_Ex._ «Architecture.» _See also_
«Arches»;—«Baths»;—«Bridges»;—«Cathedrals»;—«Fonts»;—[and many other
things built];
_also_ «Carpentry»;—«Drawing»;—«Metal-work»;—«Painting»;—[and many
other means or methods of building];
_also_
«Athens»;—«Berlin»;—«Boston»;—«Milan»;—«Rome»;—«Venice»;—«Verona»;—[and
many other cities whose buildings are described];
_also_
«Arabia»;—«Assyria»;—«Egypt»;—«France»;—«Greece»;—«India»;—«Italy»;—[and
many other countries whose architecture is described].
258. When the titles are numerous under a subject-heading divide them,
but avoid subdivision.
It may not be best to adopt strictly the same method in the
subdivisions under countries that was recommended for government
publications. There are advantages in both the following plans. The
second is the dictionary plan pure and simple; the first is a bit
of classification introduced for special reasons into a dictionary
catalogue, and perhaps out of place there. It is, however, the one
which I have adopted for the catalogue of the Boston Athenæum.
(1.) Dictionary Catalogue with a Bit of Classification
[Name of country.]
Administration.
Agriculture.
Antiquities.
Architecture.
Army.
Art.
Biography.
Botany.
Calendar.
Ceremonies.
Charities.
Climate.
Colonies.
Commerce and Trade.
Costume.
Description and Travels.
Ecclesiastical history.
Education.
Entomology.
Finance.
Folk-lore.
Foreign relations.
Geology.
Heraldry.
Herpetology.
History.
Bibliography.
General works.
Chronological arrangement.
Ichthyology.
Industry.
Language.
Bibliography.
General and miscellaneous works.
Composition.
Conversation and Phrases.
Correspondence.
Dialects.
Dictionaries.
Epithets.
Etymology.
Exercises.
Grammar.
Historical grammars.
History.
Homonyms.
Pronunciation and spelling.
Prosody.
Readers (for foreign languages).
Rhymes.
Synonyms.
Law.
Bibliography.
History.
General works.
Literature.
General
Bibliography.
History (including lives of authors).
Collections.
Manuals.
Selections for reading and speaking.
Ballads and songs.
Dialogues.
Drama.
Eloquence or oratory.
Epigrams.
Epitaphs.
Essays.
Fables.
Fairy tales.
Fiction.
Legends.
Letters.
Parodies.
Periodicals.
Poetical romances.
Poetry.
Popular literature.[68]
Prose romances.[69]
Satire.
Sonnets.
Wit and humor.
Malacology.
Manufactures.
Medicine.
Mineralogy.
Money.
Music.
Names.
Natural history.
Navy.
Naval history.
Numismatics.
Ornithology.
Palæontology.
Philosophy.
Politics.
Population.
Public works.
Registers.
Religion.
Sanitary affairs.
Science.
Social distinctions.
Social life, Manners and customs.
Social science.
Statistics.
Technology.
Theatre.
Theology.
Zoölogy.
Etc.
(2.) Dictionary Catalogue Pure and Simple
[Name of country.]
Administration.
Agriculture.
Antiquities.
Architecture.
Army.
Art.
Ballads and songs.
Bibliography.
Botany.
Calendar.
Ceremonies.
Charities.
Climate.
Colonies.
Commerce.
Composition.
Conversation and Phrases.
Correspondence.
Costume.
Description and Travels.
Dialects.
Dialogues.
Dictionaries.
Drama.
Ecclesiastical history.
Education.
Eloquence or oratory.
Entomology.
Etymology.
Epigrams.
Epitaphs.
Epithets.
Exercises.
Fables.
Fairy tales.
Fiction.
Finance.
Foreign relations.
Geology.
Grammar.
Heraldry.
Herpetology.
History.
Bibliography.
General works.
Chronological arrangement.
Homonyms.
Ichthyology.
Language.
Bibliography.
History.
General and miscellaneous works.
Law.
Bibliography.
History.
General and miscellaneous works.
Legends.
Letters.
Literature.
Bibliography.
History.
General and miscellaneous works.
Collections.
Malacology.
Manufactures.
Medicine.
Mineralogy.
Money.
Music.
Names.
Natural history.
Navy.
Naval history.
Numismatics.
Ornithology.
Palæontology.
Parodies.
Periodicals.
Philosophy.
Poetical romances.
Poetry.
Politics.
Popular literature.[68]
Population.
Pronunciation.
Prose romances.[69]
Prosody.
Public works.
Registers.
Religion.
Rhymes.
Sanitary affairs.
Satire.
Science.
Social distinctions.
Social life, Manners and customs.
Social science.
Sonnets.
Spelling.
Statistics.
Synonyms.
Technology.
Theatre.
Theology.
Wit and humor.
Zoölogy.
Etc.
Note, however, that if the subordination under Language and Literature
is objected to, it is very easy to make them independent headings in
the main alphabet, having
instead of
«Italy.» _Description._
_History._
_Language._
_Literature._
_Natural history._
the headings
«Italian language.»
«Italian literature.»
«Italy.» _Description._
_History._
_Natural history._
Of course different countries will require different divisions, e.
g., _Ecclesiastical history_, _Mythology_, _Religion_, _Theology_
will not often be required for the same {97} country. And often
it will be expedient to combine those divisions in which there are
very few titles into one more general; thus _Botany_, _Herpetology_,
_Ichthyology_, _Zoölogy_, would join to give _Natural history_ a
respectable size, and _Geology_, _Mineralogy_, _Palæontology_,
_Physical geography_ would combine, or in very small countries all
these would go together under _Description_. Under some countries
other divisions will be required; in the list are given only those in
actual use; but the arrangement is elastic and admits of new divisions
whenever they are needed. In regard to a few (such as _Epitaphs_,
_Fables_, _Names_, _Proverbs_) there is room for doubt whether they
ought to be under countries; whether the subject cohesion is not much
stronger than the national cohesion. Many others are not usually
put here (as _Numismatics_, _Philosophy_, _Religion_, _Science_,
_Theology_, _Zoölogy_). The former usage was to put under the country
only its history, travels in it, and the general descriptive works;
and books that treated of the Art, Architecture, Ballads, Botany,
Drama, etc., of that land were put with the general works on Art,
Architecture, etc. But the tendency of the dictionary catalogue is
towards national classification; that is, in separating what relates
to the parts of a subject, as is required by its _specific_ principle,
it necessarily brings together all that relates to a country in every
aspect, as it would what relates to any other individual.
It may be asked (1) why the parts of _Natural history_ are here
separated and the parts of _Language_ and _Literature_ not; and (2)
why we do not divide still more (following out the dictionary plan
fully), so as to have divisions like _Liliaceæ_, _Cows_, _Horses_. As
to (2), in a library catalogue of a million volumes it would no doubt
be best to adopt rigidly this specific mode of entry for the larger
countries; for a catalogue of one or two hundred thousand, arrangement
in classes is as well suited to quick reference and avoids the loss of
room occasioned by numerous headings. With few books minute division
has a very incomplete appearance, specialties occurring only here
and there, and most of the titles being those of general works. This
may be compared to the division of a library into alcoves. One of
from 10,000 to 20,000 volumes has an alcove for Natural History; from
20,000 to 50,000 it has alcoves for Botany and for Zoölogy; from
50,000 to 100,000 it has alcoves for Birds, Fishes, Insects, Mammals,
Reptiles, but it must be either very large or very special before it
allows to smaller divisions of Zoölogy separate apartments. On an
expansive system it is easy to make new alcoves as they are wanted;
a similar multiplication by fission is possible in the successively
enlarging editions of a printed catalogue. A card catalogue, designed
for continuous growth, should have more thorough division than can
be put into print, because it must look into the future, while the
printed catalogue has no future.
As to (1) I can only say that the divisions of _Language_ seem to me
too intimately connected to be dispersed in catalogues of the present
size, but that those of _Literature_ have a more substantive existence
and ought to be separated sooner. A double subdivision, however, ought
to be avoided. Under _Language_ there should be only one alphabet. It
is better to arrange
«Greece.» _Language._
_Accents._
_Dictionaries._
_Ellipses._
_Etymology._
_Grammar._
_History._
_Particles._
_Pleonasms._
_Pronunciation._
_Syntax._
than
_Dictionaries._
_Etymology._
_Grammar._
_Accents._
_Ellipses._
_Particles._
_Pleonasms._
_Pronunciation._
_Syntax._
_History._
Any subdivision of the groups under countries has been strongly
opposed as being troublesome to make, useless, and even confusing, or
as being an unlawful mixture of classed and dictionary cataloguing.
But suppose you have four or five hundred {98} titles under «France.»
_History._ Will you break them up into groups with such headings as
_House of Bourbon_, _Revolution_, _Empire_, _Restoration_, etc., with
references and other devices for those works which treat of several
periods, all of which it must be confessed is a little formidable
at first glance, or will you leave them in one undivided mass, so
that he who wants to find the history of the last half of the 15th
century must read through the 500 titles, perhaps, to find even one
and certainly to find all? You would divide of course. It is true that
grouping may mislead. The inquirer must still be careful to look in
several places. The history of France during the ascendency of the
House of Valois is to be found not merely under that heading but in
the comprehensive histories of the country. The inquirer may be a
little less likely to think of this because the titles of these two
groups are separated from the many other titles which have nothing to
do specially or generally with the House of Valois, but if he does
think of it he is greatly assisted by such segregation.
[note] 68. Not meaning novels, but broadsides, chap-books, and the
like,—the literature of the people in times past.[/note]
[note] 69. Again not meaning novels, but the romances of chivalry,
etc.[/note]