_Ex._ “An art journey in «Italy» and «Greece»;” “The history of
«France» and «England» compared;” “Handbook of «drawing» and
«engraving».”
But some of the subjects may be omitted if their treatment is so
slight that it is not worth while to take any notice of them, which is
occasionally the case even when they are mentioned on the title-page.
Sometimes an analytical can take the place of a full entry for the
less important topics. The points to be considered are; (1) Would
this book be of any use to one who is looking up this subject? (2) Is
the entry or reference necessary as a subject-word entry or reference
(that is, to one who is looking for this book)?
Some books are polytopical which do not appear to be so at first
sight. A collection of portraits of Germans, for example, has the
subject «Germans», and so far as it has any artistic value might be
quoted as one of the illustrative works under the subject «Portrait
painting» or «Portrait engraving».[45] If the biographical interest
were all, the general collections would be put under «Portraits»
and the national collections (as “American portrait gallery,” “Zwei
Hundert Bildnisse deutscher Männer”) under countries, with references
from the general heading to the various countries, as directed in
§ 97. If the artistic interest were alone considered, the general
titles would be put under «Portraits», and collections by painters
or engravers of particular schools would be put under the names of
the schools; which would amount to nearly the same arrangement as the
previous.
So in regard to «Hymns»; there are three sources of interest, the
devotional, the literary (which would lead to national subdivision),
and the denominational; a similar treatment would place general
collections under «Hymns», collections in any language under the
national heading, with either double entry under the name of the
denomination or a reference from that to the national heading,
specifying which of the collections there enumerated belong to the
denomination. But the devotional interest so decidedly preponderates
that it has been customary to collect everything under the
form-heading «Hymns».
In Full, almanacs will have form-entry under «Almanacs» and
subject-entry under the district about which they give information.
Sometimes if an ordinary reference be made from one subject to
another the title referred to can not easily be found. A reference
from «Architecture» to «Spain». _Architecture_, is convenient, but
a reference to the same heading from «Gothic architecture» is not,
because it obliges the inquirer to look through the whole list of
Spanish architecture to find perhaps one title on the Gothic. In
like manner there would be few entries of works on vases under most
countries, so that no division _Vases_ would be made, and the inquirer
must search for his book among a number of titles on _Art_. And if
the reference were made the other way—from the country to «Vases»—the
inquirer would be in the same plight. There is no need, however, of
double entry. If merely the name of the particular author or authors
referred to under any subject be inserted in the reference, the whole
difficulty vanishes.
_Ex._ «Gothic architecture.» [Various titles.] _See also_ «Spain»;
_Architecture_ (STREET).
It is to be noted that herein Short has a great advantage; it does not
lose so much {56} by double entry and can afford to make it in many
cases where Medium must for economy put the reader to some trouble.
The notes, too, in such catalogues as the Quincy or the Boston Public
history-list afford a convenient way of briefly inserting considerable
double entry where it is thought expedient without any apparent
inconsistency.
[note] 45. It also belongs to the class «Portraits», but that is in
the Form-catalogue, not the Subject-catalogue.[/note]
110. If a book purports to treat of several subjects, which together
make the whole or a great part of one more general, it may be put
either under each of the special subjects, or under the general
subject, and in the latter case it may or may not have analytical
references from the specific subjects, according as the treatises are
more or less distinct and more or less important.
_E. g._, “A treatise on anatomy, physiology, pathology, and
therapeutics,” which might be put under each of those four headings,
ought rather to be entered under «Medicine», in which case, if the
separate parts are by different authors, analyticals might very well
be made under the four headings; and at any rate an analytical under
the first would occasionally be useful as equivalent to a subject-word
reference.
111. When a considerable number of books might all be entered under the
same two or more headings, entry under one will be sufficient, with a
reference from the others.
On the other hand, if in printing it were noticed that under any
subject only one or two titles were covered by the cross-references
to countries (as from «Sculpture» to «Greece», «Italy», «Denmark»),
it may be thought that double entry under nation and subject would
be preferable. A man is provoked if he turns to another part of
the catalogue to find there only one title. However, it should be
remembered that one or two titles repeated under each of many subjects
will amount to a considerable number in the whole. The want of
uniformity produced by this mixture of reference and double entry is
of less importance.
112. When there are many editions of a book, it is allowable to merely
refer under the subject to the author-entry. In a college library, for
instance, the full entry of all the editions of the classics under
their appropriate subjects (as of the Georgics under «Agriculture», of
Thucydides under «Greek history», and Polybius under «Roman history»)
would be a waste of room; it is enough to mention the best edition and
refer for other editions and translations to the author’s name.
(_l._) _Miscellaneous rules and examples._
113. Trials relating to a vessel should be put under its name; Short
would make no other entry. Exploring expeditious or voyages in a named
vessel should have at least a reference from the name.
_Ex._ «Jeune Eugénie.» MASON, W. P. Report. Boston, 1822. 8º.
«Herald», _H. M. S._, Voyage of the. _See_ «Seemann», B.
114. A civil action is to be entered under that party to it who is
first named on the title-page, with a reference from the other.
In Short (and in Medium and Full, if the report is anonymous) this
will be the only entry,—unless the case illustrates some subject, in
which case entry or reference under that will be needed. Patent cases
furnish the most common examples of subject-entry {57} of trials, but
everyone will remember trials in which points of ecclesiastical law,
of medical jurisprudence, etc., have been so fully discussed as to
compel reference from those subjects.
115. Enter “Review of,” “Remarks on,” “Comments on” under the author
reviewed (as a combined subject and subject-word entry), and, if worth
while, under the subject of the book reviewed.
116. The distinction between «Bibliography» and «Literary history» is,
with reference to the books on those subjects, a distinction of more or
less; the two classes of books run into each other and it is hard to
draw the line between them.