and such as Gentil de Chavagnac. There are various exceptions, when a name has been more known under the last part, as Fénelon, not Salignac de Lamothe Fénelon; Voltaire, not Arouet de Voltaire; Sternberg, not Ungern-Sternberg. Moreover, it is not always easy to determine what is a compound surname in French. A convenient rule would be to follow the authority of Hœfer (Biog. gén.) and Quérard, in such cases, if they always agreed; unfortunately, they often differ. References are necessary whichever way one decides each case, especially when the second part of a foreign compound name has been used alone, as Merle d’Aubigné (enter under Merle with a reference from Aubigné).

In French a forename is sometimes joined to a surname by a hyphen. In such cases make the entry under the family name with a reference from the forename, e. g., entry, Rochette, Désiré Raoul; reference, Raoul-Rochette. See Rochette.

c. In foreign compound names of women also, although the first part is generally the maiden name and the second the husband’s name, the entry should generally be under the first, with a reference from the second. (See 20, c.)

Ex. Rivé-King, with cross-reference from King, born Rivé.

24. Put surnames preceded by prefixes:

a. In French, under the prefix when it is or contains an article, Le, La, L’, Du, Des; under the word following when the prefix is a preposition, de, d’.

When the name is printed by the author as one word the entry is made under the preposition, as Debucourt, Decamps.

b. In English, under the prefix, no matter from what language the name is derived, as De Quincey, Van Buren, with references when necessary.

c. In all other languages, under the name following the prefix, as Gama, Vasco da. with references whenever the name has been commonly used in English with the prefix, as Del Rio, Vandyck, Van Ess.

But when the author prints his name as one word entry is made under the prefix, as Vanderhaeghen.

d. Naturalized names are to be treated by the rules of the nation adopting them.

Thus German names preceded by von when belonging to Russians are to be entered under Von. E. g., Фонь Визин is to be entered as Von Vizin (not Vizin, von), as this is the Russian custom. So when Dutch names compounded with van are adopted into French or English (as Van Laun) the Van is treated as part of the family name.

Prefixes are d’, de, de La (the name goes under La not de), Des, Du, L’, La, Le, Les, St., Ste. (to be arranged as if written Saint, Sainte), Van, A’, Ap, O’, Fitz, Mac (which is to be printed as it is in the title, whether M’, or Mc, or Mac, but to be arranged as if written Mac). {24}

25. Put names of Latin authors under that part of the name chosen in Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography, unless there is some good reason for not doing so.

26. Put names of capes, lakes, mountains, rivers, forts, etc., beginning with Cape, Lake, Mt., etc., under the word following the prefix, but when the name is itself used as a prefix, do not transpose Cape, etc., nor in such names as Isle of the Woods, Isles of Shoals.

Ex. Cod, Cape; George, Lake; Washington, Mt.; Moultrie, Fort; but Cape Breton Island. When the name of a fort becomes the name of a city, of course the inversion must be abandoned, as Fort Wayne.

(iii.) Under what form of the name.

27. Give the names, both family and Christian, in the vernacular form, [16] if any instance occurs of the use of that form in the printed publications of the author. [17]

The same may be said of Camerarius (Kämmerer), Capito (Kopflein), Mercator (Kramer), Œcolampadius (Hausschein), where it would be useless to employ the vernacular name; if both forms are in use, as in the case of Pomeranius = Bugenhagen, the vernacular should have the preference. Reuchlin is much more common than its equivalent, Capnio.

Before the Reformation the presumption is in favor of the Latin form; after it in favor of the vernacular.

Short will consult the convenience of his readers if he uses the English forms of names like Homer, Horace, Virgil, in place of Homerus, Horatius, Vergilius.

The vernacular names of the Middle Ages often appear in various forms. The form which has survived to the present time is to be preferred (as Jean to Jehan), unless a name is commonly used in the old form, as in the romances Jehan de Lançon. Refer from the one not chosen.

28. If an author has written in several modern languages, choose that in which he has written most.

29. In languages which use a masculine and a feminine form of family names (as Modjeski and Modjeska), use that which the authoress herself chiefly employs.

30. When an author’s name is variously spelled, select the best authorized form as heading, add the variants in parentheses, and make references from them to the form adopted.

Of course, great care must be taken not to enter separately works in which an author spells his name differently, as Briant and Bryant, Easterbrookes and Estabrook, Erdmann and Erdtmann. On the other hand, different people who spell their names differently should be separated, as Hofmann and Hoffmann, Maier, Mair, Majer, Mayer, Mayr, Meier, Meir, Mejer, Meyer, Meyr, Schmid, Schmidt, Schmied, Schmiedt, Schmit, Schmitt. (On the arrangement of such names in a card catalogue see § 218.)

In German Christian names there is a want of uniformity in the use of C and K (Carl, Conrad, Karl, Konrad) and f and ph (Adolf, Adolph). Occasionally an author uses both forms in different books, or writing only in Latin (Carolus, Rudolphus), does not show which form he prefers. Where the author thus leaves the point undecided, K and f should be preferred to C and ph (except in Christoph). Swedish f is to be preferred to v, as Gustaf, not Gustav.

31. When family names are written differently by different persons, follow the spelling adopted by each, even though it should separate father and son.

32. Forenames are to be used in the form employed by their owners, however unusual, as Will Carleton, Sally (Pratt) McLean, Hans Droysen, Fritz Reuter.

33. Give names of places in the English form.

Munich not Muenchen or München, Vienna not Wien, Austria not Oesterreich.

34. But if both the English and the foreign forms are used by English writers, prefer the foreign form.

35. Use the modern name of a city and refer to it from the ancient, provided its existence has been continuous and there is no doubt as to the identity.

36. In transliteration of names from alphabets of differently formed letters, use the vowels according to their German sounds. (See Appendix II for the report of the Transliteration Committee of the American Library Association.)

I. e., a (not ah) for the sound of a in father, e (not a) for the sound of e in heir or of a in hate, i (not e) for the sound of i in mien, u (not oo nor ou) for the sound of u in true or of oo in moon. This practice makes transliterations that are likely to be pronounced in the main correctly by anyone who knows any language but his own (who would naturally give foreign vowel sounds to foreign names), and will give transliterations agreeing at least in part with those of other nations. In some points, however, we must be careful not to be misled by the practice of foreigners, and when we take a name from Russian, for instance, through the French or German, must see to it that the necessities of their alphabet have not led them to use letters that do not suit our system. A Frenchman writes for Turgenief Tourguénef, and for Golovin {26} Golovine, and uses ou for u, ch for sh, dj for j, j for zh, gu for g, and qu for k. A German for Dershavin writes Derschawin, and, worse than that, is obliged to use the clumsy dsch where an Englishman can use j, as Dschellaleddin for Jalal-ad-Din, and uses tsch for ch or tch, j for y or i (Turgenjew), w for v or f in the ending of Russian names.

In Arabic names I am advised by good scholars to uniformly write a where our ordinary Anglicized names have e, except for Ebn and Ben, which become Ibn and Bin; also i for ee, and u where o has been commonly used; in other words, to uniformly represent the vowel fatha by a, kasra by i, and dhamma by u. Thus Mohammed becomes Muhammad, Abou ed-Deen becomes Abu ad-Din. Of course references must be made from the corrupt forms under which various Arabic authors have become known in the West, unless it is thought that the altered form has been so commonly used that it must be taken for the entry, as perhaps Avicenna from Ibn Sina, Averroes from Ibn Roshd.

In Danish names if the type å is not to be had, use its older equivalent aa; in a manuscript catalogue the modern orthography, å, should be employed. Whichever is chosen should be uniformly used, however the names may appear in the books. The diphthong æ should not be written ae, nor should ö be written oe; ö, not œ, should be used for ø.

In old Dutch names write y for the modern ij and arrange so.

In German names used as headings, use ä, ö, ü, not ae, oe, ue, and arrange accordingly.

For ancient Greek names use the Latinized form, as Democritus not Demokritos, Longinus not Logginos. This holds good of translated works as well as of the originals. It will not do to enter an Italian version of the Odyssey under Omero, or of the Euterpe under Erodoto, or a French version of the Noctes Atticæ under Aulu-Gelle. A college literary catalogue may safely use the more nearly transliterated forms which are coming into use, like Aiskulos, Homeros, but used in a town-library catalogue they would only puzzle and mislead its readers. For that I should prefer the English forms, as Homer, Horace.

For modern Greek names Professor Abbot proposes the following plan: Works in Romaic to be entered in a supplement, the names not transliterated but printed in the Greek type. Translations of works of modern Greek authors to be put under their Greek names in the supplement, with references in the main catalogue under the forms (whatever they may be) which their names assume in the translation. Original works written in French, German, English, etc., by modern Greek authors may be treated in the same way if their authors have not become French, German, or English by residence and literary labors, in which case they should be entered under the French, German, or English forms which they have chosen for their names, with cross-references, if necessary, from the Greek supplement to these names. If, however, transliteration is attempted the following table of equivalents may be used:

αι æ

αυ av

ει ei

ευ ev

η i

ηυ iv

οι œ

υ y

υι yi

β v

γ gh

γ before κ, γ, χ, ξ n

δ dh

κ after γ g

ξ x

ου u

ρ r

χ kh

When Hindus themselves transliterate their names, use their form, whether or not according to our rules. (Appendix II.)

In Hungarian names write ö, ü, with the diæresis (not oe, ue), and arrange like the English o, u.

In Spanish names use the modern orthography i and j rather than the ancient y and x.

In Swedish names ä, å, ö, should be so written (not ae, oe), and arranged as the English a, o.

Ballhorn’s Grammatography (London, 1861) will be found very useful on such points. {27}

37. When an author living in a foreign country has transliterated his name according to the practice of that country and always uses it in that form, take that as the heading, referring from the form which the name would have under § 36; but if he has written much in his own language, use the English transliterated form.

Ex. Bikelas, Demetrius, with reference from Vikelas, Dmitri.

38. If a name which would properly be spelled by the English alphabet has been transliterated into a foreign alphabet, refer from the foreign form.

Ex. Šifner. See Schiefner.

(b.) CORPORATE.

General principle.

39. Bodies of men are to be considered as authors of works published in their name or by their authority.

The chief difficulty with regard to bodies of men is to determine (1) what their names are, and (2) whether the name or some other word shall be the heading. In regard to (2) the catalogues hitherto published may be regarded as a series of experiments. No satisfactory usage has as yet been established. Local names have always very strong claims to be headings; but to enter the publications of all bodies of men under the places with which the bodies are connected is to push a convenient practice so far that it becomes inconvenient and leads to many rules entirely out of harmony with the rest of the catalogue.

Details.

40. Enter under places (countries, or parts of countries, cities, towns, ecclesiastical, military, or judicial districts) the works published officially by their rulers (kings, [18] governors, mayors, prelates, generals commanding, courts, [19] etc.). Refer from the name of the ruler.

Ex.

UNITED STATES. Supreme Court. Opinions of the judges in the case of Smith vs. Turner, etc.

TANEY, Roger Brooke. Decision in the Merryman case.

41. Similarly Congress, Parliament, and other governmental bodies are authors of their journals, acts, minutes, laws, etc.; and other departments of government of their reports, and of the works published by them or under their auspices.

These are to be entered under the name of the country, city, or town, and not in the main alphabet under the word Congress, Parliament, City Council, or the like.

42. Laws on one or more particular subjects, whether digested or merely collected, must have author-entries both under the name of the country and under the name of the collector or digester.

Ex. Tilsley’s “Digest of the stamp acts” would appear both under Great Britain and Tilsley. {28}

43. Calendars of documents, regesta, etc., are to be entered under their maker, with a series-entry under the department which orders the publication.

Ex. Green, Mrs. M.. Anne Everett (Wood). Calendar of state papers, domestic, Charles II. The series-entry is under Great Britain. Master of the Rolls.

44. Works written officially are to be entered under the name of the department of government or society (see § 56) or ecclesiastical district with a reference from the name of the official, if it is thought worth making.

Some libraries may refer always; most will refer only when the report has exceptional importance (1) from its subject, (2) from the treatment of its subject, (3) from its literary merits, (4) from the fame of its author, or (5) from having been separately published. Horace Mann’s reports, for example, should be catalogued under Massachusetts. Board of Education, to which heading a reference should be made from Mann. Presidents’ messages should appear under United States. President. Proclamations and all other official writings of kings should appear under the name of the country (division King or Crown), arranged by reigns, as,

Great Britain. Crown. United States. President.

Charles I. Buchanan.

Charles II. Lincoln.

James II. Johnson.

William and Mary. Grant.

45. In the entry of Government publications, use for a subdivision the name of the office rather than the title of the officer, i. e., Ministère de la Marine, not Ministre de la Marine, Registry of Deeds, not Register of Deeds. [20] The individual name of the occupant of the office for the time being may be added in parenthesis to the name of the office; [21] and it should be so added when the publication has an individual character.

46. Messages of a superior executive officer (as President or Governor) transmitting to a legislative body or to some higher executive officer the report of some inferior officer should be entered as the report of the inferior officer, provided the message is merely introductory and contains no independent matter; provided, also, there are not three or more reports; if there are, the higher officer is to be regarded as the collecting editor (§ 59, d); in this case refer analytically to the superior officer’s official title from all the inferior officers whose reports are so transmitted.

47. “Articles to be inquired of” in ecclesiastical districts should go under the name of the district; but episcopal charges are not to go under the name of the bishopric unless they relate especially to its affairs, in which case they will have a subject-entry.

Ex. York, Archdeaconry of. Articles to be enquired of within the A. of Y. {29}

48. Reports made to a department, but not by an official, are to be entered under the department, with either an entry, reference, or analytical under the author as circumstances require.

Gould’s “Mollusca and shells” and Cassin’s “Mammalogy and ornithology of the United States Exploring Expedition under Wilkes” are of this nature; so is “Memorial ceremonies at the graves of our soldiers, collected under authority of Congress, by Frank Moore.” (Compare § 43.)

49. Enter congresses of several nations under the name of the place of meeting (as that usually gives them their name), with references from the nations taking part in them and from any name by which they are popularly known.

Ex. The Congress of London, of Paris, of Verona.

50. Enter treaties under the name of each of the contracting parties, with a reference from the name of the place, when the treaty is commonly called by that name, and from any other usual appellation.

Ex. Treaty of Versailles, Barrier treaty, Jay’s treaty.

51. Enter the official publications of any political party [22] or religious denomination or order, [23] or military order, under the name of the party, or denomination, or order. [24]

52. Enter reports, journals, minutes, etc., of conventions, conferences, etc., under the names of the bodies holding the conferences, etc. When the body has no exact name [25] enter under the name of the place of meeting. [26]

Put the convention of a county or other named district under the name of the district, with a reference from the town in which it is held, when it is named in the title-page.

53. Enter ecclesiastical councils, both general and special, under the name of the place of meeting. (The Vatican Council under Vatican, not Rome.) Refer from the name of the ecclesiastical body.

54. Enter reports of committees under the name of the body to which they belong; but reports of “a committee of citizens,” etc., not belonging to any named body should be put under the name of the writer, if known, if not, of the chairman, or if that is not given, of the first signer, or if not signed, under the name of the place.

55. Put the anonymous publications of any class (not organized) of citizens of a place under the place.

Ex. “Application to Parliament by the merchants of London” should go under London. Merchants.

56. Societies are authors of their journals, memoirs, proceedings, transactions, publications. (On publishing-societies, see B. Substitutes, § 59, e.)

The chief practices in regard to societies have been to enter them (1. British Museum) under a special heading—Academies—with a geographical arrangement; (2. Boston Public Library, printed catalogue) under the name of the place where they have their headquarters; (3. Harvard College Library and Bost. Pub. Lib., present system) under the name of the place, if it enters into the legal name of the society, otherwise under the first word of that name not an article; (4. Boston Athenæum) English societies under the first word of the society’s name not an article, foreign societies under the name of the place. Both 3 and 4 put under the place all purely local societies, those whose membership or objects are confined to the place. The 1st does not deserve a moment’s consideration; such a heading is out of place in an author-catalogue, and the geographical arrangement only serves to complicate matters and render it more difficult to find any particular academy. [27] The 2d is utterly unsuited to American and English societies. The 3d practice is simple; but it is difficult to see the advantage of the exception which it makes to its general rule of entry under the society’s name; the exception does not help the cataloguer, for it is just as hard to determine whether the place enters into the legal name as it is to ascertain the name; it does not help the reader, for he has no means of knowing whether the place is part of the legal name or not. The 4th is simple and intelligible; it is usually easy for both cataloguer and reader to determine whether a society is English or foreign. I shall mention two other possible plans, well aware that there are strong objections to both.

5TH PLAN. Rule 1. Enter academies, [28] associations, institutes, universities, societies, libraries, galleries, museums, colleges, and all similar bodies, and churches that {31} have an individual name, both English and foreign, according to their corporate name, neglecting an initial article when there is one.

Exception 1. Enter the universities and the royal academies of Berlin, Göttingen, Leipzig, Lisbon, Madrid, Munich, St. Petersburg, Vienna, etc., and the “Institut” of Paris, under those cities. An exception is an evil. This one is adopted because the universities and academies are almost universally known by the names of the cities, and are hardly ever referred to by the name Königliche, Real, etc.

Exception 2. Enter London guilds under the name of the trade; e. g., “Stationers’ Company,” not “Master and Keepers or Wardens and Commonalty of the Mystery and Art of Stationers of the City of London,” which is the corporate title. This exception is adopted because (1) it gives a heading easier to find, and (2) it would be difficult in many cases to ascertain the real names of the London companies.

Exception 3. Enter bodies whose legal name begins with such words as Board, Corporation, Trustees under that part of the name by which they are usually known.

E. g. Trustees of the Eastern Dispensary. Corporation of the Chamber of Commerce in the City of New York. Proprietors of the Boston Athenæum. Contributors to the Asylum for the Relief of Persons deprived of their Reason. Refer from the first word of the legal name.

Exception 4. Enter orders of knighthood under the significant word of the English title; as, Garter, Order of the; Malta, Knights of; Templars, Knights; Teutonic Order.

Exception 5. Enter American State historical and agricultural societies under the name of the State.

Rule 2. a. Enter churches which have no individual name and all purely local benevolent or moral or similar societies under the name of the place.

b. Young men’s Christian associations, mercantile library associations, and the like are to be considered local.

c. Business firms or corporations (except national banks numbered as First National Bank, etc.), libraries, galleries, museums, are not to be considered local, nor are private schools local, but go under their corporate name, or, if they are not corporate, under the name of the proprietor.

d. National libraries museums, and galleries and libraries, museums, and galleries instituted or supported by a city go under the name of the city provided they have not a name of their own. (E. g., the Boston Public Library goes under Boston; but the Reuben Hoar Library of Littleton goes under Hoar.) American public schools should in any case go under the name of the city. (Rule 2, h.)

e. If college societies limited to one college are considered local, they would be entered not under the name of the place but of the college; if they are treated by rule 1, as all general college societies must be, reference (6) must be made. College libraries go under the name of the college. The colleges of an English university and the schools of an American university go under the name of the university.

Refer

(1) from all the varying forms of the society’s name.

(2) from important words in the society’s name, when the first word is unlikely to be thought of.

(3) from the name of the city where the society is situated.

(4) from the motto in the names of Dutch societies.

(5) from the names of the royal societies of Berlin, etc.

(6) from colleges to college societies.

(7) from such words as Gallery, Museum, etc., to all the galleries, museums, etc., contained in the catalogue. {32}

f. Universities, galleries, etc., called merely Imperial, Royal, National and the like are not to be considered as having individual names, except the National Gallery of London.

g. Buildings are for the most part provided for in the above rules as museums, galleries, libraries, churches, etc. Any others should be entered under their names, with a reference from the city.

h. If a firm’s name is in the form Raphael Friedlander und Sohn it might be put as it reads, i. e., under R, or reversed, i. e., Friedlander und Sohn, Raphael. I prefer the latter, because the consulter is much more likely to remember the family than the Christian name. Whether the Christian name is written at the end or thus, Town (John) and Bowers (Henry), all firms should be arranged after all the other entries of the first family name, i. e., Friedlander und Sohn after all the Friedlanders. The same reason applies to other bodies whose legal name begins with a forename.

The plan might be tabulated thus:

Under name. Under place.

Churches not numbered and not named from the place. Churches numbered or otherwise named from the place.

Societies not local. Societies purely local.

English and American academies. Academies and universities of the European Continent and of South America.

Colleges, universities, libraries, galleries, museums, having an individual name. National or municipal colleges, libraries, galleries, museums, not having an individual name.

Private schools. Public schools.

Business firms and corporations. Municipal corporations.

London guilds (name of trade). State historical societies and State agricultural societies (name of state).

Ex.

Amiens. Académie des Sciences, Agriculture, Commerce, Belles-Lettres, et Arts du Départment de la Somme. (Rule 1, exc. 1.)

Association Scientifique Algérienne, Algiers. (Rule 1.)

Athenée de Vaucluse, Avignon. (Rule 1.)

Barbers and Surgeons of London (Mystery and Commonalty of), afterwards Royal College of Surgeons. See Royal College of Surgeons.

Boston (Mass.) Public Library. (Rule 2, d.)

Boston. Wells School. (Rule 2, d.)

Boston Athenæum. (Rule 1, exc. 3, Rule 2, c.)

Boston, First Church of. (Rule 2, d.)

British Museum. (Rule 2, d.)

Cambridge (Mass.), First Church of. (Rule 2.)

Chauncy Hall School, Boston, Mass. (Rule 2 c.)

Chemins de Fer de Paris à Lyon et à la Méditerranée, Comp. des. (Rule 2, c.)

Christiania. Videnskabs-Selskab. (Rule 1, exc. 1.)

Clarke (W. B.), & Co. (Rule 2, c.)

Congrès International des Américanistes. (Rule 1.)

Firenze. Galleria Imperiale. (Rule 2, f.)

Freemasons in Iowa. (§ 51³.)

Genootschap “Oefening kweekt Kunst,” Amsterdam. (Rule 1, and ref. 4.)

Geschichts- und Alterthumsforschende Gesellschaft des Osterlandes, Altenburg. (Rule 1.)

Göttingen. K. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften. (Rule 1, exc. 1.)

Great Britain. Parliament. (§ 41.)

Harvard College. (Rule 1.)

Harvard College. Lawrence Scientific School. (Rule 1, 2, e.)

Harvard College. Library. (Rule 1, 2, e.) {33}

Hermitage, Gallerie de l’, St. Petersburg. (Rule 2, d.)

Houghton & Mifflin. (Rule 2, c.)

L’Internationale. (Rule 1.)

Intime Club, Paris. (Rule 1.)

London. Merchants. (§ 55.)

Louvre, Gallerie du, Paris. (Rule 2, d.)

Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Mass. (Rule 2, c.)

Madrid. R. Academia de la Historia. (Rule 1, exc. 1.)

National Gallery, London. (Rule 2, f.)

3d National Quarantine and Sanitary Convention. (§ 52¹.)

New England Trust Co., Boston, Mass. (Rule 2, c.)

New York. Chamber of Commerce. (Rule 1, exc. 3, Rule 2, c.)

New York. First National Bank. (Rule 2, c.)

New York. Young Men’s Christian Association. (Rule 2, b.)

Or San Michele, Chiesa di, Florence. (Rule 1.)

Paris. Bibliothèque Nationale. (Rule 2, d, f.)

ΦΒΚ. A of Harvard. (Rule 2, e.)

Prado, Museo del, Madrid. (Rule 2, d.)

Pratt (Enoch) Free Library, Balt., Md. (Rule 2, d, h.)

San Francisco. Mercantile Library Assoc. (Rule 2, b.)

Société de l’Agriculture de l’Orne, Alençon. (Rule 1.)

Stationers’ Company, London. (Rule 1, exc. 2.)

Templars, Knights. (Rule 2, exc. 4.)

Tübingen. Eberhard-Karls Universität. (Rule 1, exc. 1.)

L’Union Générale, Paris. (Rule 2, c.)

United States. Library of Congress. (§ 40.)

Vatican Council. (§ 53.)

Verona, Congress of. (§ 49.)

Versailles, Treaty of. See ——. (§ 50.)

Wisconsin, State Historical Society of. (Rule 1, exc. 5.)

The 6TH PLAN has the same rules as the 5TH, and no exceptions. It may be preferred by those who think the advantage of having a single uniform rule greater than the inconvenience of unusual headings.

Perhaps from habit I prefer the 4TH PLAN. Of the other plans experience confirms me in the belief that the 5TH PLAN is the best. The A. L. A. adopted the 6TH PLAN. I have used it ever since in the Library journal, and I do not think it works well.

B. SUBSTITUTES.

Substitutes for the author’s name (to be chosen in the following order) are—

57. Part of the author’s name when only a part is known.

Ex. For a book “by J. B. Far...,” or “by L. M. P.,” or “by Ddg.,” or “by —lsd—,” the entry is to be made under Far..., J. B., P., L. M., Ddg., —lsd—. If the last initials are evidently, from the style of printing, those of a title, the entry will be under the initial preceding them; thus for books “by B. F., D.D.,” or “by M. P. R., Gent.,” or “by X. Y. Z., D.D.,” the entry is to be made under F., B., D.D., and R., M. P., Gent., and Z., X. Y., D.D. In such case it is safest to have also a reference from the last initial to the one chosen, as D., X. Y. Z. D. See Z., X. Y., D.D. It is often well to make a reference from the first word (title-reference). This mode of entry ensures the easy finding of a particular book and brings together all of an author’s works in which the same letters are used, and sometimes leads to the discovery of a real name.

Even mere printer’s marks, as *** or ..., or !!!, unaccompanied by any letters, though they can not be considered as names, may be used as headings for a reference {34} for the sake of bringing together all the works of an author using them; but each work should also have title entry if anonymous.

58. A pseudonym, that is, a false name; as, John Phenix, Mark Twain.

If the author’s real name is known, make the entry under that, with a reference from the pseudonym; but if the writer is much better known by the pseudonym, enter under that, with a reference from the real name. (See note under § 6.)

A phrase—“One who loves his country,” “A friend to peace”—or even a shorter appellation—“A lawyer”—is not a name. References might be made from these to the word under which the book is entered, but they would swell the catalogue and rarely be of use. Appellatives beginning with the definite article, like “The Prig,” “The Old Shekarry,” “The Duchess,” are not vague like “A lover of justice,” and when constantly used should be treated as names in the way either of entry or reference. Latin phrases, like “Amator patriæ,” should be treated as names and the entry made under the last word; as, Patriæ, Amator. But it should not be made under patronymic adjectives, or certain words like junior, senior, evidently intended to qualify the name, not to be taken as the name; i. e., the heading for a book “by Phileleutherus Lipsiensis” would not be Lipsiensis, Phileleutherus, but Phileleutherus Lipsiensis; Vanity Fair Album by Jehu Junior would go under Jehu junior, not Junior, Jehu. In such cases a reference from the word which is not taken as the heading will be an additional safeguard.

Pseudonyms like Aunt Jane, Cousin Mary, Uncle John, should be entered under the second word, although it is evidently not a family name but a forename; it is all the name that we have.

The word Anonymus may be considered as a pseudonym when used as follows: “Anonymi introductio in,” etc.

A foreign article beginning a pseudonym used in an English work is considered as a part of the name; as, El-Mukattem, pseud.

59. Collector.

That is, the one who is responsible for the existence of a collection. A collection is made by putting together, with a collective title, three or more works by different authors, so as to make one work.

Examples: Johnson’s “Little classics,” Buchon’s “Collection des mémoires.”

a. This rule does not apply to the collector (editor) of a periodical. (§ 73.)

b. Several works published together without a collective title are to be put under that author’s name which appears first on the title-page, even though the collector’s name is also there; in other words, he is then to be considered merely as the editor. (See § 4.)

Thus, “The fraternitye of vacabondes, by J. Awdeley; A caueat for common cursetors, by T. Harman; A sermon in praise of thieves, by Parson Haben or Hyberdyne; those parts of The groundworke of conny-catching that differ from Harman’s Caueat; ed. by E. Viles and F. J. Furnivall,” should be entered not under Viles, E., and Furnivall, F. J., but under Awdeley; but if it had been entitled “Early tracts on vagabonds and beggars; edited by E. Viles and F. J. Furnivall,” it would properly be put under the editors.

c. If the collector’s name is known, the collection is to be put under it, whether it occurs on the title-page or not. If his name is not known, enter the collection like any anonymous work, under the first word of the collective title. In either case the separate works forming the collection must be entered under their respective authors. (See V. Analysis.) Title-references are also often necessary. (See II. Titles.) {35}

d. A collection known chiefly by its title may be put under that as well as under the collector.

The older collections, like Graevius’s Thesaurus antiquitatum Romanarum, Gronovius’s Thesaurus Graecarum antiquitatum, are known and referred to by their collectors’ names but of late years a swarm of series (American statesmen series, etc.) has arisen which are known wholly by their titles, under which they should be entered in full, with contents, to save the time of the searcher. The entry under the editor is necessary because he is really the author of the series, but it may be brief, with a reference for the “Contents” to the title-entry.

e. Societies like the Camden, Chetham, Hakluyt are collectors of the series of works published by them, of which a list should be given under their names.

But every such work filling one or more volumes should be entered separately under its author or title as if it were published independently, and should have the same subject-entry. (See § 125.) Works that fill part of a volume are to be entered analytically, (See § 126.) Of course any volume consisting of three or more treatises, put together with a collective title by the society, should be entered under it as collector, if no collector’s name is given.

For anonymous works, see Title-entry, § 68. For trials, see § 64.

C. REFERENCES.

60. Make references

(§ 3.) From joint authors (after the first) to the first.

(§ 5.) From the præses to the respondent or defendant of a thesis, or vice versâ.

(§ 6.) From pseudonyms, initials, and part of names.

(§§ 7, 8.) From important illustrators when not important enough for an entry.

(§ 12.) From commentators who are not entitled to an entry, if the commentary preponderates or for any reason is likely to be looked for under the commentator’s name. Where the line of omission shall be drawn depends on the fullness of the catalogue.

(§§ 13–16.) From the authors of continuations, indexes, and of introductions of some length, also in some cases, of epitomes, revisions, and excerpts.

(§ 18.) From the names of reporters, translators, and editors of anonymous works and of works not anonymous which are commonly known by the name of their editors or translators.

Ex. Some translations from the German by Mrs. Wister are wrongly lettered as if she were the author, and are therefore asked for by her name.

(§ 19 a.) From the foreign form of names of sovereigns, whenever they are likely to be looked for under that form.

(§ 19 b, c.) From the family name of persons canonized, and of friars who drop the family name on entering their order.

(§ 19 e.) From such parts of Oriental names as require it.

(§ 20.) From the names of English sees and deaneries. {36}

(§ 20 c.) From the maiden names or unused married names of wives to the one used in the catalogue, provided they have written under the earlier names or for any other reason are likely to be looked for under them.

(§ 21.) From the family names of British noblemen to the titles, or vice versâ, if the entry is made under the family name.

From the family names of foreign noblemen, when they are known by them wholly or in part.

From any other title by which a man may be better known than by his real name.

As, “Claimant, The.” The Diary of the Shah of Persia, catalogued under Nassr-ad-Din, requires a reference from Shah.

(§ 22.) From the earlier forms of names that are changed.

(§ 23.) From the part of compound names which is not used for entry to the part which is, whenever it seems necessary.

(§ 24.) From the prefixes of foreign names when they have been commonly used in combination with the last part.

Ex. From Vandyck to Dyck, A. van, from Degerando to Gerando, and De Candolle to Candolle.

(§ 25.) From the alternative part of Latin names.

(§§ 27–38.) From all forms of a name varying either by spelling, translation, or transliteration that do not come into immediate juxtaposition with the one chosen.

This should be done whether the rejected form occurs in the title of a book in the library or not. The object of a reference is to enable the reader to find the works of an author, not merely a particular book, and the reader may have seen the author referred to under the rejected form whether the library has a book with that form or not.

(§§ 40, 44, 48.) From the authors of official writings (with discretion).

(§ 49.) From nations taking part in a congress to the place of meeting.

(§ 52.) From the places where conventions are held to the names of the bodies holding them.

(§ 53.) From the name of an ecclesiastical body to the headings under which the councils of the body are entered.

(§ 56.) A list of references is given in the note.

(§ 57.) From part of the author’s name appearing on the title-page to the whole name if discovered.

From the last initial given on a title-page to the one chosen for the entry.

(§ 58.) From a pseudonym to the real name when discovered.

From some phraseological pseudonyms, especially if brief.

Ex. From Lawyer, when an anonymous work is said to be “by a lawyer.” For Full only.

From editors and translators.

If it is thought worth while to give a complete view of the literary and artistic activity of every author so far as it is represented in the library, of course references from editors, translators, illustrators, cartographers, engravers, etc., must be made. But this completeness is not usually sought even in large libraries. Such references {37} are also undeniably a help in finding books. But they increase the bulk and the cost of a catalogue so much and are comparatively of so little use that ordinary libraries must content themselves with a selection, though the best-made selection is certain to occasion complaints that the really useful ones have been omitted and the least important made. The chief classes of necessary references of this sort are—

(1.) From the editors of periodicals to the title-entry, when the periodical is commonly called by the editor’s name, as Poggendorff’s Annalen, Silliman’s Journal.

(2.) From the names of editors and translators which are habitually mentioned in connection with a work, so that it is as likely to be looked for under the editor’s name as under the author’s name. When the form is a combination of author’s and editor’s name, as Heyne’s Virgil, Leverett’s Cicero, the reference, though convenient, is certainly not necessary, inasmuch as a person of ordinary intelligence could hardly fail, not finding what he wanted under one name, to try the other.

(3.) From the names of those who have made poetical versions, on the ground that their work is something more than mere translation.

(4.) From the translators of anonymous works, because the title of the original will generally be unknown to the searcher. This is less necessary for famous works; thus J. Scott’s version of the Arabian Nights would probably be looked for under Arabian nights rather than under Scott; but it makes assurance doubly sure.

(5.) From the names of translators, editors, etc., of Oriental works, because Occidental readers are much more likely to remember these names than those of the authors.

It may be thought that an excessive number of references is recommended, but it is plain that wherever there can be a reasonable doubt among cataloguers under what head a book ought to be entered, it should have at least a reference under each head. The object of an author-catalogue is to enable one to find the book; if that object is not attained the book might as well not be catalogued at all.

61. Make explanatory notes under such words as Congress, Parliament, Academies, Societies, and others in regard to whose entry there is a diverse usage, stating what is the rule of the catalogue.

D. ECONOMIES.

62. In the title-a-liners references are not an economy; they occupy as much room as an entry, and therefore the imprint may as well be given whenever the reference does not take the place of several titles.

63. Mr. Perkins would catalogue directories, state registers, and local gazetteers under the name of the place, omitting the author-entry This is for Short alone, and should never be done by Full or Medium.

64. Trials of crown, state, and criminal cases may be entered only under the name of the defendant, and trials of civil cases under the parties to the suit, treated like joint authors, and trials relating to vessels under the name of the vessel (subject-entries of course). But Full and perhaps Medium should make author-entries under the reporter. It may be doubted, however, whether a stenographic reporter is entitled to be considered an author any more than a type-setter.

Collected reports of trials will of course (§ 59) go under the collector: for subject-entry they come under the place over which the court has jurisdiction, and if they relate to a single crime (as murder), under that also. {38}

65. Often in analysis it may be worth while to make a subject-entry and not an author-entry, or vice versâ.

66. An economical device in some favor is to omit the entry under the author’s name when the library contains only one work by him.

By this practice many famous authors, of whom no small library is likely to contain more than one work (such as Boswell, Dante, Gibbon, Lamb, Macaulay, Milton, indeed almost any of the English poets), will not appear in the catalogue; while the man who has written both a First class reader and a Second class reader, or a Mental arithmetic and a Written arithmetic, or two Sunday-school books, must be included. It is not necessary to say more to show the absurdity of the rule. If some authors must be omitted, let it be those who the librarian knows are never called for, whether they have written one or fifty works.

67. Another objectionable economy is to put biographies under the name of the subject alone, omitting author-entry, so that there is no means of ascertaining whether the library possesses all the works of a given author.

II. TITLE-ENTRY.

CATALOGUE.

First-word entry. (Anonymous works, 68–72; Periodicals, 73, 74; Fiction, 75; What is a first word, 76–80.)

Changed titles, 81–83.

First-word reference. (Plays and poems, 84; other works, 85.)

Catch-word reference. (Anonymous works, 86 a; other works, 86 b.)

Subject-word entry. (Anonymous biographies, 87.)

Subject-word reference. (Anonymous works, 88 a; other works, 88 b.)

Title-reference to corporate entries, 89.

Title-reference from subtitles, 90.

Double title-pages, 91.

TITLE-ENTRY.

68. Make a first-word entry for all [29] anonymous works, [30] except anonymous biographies, which are to be entered under the name of the subject of the life. [31] (If the author’s name can be ascertained insert it within brackets.)

This is the British Museum rule. It is of a piece with putting all periodicals under the heading Periodicals and all publications of learned societies under the head Academies. It would be much more in accordance with dictionary principles to put the separate books of the Bible each under its own name as given in the revised {39} English version (Matthew, Gospel of, not Gospel of Matthew), with all necessary references.

Under the present rule, references should be made to Bible from Testament, Old Testament, New Testament, Gospels, Apocrypha, Psalms, Pentateuch, the names of the single books, and from such well-known names as Breeches Bible, Speaker’s commentary.

In cataloguing the anonymous books of the Middle Ages, “Incipit” or “Here begyns,” or “Book the first of,” and similar phrases are not to be considered as first words. Thus the history of the Seven Sages appears under the following variety of title:

1. Incipit historia septem sapientū Rome. [Cir. 1475.]

2. In hoc opusculo sunt subtilitates septē sapientū rome valde perutiles. [Later.]

3. Historia septem sapientum Romæ. 1490.

4. Historia calumnie nouercalis que septem sapientū inscribitur. 1490.

5. Ludus septem sapientum. [Cir. 1560.]

And the titles of the versions are equally various:

1. Li romans des sept sages.

2. Li romans de Dolopathos.

3. Les sept sages de Roe.

4. Les sept saiges de romme.

5. Los siete sabios de Roma.

6. Hieuach volget ein gar schöne Cronick v hystori auss denn Geschichten der Römern.

7. Die hystorie uan die seuen wise mannen van Romen.

8. Hystory of the seuen maysters of Rome.

9. The Hystorie of the seven wise maisters of Rome.

10. The sevin seages.

11. De siu sive mestere.

Of course it will not do to catalogue these severally under Incipit, Hoc, Historia, Ludus, Romans, Sept, Siete, Hienach, Hystorie, Hystory, Sevin, and Siu. In this and other prose and poetical romances of the Middle Ages the heading must be taken in general from the subject of the romance; the name appearing of course in the original language, with all necessary references from other forms. In the present case all the editions would be collected under Septem sapientes,[[32]] with references from Ludus, Sept sages, Siete sabios, Hienach, and Seven, provided the library has so many editions.

Somewhat similarly collections of papers known by the name of a principal contributor or a previous owner or of the house where they were found should be entered under such name, or, if they must be entered under the name of an editor, should have a reference from such name; ex., Dudley papers, Winthrop papers, etc.

A title like “The modern Plutarch” does not mean to imply that the work is written by Plutarchus; such a book would be treated as anonymous, unless it had an editor.

If a book’s title-page is lost, and it is impossible to ascertain what it was from other copies or other editions, or from catalogues or bibliographies, use the half-title or the running title, stating the fact; if it has neither, manufacture a title, within brackets. Such an entry will require many references.

69. A single inscription by an unknown author needs no title-entry, but should have subject-entry under the subject of which it treats, or the name of the place where it is found, or both.

70. When the author’s name is known, it will be enough for Medium to make not an entry under the first word, but a reference from it to the author. The shelf-mark or class-mark should always be given with this reference, that the man who merely wishes to get the book need not have to look in two places for the mark. If there are several editions all the marks should be given, which is not satisfactory unless the imprints are also given, that is, unless an entry is made and not merely a reference.

The entry (or reference) for an anonymous work should be made, even if the author’s name is given in another edition.

71. An anonymous work which forms a part of a larger whole is to be entered where the whole would be, with a reference from its own title.

Ex.

New testament. See Bible.

Die Klage. See Nibelungenlied.

72. Translations of anonymous works should be entered under the same heading as the original, whether the library possesses the original or not.

Ex. Gisli’s saga. Story of Gish the outlaw, from the Icelandic, by G. W. Dasent.

So Perron’s translation, called by him “Glaive des couronnes,” would appear under Saif-al-tidjan; and the Arabian nights’ entertainments under Alif laila. Criticisms of anonymous works must be put under the heading of the work criticised.

73. Periodicals are to be treated as anonymous and entered under the first word.

Ex. Popular science monthly, Littell’s living age.

When a periodical changes its title the whole may be catalogued under the original title, with an explanatory note there and a reference from the new title to the old; or each part may be catalogued under its own title, with references, “For a continuation, see ,” “For the previous volumes, see .”

Treat almanacs and other annuals as periodicals. Do not confound periodicals with serials. The four characteristics of a periodical are: (1) that it be published at intervals usually but not necessarily regular; (2) in general that the publication be intended to continue indefinitely; (3) that it be written by a number of contributors under the supervision of one or more editors; (4) that it consist of articles on various subjects, so that a set of the work does not form an organic whole. The 2d, 3d, and 4th criteria exclude works like Trollope’s “The way we live now,” and the “Encyclopædia Britannica.” There are some exceptions to the 3d, as “Brownson’s quarterly review.” {41}

Make a reference from the name of the editor when the periodical is commonly called by his name, as in the case of Silliman’s Journal of science.

The Memoirs, Proceedings, Transactions of a society are periodicals in point of (1) occasional publication, (2) indefinite continuance, and—so far as they contain anything beyond the record of the society’s meetings—of (4) variety of subject; but they lack the 3d characteristic, variety of authorship, inasmuch as the memoirs or other papers given in addition to “proceedings” proper may be considered as the work of the society acting through its members; the society, therefore, is the author, and the Transactions, etc., need not have title-entry. There are, however, some “Journals” published by or “under the auspices of” societies which are really periodicals, and should be so treated in entry, the society being not the author but the editor. Again, there are works which occupy a borderland between the two classes, in regard to which the puzzled cataloguer should remember that it is not of much importance which way he decides, provided he is careful to make all necessary references. Examples of such doubtful cases are “Alpine journal: a record of mountain adventure and scientific observation. By members of the Alpine Club;” which contains nothing of or about the Club itself;—“Journal of the American Institute, a monthly publication devoted to the interest of agriculture, commerce, etc. Edited by a committee, members of the Institute,” and “Journal of the Society of Arts and of The Institutions in Union,” both of which are journals both in the sense of record of proceedings and of periodical publication.

Newspaper titles are troublesome. It is not uncommon for the name of the place to be included in the name on the first page (as The Boston Ægis), but to be dropped over the editorial column, or vice versa, or to be used for some years and afterwards dropped, or vice versa. The searcher can not always remember whether it is used or not. It would be well, therefore, to give under each name of a city the title of every newspaper published there which the library has.

74. Collections of extracts from a periodical should go under the name of the periodical.

Ex.

Life, Verses from.

Punch, A bowl of.

75. Make a first-word entry or reference for all works of prose fiction. (Include the author’s name in the entry.)

Ex.

Daughter of Heth; novel, by W. Black. London, 1874. 3 v. O.

The reason is that novels are known more by their titles than by their authors’ names. Whether to make an entry or a reference depends on the space at command. An entry means giving the book-marks for every edition. With a reference this may be done; but a reference without them obliges the reader to turn to the author-entry for such details, which is objectionable. It is better to give all the book-marks with the title.

If the name of the hero or heroine enters into the title the entry should be made under that; ex., David Copperfield, Life and adventures of, by C. Dickens.

76. When a title begins with an article, the heading of a first-word entry or reference is the word following the article.

Ex. Centaur, The, not fabulous, not The centaur not fabulous. The entry has commonly been made under the first word “not an article or preposition.” But it is found to work badly to except the preposition in the titles of novels and plays, and it is awkward to omit or transpose it in any case. One reason for excepting the article—that there would be an immense accumulation of titles under the unimportant words A, The, Le, Der, Uno, etc.—is not so strong in the case of prepositions; the other—that it is difficult to remember with what article a given title begins—hardly applies at all to prepositions. The preposition is full as likely to fasten itself in the {42} memory as the word that follows it. The strongest argument in favor of confining preposition-entry to fiction and the drama is that in other cases the word following the preposition will probably be a subject-word, so that one entry will do the work of two. This will occasionally be true, but not often enough, I think, to make much difference.

77. When a foreign phrase is used as an English title, refer from the article as well as from the following word.

Ex. El Fureidis should have references to Cummins both under E and F; L’arratiata both under L’ and A to Heyse.

78. When a title begins with a word expressive of the number which the work holds in a series the first-word entry or reference is to be made under the next word.

Ex. Collection of papers, 8th, not Eighth collection. Letter, 1st and 2d, to the Ministry, not First letter, etc., under F, and Second letter under S. When the numeral comes after a word like Book or Part (as frequently in Latin after Liber, Pars, Tomus, Volumen) both are to be neglected and the word following put into the nominative and used as a heading; e. g., “Pars prima epistolarum” is to be entered under Epistolæ. Similarly Evening, Morning, Daily, and Weekly should be disregarded in titles of newspapers, otherwise we should have the morning edition at one end of the catalogue and the evening at the other. So “Appendix to,” “Continuation of” “Supplement to” (but not “Reply to”), are to be disregarded when they are followed by the title of the work continued. “Reply to” and similar beginnings are to be put under Reply, etc., with a subject-entry under the author of the work replied to.

79. When the first word of a title is spelled unusually, all the editions should be entered under the word spelled in the modern or correct way, with a reference from the form adopted in the title.

Ex. The hystorie of the saints would be entered—

History.] The hystorie of the saints.

We enter under the common spelling (1) in order to get all editions of a work together, (2) because the reader can not be expected to know exactly how the word is misspelled in the title, and will generally look first under the correct spelling.

Of two spellings equally correct, choose one and refer from the other.

80. When the first word of a title is in an oblique case, use the nominative as a heading.

Ex. Put Monumentorum antiquae sculpturae quae supersunt under Monumenta.

81. If the title has various forms, refer from any that differ enough to affect the alphabetical order.

See the example in § 68.

82. Modern anonymous works whose titles are changed in different editions may be entered under the first, with a reference under the later; but the most satisfactory method is to enter in full in both places.

83. Anonymous works that change their titles in successive volumes are to be entered under the first title, with a reference from the later, unless the greater part of the work has the later title, or the whole is much better known by the later title, in which case entry should be made under that. {43}

84. Make a first-word reference to the author for all plays, and for poems of some length or importance or notoriety.

Ex.

All’s well that ends well. See Shakespeare, W.

Nothing to wear. See Butler, W. A.

Of course entries are better than references for the reader; the latter are recommended here merely for economy, which will be found to be considerable when there are many editions of a play. It is much better to distribute these like any other title-references, through the alphabet, than, as some have done, to collect the titles of novels together in one place and of plays in another. A man not unfrequently wishes to find a book whose title he has heard of without learning whether it was a novel, a play, a poem, or a book of travels.

If the catch-word of the title of a novel, poem, or play is the name of a real person who is its subject, it is optional to make a reference, as in § 86, or a biographical entry under the family name, or both.

Ex.

Paul Revere’s ride. See Longfellow, H. W.

or

Revere, Paul. LONGFELLOW, H. W. (In his Tales of a way-side inn.)

85. Make a first-word reference to the author for other works which are likely to be inquired for under the first word of the title, whether because the author-entry of the work is not obvious from the title, [33] because the title does not indicate the subject, [34] or because it is of a striking form, [35] or because the book is commonly known by its title, [36] or for any other good reason.

In a majority of cases, when a subject-word entry is made, no first-word reference is needed; but, if the title is striking, there should be a first-word reference, or a reference from that part of the title which is striking. Title-references should not generally be made from certain common titles, as “Sermons on various subjects,” “Essays, historical and literary,” and should be made from less common collective words, as “Century of painters,” “Century of praise,” etc. References should be liberally made to the works of such authors as Brown, Jones, Schmidt, Smith, Wilson; if one has forgotten the Christian name, it is a work of too much time to find the book under the author, and one looks at once for a subject- or a title-entry or reference. And a reference will facilitate the finding of many collections entered properly under the editor; for it is easy to forget an editor’s name, and often difficult to determine the subject-entry of a collection.

To sum up, then, make a title-reference when the author’s name is common, the title memorable, or the subject obscure.

86. Make a catch-word reference or references—

a. For all anonymous works which admit of it, if their subject does not appear distinctly from the title. To be made to the author if known, otherwise to the first word.

Ex. Scarlet gowns, True and exact account of the. See True. Here Cardinals is the subject, but the word does not occur in the title; True is the first word and is therefore taken for the heading; but Scarlet gowns is a phrase very likely to remain {44} in the memory of anyone who had seen the title, and therefore the reference is made. Books published under a comparatively unknown pseudonym should have either a first-word or a catch-word reference, unless their subject-entry can be easily inferred from the title.

b. For other works which are likely to be inquired for not under the first word but under the catch-word of the title. To be made to the author.

Ex. The fac-simile of the Laurentian ms. of Sophocles might be spoken of or referred to as “The Laurentian ms.” simply.

It is not easy to decide when to make such entries nor how many to make. “An account of the baronial mansions of England in the olden time” may be asked for as “Baronial halls” or as “English baronial halls” or perhaps as “Mansions of the olden time.” If references are made from all possible headings which might occur to an inaccurate memory, there will be no end to the catalogue.

87. Make a subject-word entry for all anonymous biographies and works of a biographical character. (See § 68, note 3.)

Ex.

Cromwell, Oliver. PERFECT politician, The; life of Cromwell. London, 1681. 8º.

— TREASON’S masterpiece; or, Conference between Oliver and a committee of Parliament. London, 1680. 8º.

For greater security this latter ought to have also a first-word reference.

88. Make a subject-word reference—

a. For all anonymous works which admit of it, to the author if known, otherwise to the first word.

When the subject-word is the same as the heading of the subject-entry this reference need not be made; but it will not do to omit an important title-entry when there are many titles under the subject-heading or they are much subdivided, so that it would be difficult to find the title-entry there. Thus an anonymous book, “France and the Pope,” would no doubt have a subject-entry under some subdivision of France, but as this in a large catalogue would be little help towards finding the book, it should also have a reference among the titles which follow the subject France. Of course if there were only a dozen titles under France one entry would be enough.

b. For other works, when the subject-word is not the same as the name of the subject selected by the cataloguer.

In this case, however, a cross-reference, which will answer for all titles, is to be preferred to a collection of subject-word references, being more economical and nearly as convenient to the inquirer. Suppose, for instance, that Insects is preferred as a subject-name to Entomology. It will be better and more sparing of space to say once for all “Entomology. See Insects,” referring a man to a part of the catalogue where he will find not only the book he seeks but many similar ones, than to make number of references like these:

Entomologie, Cours de. See Latreille, P. A.

Entomologique, Bibliographie. See Percheron, A.

Entomology, Dialogues on. See Dialogues.

Entomology, Elements of. See Dallas, W. S.; Ruschenberger, W. S. W.

Entomology, Introduction to. See Duncan, J.; Kirby, W.

which will serve his turn only for the particular book he has in mind, and serve it very little better than the general reference. {45}

89. Make title references (first-word, catch-word, or subject-word) for works which are entered under the names of societies or of governments.

Ex. Consular reports. See U. S. Consular Service.

The reason for this is that the inquirer might not think of looking for such works under those headings or might be unable to find them in the mass of titles under the larger countries, France, Great Britain, United States. But in view of the room which such references would fill, if made from all governmental titles, it seems best to state the rule for the entry of governmental and society publications very distinctly in the preface and then to require and presuppose a certain acquaintance with the plan of the catalogue on the part of those who use it, and omit all reference for ordinary official reports, making them only for works which have become part of literature, and are likely to be much inquired for: as, the “Astronomical exploring expedition,” “Connaissance des temps,” “Description de l’Égypte,” “Documents inédits,” “Philosophical transactions,” etc. Of course absolute uniformity can not be secured in this way, but absolute uniformity is not very important. Even if occasionally a reference of this kind fails to be made which might reasonably be required, those which are made will be useful. It is easy to add the reference wanted in a manuscript catalogue or in the inevitable supplement of a printed catalogue.

90. Title references must sometimes be made from subtitles and half-titles.

Because some books are known and referred to by them rather than by the full title. For the same reason the binder’s title, used on the original binding, may deserve a reference (never an entry); and also titles commonly given to books though not appearing anywhere in them, as Breeches Bible, Speaker’s commentary.

91. If a book has several title-pages use the most general, giving the others, if necessary, in a note or as contents.

This occurs especially in German books. The rule above should be followed even when the library has only one of the parts. But under the subject-heading the subtitle which corresponds to that subject may be used, the general title being given in a parenthesis after the imprint, so as to preserve the connection of the subject- and title-entries. Ex. Saxony, House of. VEHSE, E. Geschichte der Höfe des Hauses Sachsen. Hamburg, 1854. 7 v. 8º. (Vol. 28–34 of his Gesch. d. deut. Höfe.)

III. SUBJECT-ENTRY.

CATALOGUE.

(a.) ENTRIES CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. (i.) CHOICE BETWEEN DIFFERENT SUBJECTS. Between general and specific, 93; Between person and country, 94; Between event and country, 95; Between subject and country, 96, 97; Between subjects that overlap, 98. (ii.) CHOICE BETWEEN DIFFERENT NAMES. Language, 100; Synonyms, 101–103; Subject-word and subject, 107; Homonyms, 105; Compound headings, 106, 107; Double entry, 108–112; Vessels, 113; Civil actions, 114; Reviews, comments, etc., 115.

(b.) ENTRIES CONSIDERED AS PARTS OF A WHOLE. Cross-references, 119, 120; Synoptical table, 121. {46}

SUBJECTS.

(a.) ENTRIES CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.

92. Some questions in regard to the place of entry are common to the author- and the subject-catalogue; because individuals (persons, places, ships, etc.) may be at once authors and subjects. For these questions consult Part I, and also § 100 of the present part.

In a dictionary catalogue some books can not profitably have subject-entry, because they not only have no one subject but do not even belong to any class of subjects.

A collection is to be entered under the word which expresses its subject or its general tendency. The memoirs, transactions, proceedings, etc., of a society should be entered under name of the object for which the society is founded. When there are many societies under one head, it is economical to refer merely; as, from Agriculture or Agricultural societies to the various names.

The importance of deciding aright where any given subject shall be entered is in inverse proportion to the difficulty of decision. If there is no obvious principle to guide the cataloguer, it is plain there will be no reason why the public should expect to find the entry under one heading rather than another, and therefore in regard to the public it matters not which is chosen. But it is better that such decisions should be made to conform when possible to some general system, as there is then more likelihood that they will be decided alike by different cataloguers, and that a usage will grow up which the public will finally learn and profit by, as a usage has grown up in regard to the author-entry of French names containing De, Du, La, etc.

(i.) CHOICE BETWEEN DIFFERENT SUBJECTS.

(a.) Between general and specific.

93. Enter a work under its subject-heading, not under the heading of a class which includes that subject.

Ex. Put Lady Cust’s book on “The cat” under Cat, not under Zoölogy or Mammals, or Domestic animals; and put Garnier’s “Le fer” under Iron, not under Metals or Metallurgy.

This rule of “specific entry” is the main distinction between the dictionary-catalogue and the alphabetico-classed.

Some subjects have no name; they are spoken of only by a phrase or by several phrases not definite enough to be used as a heading. A book may be written on the movements of fluids in plants, a very definite object of investigation, but as yet nameless; it must be put under Botany (Physiological). But if several works were written on it and it was called, let us say, Phythydraulics, it would be seen that, under this rule, it no more ought to be under Botany than Circulation of the blood under Zoölogy. Thirty years ago “Fertilization of flowers” could hardly have been used as a heading; but late writings have raised it to the status of a subject. There are thousands of possible matters of investigation, some of which are from time to time discussed, but before the catalogue can profitably follow its “specific” rule in regard to them they must attain a certain individuality as objects of inquiry, and be given some sort of name, otherwise we must assign them class-entry.

And it is not always easy to decide what is a distinct subject. Many catalogues have a heading Preaching. Is Extempore preaching a sufficiently distinct matter to have a heading of its own? There are a number of books on this branch of the {47} subject. In this particular case the difficulty can be avoided by making the heading “Preaching without notes.” Many such questions may be similarly solved, with perhaps more satisfaction to the maker of the catalogue than to its users; but many questions will remain.

Then, mixed with this, and sometimes hardly distinguishable from it, is the case of subjects whose names begin within an unimportant adjective or noun,—Are of the meridian, Capture of property at sea, Segment of a circle, Quadrature of the circle. All that can be said in such cases is that, if the subject be commonly recognized and the name accepted or likely to be accepted by usage, the entry must be made under it. For the fuller discussion of compound headings, see §§ 106, 107.

On the other hand, difficulty arises from the public, or a part of it, being accustomed to think of certain subjects in connection with their including classes, which especially happens to those persons who have used classed catalogues or the dictionary catalogues in which specification is only partially carried out; so that there is a temptation to enter certain books doubly, once under the specific heading to satisfy the rule, and once under the class to satisfy the public. The dictionary principle does not forbid this. If room can be spared, the cataloguer may put what he pleases under an extensive subject (a class), provided he puts the less comprehensive works also under their respective specific headings. The objection to this is that, if all the specifics are thus entered, the bulk of the catalogue is enormously increased; and that, if a selection is made, it must depend entirely upon the “judgment,” i. e., the prepossessions and accidental associations, of the cataloguer, and there will be an end to all uniformity, and probably the public will not be better satisfied, not understanding why they do not find class-entry in all cases.

(b.) Choice between person and country.

94. Put under the name of a king or other ruler all his biographies, and works purporting to be histories of his reign; but enter under the country all histories which include more than his reign and accounts of events which happened during the reign, and all political pamphlets not directly criticising his conduct.

The first part of this rule is analogous to that by which the works of a king of a private nature are put under his name, and all his public writings under the country; putting histories of the reign under the king is partly subject- and partly title-entry. Books of this sort have really two subjects and ought to be entered twice (e. g., Boutaric’s “La France sous Philippe le bel”); the rule above is simply an economical device to save room at the expense of convenience. Perhaps a better practice would be to enter all lives of kings as well as histories of their reigns under the country only, with a reference from the king.

Similarly there are some biographies and autobiographies which have such a very large proportion of history that they ought to appear both under the man and the country. In general we merely refer from the country, but occasionally nothing but double entry will suffice. Whether they shall appear by way of entry or merely be mentioned in a note, must be determined by circumstances.

(c.) Choice between event and country.

95. Events [37] or periods [38] in the history of a country which have a proper name may be entered under that name with a reference from the country; those whose name is common to many countries [39] should be entered under the country.

(d.) Choice between subject (or form) and country.

96. The only satisfactory method is double entry under the local and the scientific subject—to put, for instance, a work on the geology of California under both California and Geology, and to carry out this practice through the catalogue, so that the geographical student shall not be obliged to search for works on California under Botany, Geology, Natural history, Palæon­tol­ogy, Zoölogy, and a dozen similar headings, and the scientist shall not be sent to California, England, Russia, and a score of other places to find the various treatises on geology. But as this profusion of entry would make the catalogue very long, we are generally obliged to choose between country and scientific subject.