Impregnation Archive
🔞 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻
Impregnation Archive
-15
-14
-13
-12
-11
-10
-09
-08
-07
-06
-05
-04
-03
-02
-01
+01
+02
+03
+04
+05
+06
+07
+08
+09
+10
+11
+12
+13
+14
+15
-15
-14
-13
-12
-11
-10
-09
-08
-07
-06
-05
-04
-03
-02
-01
+01
+02
+03
+04
+05
+06
+07
+08
+09
+10
+11
+12
+13
+14
+15
Search Metadata
Search text contents
Search TV news captions
Search radio transcripts
Search archived websites
Advanced Search
Full text of " Subject Classification, Ed.2 "
See other formats
SUBJECT
CLASSIFICATION
With Tables, Indexes, etc., for the
Subdivision of Subjects
n\
JAMES DUFF BR0WN
Author of
Mdiiual of Librnry Economy" : "Library Cl assijication and Cataloguing" :
"Biographical Dic^onary of Musicians" ; "Characteristic Songs
and Dances of all Nations," etc., etc.
SECOND EDITION, REVISED
LONDON
GRAFTON & CO., 6g, Great Russell Street, Bloomsbury, W.C.
1914 .
Dedicated to
THOMAS GREENWOOD,
Leader of the Modern Libraty Movement,
AS A tribute to his GREAT AND USliFUL
Educational Work.
Contents
Preface
Introduction . .
1. Preliminary . .
2 . —
3. Constant Place
4. Classification versus Cataloguing
5. General Principles
6. Ord^r of Main Classes
7. The* Notation
8. National Numbers
9. New ^■•Numbers
10 . SUBJECT3
11. Categorical Table . .
jjt Application of System, General
f •
13 *
Composite Books
1
M
Locality versus Subject
^ 5 . -
BY Classes, General,^ . .
16. —
— A, Generalia
17 * -
- B-D
18. -
— Architecture
19.
— Music
20. —
— Poetry and Music
•
21.
— E-I
22. • —
•
J-K
23 - —
— M
24. —
0 -W
25. SpEcfAL Local Collections
PAGE
• , 5
7 .
7
8
9
10
11
II
• 13
• 13
• 14
• 15
• 15
■ 17
. 18
. 18
20
20
21
22
22
22
22
• ■ 23
•• 23
.. 24
.. 24
PAGii
26. Biography . . . .
27. Criticism, Ana,* etc.
28. Biographical Numbers for Subdivisional Purposes
29. Numbering of Books
30. Author Numberc : Book Letterings . .
31- — — Accession Numbers
^32- — — Biographical Numbers
33. — — Cutter Marks
34- — -- Merrill Marks . . ... ^. . .
35. — — Three-letter Plan
36. Tii'le or Book Numbers '
37. Copy Numbers
38. Chronological I^Iumbers
39. — Biscoe System
40. — Extended System
41. Juvenile Book Marks .. .. y.
42. Controversial SuB^tect-Marks •
43. Book Sizes
44. The Index (description) . .
45. Aids to Classification
46. Table for arranging an Author’s Works . . . . '
47. Table for arranging a County
48. Hints for Practical Application
Categorical Tables
— Index
Table of Main Classes
Summary Table of Main Classes and Abbrevi.ated Symbols
Classification Tables''
Index to Classification Tables
24
f
25
25
■* .
26
26
26
27 *
27
27
28
28
^9
29
29
29
32
^.34
35
36
39
49
61
62
234
Preface
T his system of Classification has been compiled in response to a
demand from many librarians in the United Kingdom for a greatly
extended" version of the Adjustable Classification, which was
published in 1898. That system was not fully indexed, and its
main classes and divisions are only worked out in detail here and there,
ta suit the needs of the smaller British municipal libraries. There was,
in consequence, jilenty of room for a much more elaborate and complete
scheme, suited to the requirements of British librrA'ies of all kinds and
sizes, an^i this system of Subject Classification is the result. Its plan and
method of application are set out so fully in the Introduction, that there
is no need to explain here /he principles of its construction or aim. The
attempt to supply a. complete classification of literature for libraries and
general edycdtional purposes could be justified dh many grounds, but it
will be sufficient to claim that a simple, fairly logical and practical method
hq^. long been wanted in British libraries.
My best thanks are due to various librarians, and others, who have
aid(*d me with suggestions and plied me with unstinted criticism. Without
such help the work would be much more incomplete than it is, and I have,
Aerefore, to express my gratitude for the stimulus and aid- afforded in
so many ways by numerous specialists in different departments of know-
ledge. In partierjj^ar I owe very warm thanks to Mr. James D. Stewart,
of the Islington f^ublic Libraries, who aided in the laborious work of indexing
^the scheme, and by his practical acquaintance with other systems, ^nd
the work of ^applying strict classification to books, greatly lessened the
^rrj^lgery of cxiiiipilation. I am alsr. indebted^ to Miss Alice Jones,
of the Islington Public Libraries, for carefully reading the proofs.
Notificariops of errors and omissions will be thankfully received and
acknowledged.
This second editioilf contains corrections of errors found in the original
issue, and^a few suggestions which have been made from time to time.
The scheme has been received with more favour fhan its author expected,
and more than a score of British libraries have adopted it ill practice. Some
friendly criticism has been passefd, but nothing of a very serious nature.
The separation of the Arts and Sciences is still upheld by some of the critics,
but as time goes on and it is found that theory and application are now
being taught together, instead of being treated as different things, 'chis
kind of objection will gradually die out. Only one critic has objected to
the categorical numbers, and several writers have pleaded the cause of a
relative '' index, that is an index cluttered up with standpoints of every
kind and form. This is an apparatus for cataloguing, not for classifying
books, and it may be mentioned that every published index on this principle
has been found imperfect, selective and confusing. These and some minor
matters lun^e been criticised, but, on the whole, very little of a destructive
nature has appeared.
It has been tested in a number of libraries, and has been found most
efficient and comprehensible by the general run of readers and the staffs
of public libraries. the alterations originally published in the Library
World, 1909, have been carried into this edition, and the errors which have
been noticed by different users have been corrected. Plenty of margin
is allowed all through the scheme for differences of opinion as to the correct
places of certain subjects, and no attempt is made, as in otlw schemes,
to fetter the judgmehijt of the users. After all, a classification scheme
is just as susceptible of different interpretations as a piece of ' music, and
it is hopeless for any one to try and force one hard and fast reading on all
others. Perhaps it will be possible in the futune to prepare an editioibof
this classification fitted with examples, and aids to interpretation, which
will facilitate and simplify its application.
JAMES DUFF BROWN.
15, Canonbury Park South,
I.ondon, N,
NOTE. — The revision of this work for the present edition was
completed by Mr. Brown shortly before his death. The task of seeing
the volume through the press, therefore, has been comparatively easy,
and the Publishers hhve taken every care to ensure accuracy, fliss
Alice Jones has again been responsible for reading the proofs, and
%
to her thanks are due.
Communications regarding the Classification ^and its use should be
addressed to me, c/o the Publishers.
JAMES D. STEWART.
Introduction.
1 . Some observations on the theory of Classification are perhaps
necessary, before entering upon a detailed explanation of the meth\)d of
applying this scheme to books or libraries.
For many hundreds of years it has been a pet exercise of philosophers
and logicians to arrange the varied constituents^ of human knowledge
according to scfxne w8ll-ordered plan, which would assemble in one place,
and in immediate proximity to kindred topics, all the books or facts relating
to a specific subject. Most of these plans have been discussed at great’
length ; some have been approved with reservations, and others condemned
©utright without reservation. Some of them are the work of great thinkers,
and others the experiments of practical men of affairs, in quest of labour-
saving ^devices to facilitate business. No single system of classification
succeeds in just exactly suiting its user, or satisfying the demands of other
classifiSrs, from which it may be judged that the whole subject is one of
immense difficulty and complexity. To begin with, very few men of science
or philosophical theorists can agree as to the exact order of progression
to be ol^er ved in the arrangement of the main divisions of human know-
ledge. Each, according to his training or prepossessions, will seek to
place his^o^n pet subject of study in the foreffont of the sequence, and
let all subjects of less personal interest tail off into an indefinite perspective
of diminishing value. Thus, the physical science specialist will argue
1^!at force and radiatioi^ are the genesis of all actions, thoughts or accom-
plishments, and will therefore plan his scheme of classification to show
Physics c?ccupying a leading or central* position, from which will be
dSminated every other science or study. On the other hand, the historical
classifier will show in his scheme that the physical sciences are a mere
incident in the progress of the wofttl from prehistoric to present times,
and promptly relegate them to one of the many annexes of General History,
as a useful but by no means indispensable collateral study. The meta-
physician will daim pride of place for his special study, on the ground
that Ideas precede either matter or record, and will then spread out the
foundations of knowledge according to a radically different conception of
their relative values and kinds. The sociologist will tell you that nothing
in the whole course of human endeavour possessed the slightest significalice
1^11 mankind became formed into society, with groups capable of iscussing
all kinds of phenomena, and so he will make every other subject a minor ,
detail in the predominating sociological structure. But the jurist will
tell you* that such an order is erroneous, as nothing could be discussed,
or even formulated, till the establishment of Law in all its varied intricacies.
To this the theologian will retort that only Divine Law can be recognised
as the foundation of human knowledge, and proceed to show that science,
history, ^aw, and art are but different manifestations of religious belief.
7
SUB JECT CLA SSIFICA TION.
The mathematician will tell youtthat everything in existence is but an
expression of Number ; while the logician will claim that only reason
and system can be properly taken as a basis for classification. As for
the chemist ! Finally, the anthropologist will come along and sweep
every one of the preceding claimants, and all others, into his capaci6hs
net, and calmly assert that his study is Man in all his aspects, and that
every human science Ls, therefore, but a branch of Ethnology.
2, The result of these many claims to sovereignty, preferred on behalf
of such a number of important sciences, is that Classification has become
a mere battlefield for theorists, from which nothing of a very definite or
permanent kind has emerged. Systems of classification to suit every
theory have been devised, and, in addition, schemes have been prepared
in which attempts hav^ been made to meet the needs of every specialist,
by endeavouring to gather at one place everything relating to his special
.subject. The result is that the special schemes based on particular
theories, or which treat some select science as paramount, fail because of
their limitations outside the favoured field ; while the universal schemes,
which try to specialize for everybody, fail because they are swollen b}’
endless and needless repetitions, and then do not meet the minor needs
of the specialist. c
It is inevitable that these failures should result from any attempt
to classify human knowledge from particular standpoints. The depart-
ments of human knowledge are so numerous, their intersections so great,
their changes so frequent, and their variety so confusing, that it is impossible
to show that they proceed from one source or germ, or that they can be
arranged so that each enquirer will find the complete literature of his
special subject at one fixed place. Subjects overlap and qualify each
other in every conceivable manner, and they are further complicated by
considerations of literary form and the points of view from w^hich they
may be studied. Every subject is capable of being treated from a large
number of standpoints, and each of these may be the centre of an enormous
literature, and form an important study. To illustrate this, I shall assume
that there are some thousands of books existing, which have for their
theme the Rose in every conceivable aspect. This subject may be con-
sidered from any of the following standpoints : —
Biological, Botanical, Horticultural, Historical, Geographical, Ethical,
Decorative, Legal, Emblematical, Bibliographical, Poetical, Musical,
Sociological, and so on, to any extent.
Works about the Rose may assume the form of Dictionaries, Periodicals,
Societies, Catalogues, and so forth ; while it may also be considered in
reference to Costume, Perfumery, Therapeutics, and similar subjects.
Now, it is quite evident that, while there would be enormous practical
convenience to the Rose student in having all his material gathered*
together at one place, so that the literature of the subject would appear
in a sequence of forms, categories and standpoints, the same advantage
would not be gained by the perfumer, gardener, botanist or bibliographer,
who wanted to find all his material assembled at one place. The problem
to be solved becomes, therefore — Is it better to assen^ble at a specific place,
or at a more general place, the literature of a concrete subject ? To show
it more graphically, let m(^ take the case of a work entitled Bibliography
INTRODUCTION,
0^ the Rose and show the aspect of g,the problem when displayed iii
tabular form under general and more local heads : — -
General System.
Local System.
Bibliography, General.
M760 . 2 — Encyclopaedias
M760 . 7 — Periodicals
M760 . 10 — Histories
Special subjects —
M760 . 183 Architecture
M760 . 37 1 Biology
M760.441 Botany
M760E570 Rosales
M760E600 Roibe
E600
Rose, General
E600 . 1
— Bililiography
E60O . 2
— Encyclopaedias
E60O . 7
~ Periodicals
E600 . 10
Historv
It certainly appears that the balance of advantage lies with the
assignment*'of the subject to a local head in this particular instance, but
it would, in the case of a collection of books, deprive the bibliographer of
]^art of his material. On the other hand, it must be argued that if the
liibliographer is able to have all the general and abstract bibliographical
works g^ithered at one place, it will just be as coi^venient for him to go
elsewhere for the special literature of subjects not of themselves biblio-
graphical. It is further to be considered to whom such a l)ook as The
Bibliography of the Rose would most appeal, and here there can be no
disputing thcT fact that th^ rose lover would be in an enormous majority.
For this •reason, and it has a wide general apjdication, I incline to think
that, in book classification, the constant or concrete subject should be
preferred# to the more general standpoint or ^'occasional subject. The
topic Rose is concrete ; that of Bibliography is standpoint, and should
remain subordinate whenever possible in Classification. But this does
fibt prevent anyone who prefers to use a general head from doing so, as
it is only necessary in such a case to apply the general number and qualify
or subdivide by the categorical tables, or •by combining specific numbers
frdm the classification tables.
^ 3, Constant Place. — In assigning places for a large number of books
or topics, there is often a choice oriered between two or rgore enquirers
or specialists, and it lies with the classifier to decide which of these has
the strongest claim. In general libraries the difficulty can be overcome
in many cases by determining how far the subject has constant or only
occasional interest for the enquirer. In the case of a book entitled British
Library Laio, the question would arise as to whom such a work* would
be most constantly useful. As the librarian is daily engaged in applying
the law which regulates his work and defines some of his powefs, it is
►iwfectly clear^that to him, rather than to a lawyer, the book is constantly
useful. A lawyer may never have occasion to refer to Library Law in
the whole course of his professional career, or may only do so on a few
special occasions, consequently the librarian must, in this case, have the
preference. Again, a book entitled Library Architecture is exactly in the
same position. It mtiy never be required by an architect, but is almost
inevitablv required for constant reference by a librarian, and its place
is, therefore, with other books on librarianship. Buildings are designed
9
SUBJECT CLASSIFICATION.
to meet certain requirements anc\ to perform certain work. An architect
simply follows out certain instructions and carries out merely temporary
duties in devising a building according to certain recognised principles of
construction. He does not originate the purpose or main arrangements
of the building, nor has he to work it as a machine afterwards. All iliis
is done by a different kind of specialist, who only employs the architect
as an occasional aid. Such special works as books on the architecture of
libraries, churches, slaughter-houses, barracks, hospitals, baths, qtc., have,
therefore, no special right to be arbitrarily placed under the general class
of afchitecture, but should be put with their actual subjects, where they
would be in compamtively constant demand, and close to all relative
aspects of this topic./ These are strong reasons why, in general libraries,
only general and intimately germane subjects should be made the essential
divisions of a main class. Subjects which are not general, but feed a
more constant demand, should appear as divisions or subdivisions, or
categories of the classes to which they are constantly germane. It would
be possible to give many other examples to prove the utility of this rule
of preferring a constant to an occasional
Wife Zoophilia
Tranny Schlong
My Mom Ate My Pussy