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.