  Noblemen. Title v. Family Name. Double Subject-Entry. Oriental Names. Indian Names. Japanese and Chinese Names. Hebrew Names. Maori Names. Whether noblemen are to be entered in the catalogue as authors or subjects, the question of entry by title or family name requires careful consideration. Difference of opinion exists on this point. This difference is carried into the codes of rules, the Library Association of this country, curiously enough, advocating entry by the family name, whereas the American Association, ignoring the republican tradition, recommends entry under the latest title. This latter recommendation is certainly far more convenient, because, as a rule, the title is better remembered, even in cases of recent "creations." Those who make any large use of the Dictionary of National Biography know how troublesome it is in this respect, invariably entailing two references. For the catalogues of popular libraries, entry under the latest and highest title is by far the most convenient and satisfactory, while no possibility of mistake can arise if references are given in doubtful cases from the family name to the title, or from an earlier and lower to a later and higher title. Some illustrations of such names are the following:—
Under the rule in the English Code (Joint-Code) this would be given as
For the former entry no reference is needed from Primrose to Rosebery, but in the latter the reference from Primrose is absolutely indispensable. The indexer of a lately-published book on dress gets over the difficulty in a very easy if unsophisticated way by entering under "Lord," after this manner Lord Beaconsfield, how dressed, 235 It is of importance to have the books entered under the highest title attained at the time the catalogue is published. The two undermentioned books illustrate this point. The first is described as by "the late Alexander, Earl of Crawford and Balcarres, Lord Lindsay, Etc.," and the second as by "Lord Balcarres." We distinguish between them and enter in this way
This latter work being published while the author was Lord Balcarres necessitates the reference Balcarres, Lord. See Crawford and Balcarres, which will fit any Earl of Crawford who might have published a book while using the courtesy title of When the title of a nobleman is adopted for the entry in cases where he has written books before being raised to the peerage, it is essential that the reference from his former name be given, particularly if it differs from the title he has assumed, as Lubbock, Sir John. See Avebury, Lord. If the family name and the title are alike, or almost so, the reference is seldom necessary, as the two names come near together. Examples are:— Courtney of Penwith, Lord (Leonard H. Courtney). In the event of there being many entries under the names of Courtney and Morley, the references are required. In arranging these names for order they would, of course, precede those of commoners, irrespective of the alphabetical order of the secondary parts, that is to say "Courtney of Penwith, Lord," comes before, say, "Courtney, Abram." As "exceptions which prove the rule," there are a few noblemen who are decidedly better known and are always referred to by their family names, of which two outstanding instances are Francis Bacon (Viscount St. Albans) and Horace Walpole (Earl of Orford). The subject-entries for the three books given above are
There is no occasion to distinguish between the Earls of Crawford in the sub-entries except in the very remote possibility of two of them having written on the same subject. The book on Italian sculpture raises a very troublesome question in connection with subject-entries for the dictionary catalogue, namely, whether double entry is required or not. The youthful beginner may be told here, as a kind of aside, that there is no third subject to this book, it has nothing to do with "Evolution" as such. The book is not upon sculpture as a whole, but upon that subject with a geographical (or national) limitation, yet the prominence of Italian sculpture in that art calls for an entry under "Sculpture," as shown above. The book, moreover, is not specifically upon Italian art, but only upon a phase of it, yet those who want to study Italian art in all its aspects must have their attention directed to it. Accordingly we either need an entry, as
or the more economical reference:— Italy: When space is a consideration, then the reference will suffice, but where it can be afforded, double entry is advised. If there are many entries under such a heading it can be sub-divided to simplify reference—divisions as "General," "Greek and Roman," "Italian," "British," suggest themselves, though the amount of sub-division usually depends upon the material to be arranged. The heading need not necessarily be the geographical one (Italy), as here shown; a term more direct, say "Italian Art," might be chosen. In any case a book of this definite character would not be entered under "Art" in the dictionary catalogue, sculpture being but a branch of the Fine Arts, as also are painting and architecture. The heading "Art" then would be reserved for books dealing with art generally, including all the arts, or, at least, the two principal, painting and sculpture, which people mostly mean when speaking of art, though in no case must the valuable guiding reference be omitted Art: Furthermore, there is no reason why this heading should not be reserved for books upon art generally without a qualification, and the books upon national art be placed under the names of the country concerned, with a further reference of a comprehensive nature, to this effect Art: Though not quite in the same category, by far the most troublesome names the cataloguer has to contend with are the Oriental, both of the far and near East. They are increasingly coming under notice, not only attached to translations, but to books written in English, and have to be reckoned with for the catalogues of even comparatively small libraries. If the cataloguer should stumble in his selection of the name under which he makes the entry, he has the satisfaction of knowing that he errs in good company, with the further consolation of believing that there will be few who know enough to discover his mistake, though these facts will be no justification, and should only serve to put him on his guard. In Abdullah Yusuf-Ali's Life and labour of the people of India (1907) we read:— "If Miss Toru Dutt were to come to life again, and had nothing better to do than go to the British Museum, she would never be able to trace her own book from the Catalogue. Her name is to be found neither under Dutt nor under Toru, but as Tarulata Datta. Mrs. Naidu's name appears under S. as Sarojini Nayadu. Perhaps some sympathy might be extended to the Frenchman who never could understand why names were treated so badly in England; there was one he knew which they wrote as Marjoribanks and pronounced as Chumley! To be consistent the British Museum Catalogue ought (especially after the recent spell This is quoted for what it is worth, though coming as it does from a native source and from one who can also write in English, it is entitled to great respect. The following paragraph taken from The Westminster Gazette is helpful in this connection:— "The usually full telegrams from India during the past week have furnished several examples of that perpetual puzzle the proper use of Indian names. Both the home and the Anglo-Indian Press are apt to stumble, and to an Indian reader their mistakes must be as amusing as the 'Lord Balfour' and 'Sir Morley' of certain French newspapers are to us. As a rule, the blunders occur in reference to Parsee or Bengali names. Roughly speaking, every Bengali man has three names. The first is his given name, the second is conventional or honorific, the third is the patronymic, analogous to an Irish or Scottish clan-name. For example, Dr. Rash Behari Ghose (who should have been president of this year's National Congress), Mr. Romesh Chandra Dutt (the historian and ex-Civil servant), Bepin Chandra Pal (the well-known agitator). In each case the important names are the first and third; the second cannot be used without the first, though in certain forms of address the third is omitted. Thus, while it is permissible to speak of Dr. Rash Behari, Reuter is quite wrong with his 'Dr. Behari Ghose.' Similarly, the Times should not speak of 'Mr. Chandra Pal,' nor the Morning Post of 'Babu Banerjea.' We may say 'Bepin We may take a book by way of illustration, and examine it for cataloguing. The title-page of that chosen reads The Tarikh-i-Rashidi of Mirza Muhammad Haidar, DughlÁt. A history of the Moghuls of Central Asia. An English version edited, with commentary, notes, and map by N. Elias. The translation of E. Denison Ross. London, Sampson Low, &c. 1895 Upon somewhat general principles—too general to be always reliable—the entry in such names is usually made under the first name, which in this instance is Mirza, the author being referred to throughout the preface as Mirza Haidar, though it appears that other European writers have called him Haidar Mirza. In some parts of Asia the reversal of the name in this way makes considerable difference; when "Mirza" leads it means simply "Mr." or "Esq.," but at the end of the name it is equivalent to "Prince," and is so used only by persons who belong to a reigning family. As the writer was a prince, his name could properly be given either way. Mirza being a title and not a name, cannot be the entry-name, yet it is so entered, with other Mirzas, in the Catalogue of the London Library. The British Museum enters the name as "Muhammad Haidar, DughlÁt." For most libraries an entry to the following effect will prove sufficient
The book from which the paragraph criticising the British Museum Catalogue was taken will serve as a further example, though it is a very simple one; the author, apparently appreciating the difficulty his name presents to Westerns, has given it at the end of the preface and on the binding as "A. Yusuf-Ali," though it is in full, Abdullah Yusuf-Ali, on the title-page. This enables us to see that it is correct to treat the name as if it were an occidental one, and the entry is Yusuf-Ali, Abdullah. Life and labour of the For ascertaining the meaning of terms attached to Oriental names, the "List of Oriental titles and occupations with their signification," given in Linderfelt's Eclectic Card Catalog Rules already named is useful. For Indian names such works of reference as Whitworth's Anglo-Indian Dictionary, Beale and Keene's Oriental Biographical Dictionary, and Lethbridge's Golden Book of India are serviceable. Japanese and Chinese names present the same difficulty, though the books themselves often indicate the correct name for entry, especially in translations. Works in the original will necessitate obtaining the aid of an expert, not only for giving the name of the author and stating the subject with which he deals, but for making a transliteration or some rendering suitable for a catalogue entry. On the rare occasions when this is required, there is seldom For the present Japanese names are oftener met with than Chinese, not only attached to translations, but to books written in English and continental languages, and first name entry is not always the correct form. To take two examples in illustration The ideals of the East, with special reference to In the prefaces of these books the writers are referred to as Mr. Okakura and Mr. Markino respectively, therefore, these names may be looked upon as corresponding to, although not actually the same as, the family name in European usage, and the entries are given accordingly
There is every probability that had these books been published in Japan the names of the authors would have been reversed upon the title-pages, as "Okakura Kakasu" and "Markino Yoshio," but that fact does not involve any necessity for references in an English catalogue. Chinese names may need quite different treatment, and, failing any clue as to the correct name for entry, the first given should be taken. The The Light of China. The TÂo Teh King of LÂo Tsze, 604-504 B.C. An accurate metrical rendering, translated directly from the Chinese text, and critically compared with the standard translations, the ancient and modern Chinese commentaries, and all accessible authorities. With preface, analytical index, and full list of important words, and their radical significations. By I. W. Heysinger, M.A., M.D., Author of "Solar Energy, its Source and Mode Throughout the Universe," Etc., Etc. Research Publishing Co., Philadelphia, MDCCCCIII. This is more advertisement than title-page, and the cataloguer renders it all as simply as possible in this way:—
Before proceeding further, these books by Orientals must have subject-entries to complete them. The first is a history of the Mongols, and not of the Mohammedan Empire in India as the title might seem to imply, therefore the entry is
The author's name here cannot be curtailed to "Muhammed H." Two references are needed, none being required from Moghuls to Mongols,
Where names have become so much adapted to the Western style, as the above two, it might be possible to reduce them to "Okakura, K." and "Markino, Y.", though the full form is preferable, even in sub-entries. The Chinese work being by the founder of the religion known as "Taoism," receives an entry accordingly
The necessary reference is China: Hebrew names, those of Jewish rabbis especially, come up occasionally for entry, but a general recommendation to consult the Jewish Encyclopedia (12 v. 1901-6) will suffice. There are many other forms of foreign names, but the foregoing remarks and illustrations will enable the cataloguer to see that no definite rule governing all forms of names, even those of a particular nationality, can be laid down. For instance, to go further afield in the world, no code gives any guidance for Maori names, yet it is conceivable that people of this race may yet figure as authors of English books, even if only sermons, as a number of them are clergymen of the Church of England. So far as Crockford's Clerical Directory serves as a guide, their names appear mostly under "Te," as Te Awekotuku, Te Hana, Te Ngara, Te Raro, but there are no names of the kind in the British Museum Catalogue under "Te," and, therefore, the careful cataloguer will take heed, when the occasion arises, to ascertain exactly the really important and distinguishing part of the name, and enter accordingly. |
|
