Page images
PDF
EPUB

MONTHLY NOTES

OF THE

Library Association

of the United Kingdom.

Ar the Meeting on Friday, May 7, a paper will be read by Mr. HENRY WILSON, Assistant Librarian, British Museum: "Remarks on Facsimile Reproduction."

APRIL MONTHLY MEETING.

THE sixth Monthly Meeting of the third year of the Association was held at the London Institution on Friday, April 2, 1880, at 8 p.m., Professor W. S. JEVONS in the chair.

The minutes of the previous meeting having been read and confirmed, the Chairman called on Mr. B. R. WHEATLEY to read his paper entitled

THOUGHTS ON TITLE-TAKING, TRITE, TRIVIAL, OR TENTATIVE.-No. 1.

Mr. WHEATLEY said: The taking of a title appears a very simple work, and some have spoken of it as a mere copying of words within the capacity of everyone. There can be no objection to the copying of an entire title-page for a special bibliography, but the experience of all who have had to do much cataloguing must lead them to avoid the servile repetition of the wording of a title. There is so much introduced for the sake of appearance or for advertisement, so much that we feel can be of no use to the enquirer, that it seems like being imposed upon, to be tied to the necessity of following literally so much useless verbiage; and it becomes a question whether, even in bibliographical works on rare books, it may not be carried to excess, and whether the complete copying of a title-page is not really an unnecessary and fanciful style of work, for which there is no adequate motive. Is not a catalogue of the nature described in the old clever and amusing anagram of the word, "Got as a clue"? and may not the catalogue title, in some, though of course in a very different degree, bear the same relation to its title-page as an index or title-page does to the book? and may it not therefore bear to that title-page some little proportion of the indicial character? Any of the usual plans of dots, lines, &c., to represent elisions, omissions, &c., can be adopted, but a book must not be considered as badly or improperly catalogued because such and such words have been omitted. The

cultivation of our own judgment in making such omissions will be a more useful object for the employment of our critical faculties. A long list of titles illustrating this point might be made. I have made a copy of one of them as an illustration :"Speculum Polytechnum Mathematicum novum, | tribus visionibus illustre quarum extat | Una Funda- mentalis Aliquot Numerorum Danielis et Apo- | calypseos naturæ et proprie- tatis Consignatio | Altera, usus Hactenus incognitus Instrumenti Da- | nielis Speccelii, ad altitudinum, profun- | ditatum, longitudinum, latitudinumque dimen- siones, nec non Planimetricas delineationes accommodatio | Postrema brevis ac luculenta se- | xies Acuminati Proportionum Cir- | cini quibus fructuose iste adhibeatur enarratio | In omnium Mathesin Adamantium | Emolumentum prius Germanicè æditum | Authore | Joanne Faulhabero Arithmetico | et Logista Ulmensi ingeniosissimo | Posterius vero ne tanto aliæ na- tiones defraudentur bono, Latinè conversum per Joannem Remmelinum, Ph. et Med. | Doctorem | Impressum Ulmæ, typis Joannis | Mederi | MDCXII." The following entry of the title is such as perhaps would answer all the necessary requirements of an ordinary catalogue :-" Faulhaber (Johannes). Speculum Polytechnum Mathematicum novum tribus visionibus, una: Numerorum Danielis et Apocalypseos naturæ consignatio; altera: usus Instrumenti Danielis Speccelii, ad altitudinum etc. dimensiones accommodatio; postrema: sexies Acuminati Proportionum Circini enarratio; prius Germanicè, Latinè conversum per Joannem Remmelinum. 4to. Ulmæ, 1612." The process usually taking place in a library when a book is required does not necessitate the full display of the wording of a title-page; it is the book itself which is wanted, and the shortened form serves this purpose, while the reading of an elaborate titlepage can be obtained from the book itself when found. In choosing our omissions, we ought to make a special point of leaving out all that is a mere expansion of words previously used, while we must enter with care all such phrases as show in what the work is otherwise special or peculiar. There are a certain set of phrases which are frequently met with in old books, such as "Whereunto is added a new and very complete treatise on," "To which is annexed a very particular and instructive account of," "The whole illustrated with elegant sculptures after the life," "With a treatise very profitable and necessary for every man, newly and carefully corrected and amended, and also somewhat enlarged in certain places, on." Most of such pleonastic phrases might be replaced by the preposition "with," in brackets if preferred. One is sometimes inclined to omit short first words, or such as are redundant or unnecessary to the sense, and also Latin words or phrases at the head of titles of English works, which are simply translations of the English words following them; but I have sometimes had reason to doubt the propriety of the omission, from finding that these words have become in the course of time a portion of the familiar quotation of the book, and, therefore, if they are not inserted, doubts may arise as to identity of edition. This refers to

Latin sentences as well as to single words, among the latter of which may be mentioned such works as: Hodges' Loimologia, or Account of the Plague; Deane's Spadacrene Anglica; Crooke's Microcosmographia, &c. Among causes of error in transcription of titles, one sometimes occurs in which the author's name is placed in a position and type totally subsidiary to that of the translator, in order apparently to flatter the vanity of the latter by throwing the name of the author into the greatest possible shade obtainable by small type, while the translator's name appears in letters which, compared with the author's, are like those of the starring actor in theatrical placards. On the bindings of these books and in rapidly compiled catalogues, the translator's name is invariably adopted as that of the author. I may mention an example: "G. L. Bayle's Researches on Pulmonary Phthisis, translated by William Barrow. Liverpool, 1815." At first sight the work is invariably supposed to be Barrow's, the name of Bayle being in small old English type, intentionally so printed. In another work the same object is differently achieved. The book is a translation of Davaine's work on Human Entozoa. In the title Davaine's name does not occur, but the pseudo-author acknowledges a partial indebtedness to him in the preface. The work is really an abridged translation of Davaine's treatise, by Abbotts Smith, though ostensibly a work by the latter. I once met with another simple but singular cause of error in title-taking. It was a small 4to volume in Latin, which at first sight I catalogued as by Herman Conringius. The work was "Twelve Books on the Chief Controversies in the Art of Surgery," an 66 "opera posthuma, nunc primum edita." I was puzzled, however, on turning over the title, to find the dedication signed by the posthumous author, and further, that in the running heading it was stated to be the work of Thomas Fienus. Turning back to the title to endeavour to decipher the mystery, I soon found that the titlepage, which was an engraved one, had a square opening in the centre for the reception of the printed title, but not made sufficiently large for the purpose, and the name of Thomas Fienus had been printed into a dark portion of the engraving, and was thus almost entirely obscured to casual observation. While referring to engraved title-pages, I would add that where a work has two title-pages, one printed and the other engraved, the former should always be taken in preference to the pictured form, as the latter frequently has errors in spelling, either of the author's name or of other important words. Indeed, the engravers appear always to have worked independently of the corrector of the press, and to have had a peculiar idiosyncrasy for variety in their spellings.

Difficulties sometimes occur in the use of the article in French names, leading, when an author has also written in Latin with a Latinized name, to the separation of his works, as: Du Moulin and Molinæus, Descartes and Cartesius, Le Roy and Regius, Le Clerc and Clericus, Joan. de Monteregio and Regiomontanus, and many others. The rule (to be again mentioned subsequently) as to the first of two French names in apposition being the one to be

adopted in alphabetical arrangement, and also applicable to the case where the second name is joined to the first by the preposition "de," has to be sometimes broken when familiar or professional parlance has rendered the second name so common and prevailing as to be the only possible one for use. I need not now refer to the hackneyed case of Voltaire, but I may add a few other illustrations of the point, in those of R. J. Croissant de Garengeot, Guill. Mauquest de La Motte, H. M. Ducrotay de Blainville, &c. The above use of names is easily explicable by the universal instinct toshorten all names brought into constant use, the name which rests last upon the ear soon becoming that adopted for usual parlance by the tongue.

The letter O in names of authors is sometimes a trouble from its usual connexion with the ablative case, and we have to be careful when we come upon such names in titles, as "a Philippo Montalto," "authore Julio Millo," &c., that we do not turn the surnames into us, but give them their right nominatives in o, as Philippus Montalto, and Julius Millo, which will be found by reference to dedication or preface to be the right forms of their names.

There is a famous little work by Nicolas Stenson on the Muscles and Glands, in which the genitive case of the name becomes the cause of trouble. On the title the wording is "Nicolai Stenonis de Musculis et Glandulis Observationum specimen," and you naturally write on your title slip, "Steno (Nicolaus)," as it is generally catalogued; but on turning to the preface you find it is signed Nicolaus Stenonis. I met it once somewhere in the form of Nicolaus Stenonis fil., which probably explains the matter, and is connected with the fact that in the vernacular the name is Nicolas Stenson.

When any antique or doubtful form of spelling occurs in a modern work, it is as well in copying it literatim to add the word [sic] in brackets, as you will find the compositor will otherwise not unfrequently correct your supposed error into the most recent and customary form. When the names of two authors occur as partners in a work, we should not, I think, place the Christian name of the second in parenthesis after the surname, as is often done. The object of the parenthesis being merely to show that the Christian name is removed to the second place for the alphabetical arrangement of the surname, but is to be read first, there can be no reason for repeating the operation with the second name. Honorary titles should not on the same principle be included in the parenthesis, as Brown (John, D.D.), as it gives the reading John D.D. Brown. It seems preferable always to write Brown (John) D.D.

With regard to Christian names, many authors invariably sign with initials, and as it is important for the identification of authors, the Christian name must be sought for in a Biographical Dictionary; but where an author has three or four Christian names, and they are given in full in his work, it will generally suffice to give the first in full, and the rest in initials. I refer to such names as Dietrich Wilhelm Heinrich Busch. In objection to the rule for

putting works under the last initial letter of a concealed name, I
may mention one instance out of many. In Errard's work on
Geometry, published in 1620, we have "reveue par D. H. P. E. M.,”
which are the initials of "D. Henriom, Professeur ès Mathema-
tiques." Other letters which occur frequently before names create
doubts as to their standing for Christian names or not, such as
M., F., P., R., D., &c., which often mean only Monsieur, Frater,
Pater, Reverendus, or Dominus.
or Dominus. You cannot always be guided
by the importance given to names by old printers in their use of
small or large type; appearance, totally irrespective of meaning or
real importance, seeming to be the controlling guide of the
arrangement; take as an instance a work by Ferrarius: IOH.
BAPTISTE Ferrarii Senensis | FLORA..

We want to keep up a casual acquaintance with the Latinized names of towns, for frequently of three names it is excessively difficult to say whether they consist of two Christian names and a surname, or of a Christian name, a surname, and a patronymic, or agnomen from place of birth or residence. Catalogues often contain errors on this point. A careful reference to the characters of the type in which the name is given at the commencement or end of the preface will sometimes relieve our doubts on the subject. Another class of difficult names is when the surname has the appearance of a Christian name, as P. F. Thomas Longueville, which is often erroneously catalogued under Longueville.

It is a great error to invent new works by entering separately portions of title-pages; such tractates should be entered only as part of the general title in which they are found, with cross references from the several names of the authors.

Lines at the commencement of titles should be confined to replacing the repetition of the same author's name. When the same name occurs with different Christian names it should be repeated, as there is a risk, if the lines are continued, of the whole appearing to the eye as the works of the first author named. The repetition of the surname to every work of an author is equally objectionable, as it destroys the possibility of seeing at a glance the extent of each author's works.

With regard to place of publication in our titles, no ibids should be allowed to works published at the same place except when they are the works of the same author. Ibids continued down a page including works of different authors may lead at a future time, when some cutting-up and re-sorting of the catalogue takes place, to an infinity of error as to place of publication.

On the subject of dates, I may mention some varieties which prove difficulties to cataloguers. There is a master-key, which will unlock the mystery of the greater number of them, and this is the simple and common one that all lesser numbers placed before larger ones, or inserted between parts of them, are to be deducted from the larger. In illustration I may mention that I have seen the dates 1609 in the form of MDCVIV, 1599 as MDIC, viz., one less than 1600; and 1698 as MIIDCC, or two from 1700. In an old work, "Mare Liberam," date 1609, there is an uncommon use of I in

L

« PreviousContinue »