CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION
THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL
I. The Order of the Sciences
II The Classification of Books
Together with an Appendix containing an
Essay towards a Bibliographical History
of Systems of Classification
BY

ERNEST CUSHING RICHARDSON
Librarian

of Princeton

University

THE NEW YORK STATE LIBRARY
SCHOOL
ASSOCIATION
ALUMNI
LECTURES
1900-1901

NEW YORK

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1901

COPYRIGHT,

1901,

BY
ERNEST CUSHING RICHARDSON.

PREFACE.

i

A WORD of explanation is due to the members of the Alumni Association regarding
these lectures. The invitation to deliver them
was a double one; on the one hand from a
representative of the school who wished something on the philosophical order, which should
be a contribution to the theory of library science, and on the other hand from a representative of the alumni who wished something
very practical. The lectures are the result of
an attempt to meet both wishes even at the
risk of falling between two stools.
There is a perhaps small, but very earnest,
number of librarians at the present day who
are extremely anxious that the rising generation of librarians should be thoroughly
grounded in the habit of searching the historical and philosophical basis of their art to
the very bottom. They believe that the real
progress of things in years to come depends
precisely on thpt thing, that there is no danger of any neglect of the most thorough
study of practical method in every aspect,
but that there is danger that the habit of
scientific thought will be neglected. They be-

r
51191

vi
lieve as cordially as any that the scholar without business ability and training is as much
out of place in a library as he would be in
Wall Street, but they believe also and with
equal conviction that the best banker without
literary and scholarly attainment is a ^pitiable
spectacle as a librarian.
This view is perhaps held as concretely at
the Albany Library School as anywhere, although the bibliographical and even palaeographical courses at Pratt Institute and elsewhere are strong symptoms of the same feeling. At the Albany school with its nearly
fifty students, every one college trained, if
anywhere, something of the most scholarly
possible work can be, and is, attempted with
success. It was felt that here, if anywhere,
the attempt might be made to present to students of library science the view that the most
highly philosophical treatment that can be
given to its problems has important bearing
on progress in the most practical details of
the art.
It is by no means intended to claim that
these particular lectures represent adequate
philosophical knowledge or that their conclusions are in any sense final. They are simply
the thinking of this one lecturer along this
line. If there is in them any contribution,
however small, so much the better. The point

Vll

of the lectures, however, was not so much to
reach results as to incite others to scholarly
work. If the lectures fail to reach this end,
whether through being too scholastic or for
any other reason, it will be a matter of regret
to the lecturer, but it will be his fault, not the
fault of the principle.
Of these lectures it may perhaps be said
with some degree of reason that a pure discussion of the order of the sciences seems to
belong rather to the college course itself than
to a library school course. As a matter of
fact, however, the student in college does not
get this —at least does not get it in that intensely practical way in which it comes to
those whose life work will be the interpretation of a system, or perhaps helping in the
evolution of a new system.
As regards the matter in itself considered,
one may sustain the thesis that it is as necessary for a thoroughly first class librarian to
know the philosophical order and divisions of
the sciences as it is for a bridge-builder to
know Mechanics. Those librarians therefore
who say that they "do not see the use" of the
study of incunabula, palaeography, the laws
(rather than the rules) of classification, the
history of libraries, ethics and social conditions as governing and governed by the production and distribution of books, the theory*

Vlll

of literature, etc., etc., have an undoubted
right to their point of view, but that point
of view is not the one calculated to produce
a true librarian.
There are those who seem to think that
anything scholarly leads to unpractically because many of the men represented to be most
learned are unpractical. But are there none
unpractical among the ignorant? Learning
which is not practical is not scholarly but
scholastic. Of learning which is practical
there cannot be too much in any trade. Other
things being equal — heredity, personality and
common sense — the more "learned" a librarian is the better he will buy, the better organize his treasury, secretaryship, shelf and
delivery and all the other departments, the
better too will his books be cataloged, classified and used.
Since the lectures were delivered two observations have been made which require notice here. Mr. E. M. Fairchild, of the Albany
Educational Church Board, has, apropos
of the question of the natural order, called
attention to the fact that the new educators,
not only in colleges but in secondary schools,
are coming to arrange their lines of teaching
according to the "natural" order of the sciences. It follows that if the system of classification in vogue in any library is at variance

ix
in any way with the order in use in the
schools the librarian must be all the more intimate with the scientific order to the end that
he may harmonize, so far as possible, with his
library classification and may guide pupils
who are in the habit of thinking in another
order. The use, therefore, which the library
student will find for a somewhat intimate
familiarity with the relations of the sciences,
theoretically considered, will not be limited
by the use in making or altering a classification or even, what is its chief practical use, in
classifying into it, but will extend to all sorts
of reference work, from that of helping the
special student down to that of helping the
primary school child — or his teacher.
The second observation which calls for notice in this preface is a remark that "coming
from Princeton campus" the lectures may, in
some mysterious way, be calculated to cast an
"odium theologicum" somewhere. The intention of the lecture was distinctly to stop with
the merest reference to theology, and it was
supposed that even this reference had been
sufficiently guarded in speaking of it as the
"theory known as Christianity," etc. However, in the fear that there may still lurk
something explosive in the handling of so
dangerous a subject, even in small quantities, and thereby unjust responsibility be cast

on the Princeton Theological Seminary,
whose professors the lecturer is honored to
know, but with whom he has no official connection whatever, or even odium, theological,
philosophical or otherwise, be cast on the
University with which he is connected, I hasten to say that nobody connected with Princeton save the lecturer himself is responsible
for these views or has even heard that he has
them. Whether the possible odium is because
the views are too orthodox or because they
are too heterodox, informant saith not.
It should perhaps be noted that usage,
which seemed fluctuating as to "ions" or
"corpuscles" when these lectures were written, now seems to have settled on "corpuscles" for fractional atoms.
Orthographic usage is somewhat influenced
by the preferences of the Library Journal,
where these lectures were first published in
part.
ERNEST CUSHING RICHARDSON.
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY, I
March 20,1901.
j"

CONTENTS
PREFACE

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

xi

INTRODUCTION.

I. The nature of classification..

i

2. Kinds of classification

8

.,.

3. Laws or principles of classification
LECTURE I.

n

T H E ORDER OF THE SCIENCES.

I. Divisions and unity

17

II. The order of the sciences the
order of things
III. Organic unity

18
22

IV. Things past and things present
24
V. Ideas as things..

26

VI. The ordering of ideas

27

VII. An hypothetical order

29

VIII. Cosmic history
IX. The order of complexity
X. The order stated

33
39
43

Xll

LECTURE II.

T H E CLASSIFICATION OF BOOKS.

I. Book classification an a r t . . .

46

II. Book classification and card
classification

51

III. The objects and importance
of book classification

53

IV. The kinds of book classification

60

V. Likeness between theoretical
classification and book classification

,

67

VI. Differences between theoretical classification and book
classification

69

1. Making the schedules.. 69
(a) Modification by circumstances
(b) Variation

70

arising

from the nature of
books

72

(c) Differences arising
from intended use. 74
(1) Adjustment
to building

74

xiii
LECTURE II.—Continued.

(2) The princip l e s of
subdivision

76

(3) The quest i o n of
deg ree
and proportion in
s u b d ivision

77

2. Making a notation

80

3. Classification of the card
catalogue
4. The

classification

83
of

books on the shelves.. 83
5. The putting of the books
in their classes

85

VII. Criteria of a practical book
classification
VIII. Conclusion
APPENDIX.

86
87

SYSTEMS OF CLASSIFICATION.

I. Method

9i

xiv
APPENDIX.—Continued.

II. Classification

of

classifica-

tions

93

III. Literature referred to

94

IV. Theoretical systems

100

V. Practical systems.

153

VI. Systems of

current biblio-

graphical periodicals

232

VII. Partial systems of classification

234

VIII. Systems of alphabetical classification
INDEX

235
237

INTRODUCTION.
THE NATURE, KINDS AND LAWS OF CLASSIFICATION.

First by way of introduction, a definition of
terms relating to the nature, the kinds and
the underlying principles or laws of classification.
i

I.

THE NATURE OF CLASSIFICATION.

Classification is in its simplest statement the
putting together of like things, or more fully
described, it is the arranging of things according to likeness and unlikeness. It may
also be expressed as the sorting and grouping
of things.
It is convenient sometimes, to
speak, of "likeness and unlikeness" but really
in classification it is "likeness" which rules
while "unlikeness" is merely what is left over
when likeness has been defined. The "putting together of like things" is therefore the
fullest and most exact form of the definition.
So simple an act as the putting away of a
handful of change in one's purse contains the
gist of a process through which every thing
and every thought in the universe has come

2

into being — the paper money is put in one
compartment, the coin in another and then
perhaps the coin is subdivided again by putting the gold, silver, nickel, or copper each in
a separate compartment. If the money is to
be counted, it will probably be laid on a table,
in groups of paper, gold, silver, etc., these
groups arranged according to value into one
and two cent pieces copper; three and five
nickel; ten, twenty-five, fifty and one dollar
silver; and so on with gold and paper. Into
each group will be put all the pieces of like
material and like value. The money in this
act is fully classified, its pieces have all been
put together according to likeness, first according to material and then according to
value.
This is a mechanical example of what
actually goes on in every process of classification whether of ideas or things. It represents
also the real order of arrangement of things
in the universe —a series of groups and
groups of groups arranged according to degree of likeness from the simplest to the most
complex. What this process leads to will be
discussed under the order of the sciences, but
the process is the same all along the line.
The object at which classification aims is
in every case order or system and its result
is called a system. It starts facing a disorder-

3

ly mass, and aims to reduce this to an orderly
whole.
If this is classification what then is a
thing?
A thing as subject for classification is whatever is; that is to say whatever has separate
existence. Whether its substance is matter o/
motion or spirit is indifferent. If it is, it may
be classified, and if it can be classified it
must be that it is. That is the whole of it.
Identity, sameness, and thing-ness are one
and the same thing. The characteristic of a
thing is that it is itself. It is a and it is not
b. It is discrete, separate and in short subject to definition.
Ideas are therefore the subjects of classification just as much as anything else not only
because they have a material as well as a
spiritual substance but because they are individual separate things existing in a certain
place at a certain time in a certain definable
nature.
Things therefore as the subject of classification include the things in man and the
things outside. The things outside include in
turn the things which make man (nature and
environment) and the things which man
makes or art. Things therefore include nature, ideas and art. Of these man has to do
only with ideas and art. The things of na-

4
ture are already classified, but this classification according to nature may be rearranged
by man and this is art, whether it is plowing,
or breeding, the making of houses, paintings
or books, or yet the reorganization of a man's
ideas in education.
Ideas themselves are therefore of two sorts,
corresponding with the two kinds of outer
things, nature and art. One kind is facing
nature and the other is facing art, but the
operation with either sort is one of classification. Cassification of ideas on the one hand
facing nature is knowledge, and when carried
to perfection is called science. The classification of ideas on the other hand into a
group which never yet has had any likeness in
the outer world, but may have, and is intended to have, is art. The true classification
of the ideas of things that have been, in short
the classification of the sciences, is simply the
order of nature paralleled. The classification into new ideas or art is by this same
token not an imitation of nature and is endless in possible variety.
It must be remembered in this connection that from the standpoint of the individual, I e., the standpoint of knowledge,
everything is an outside thing to a man.save
his own ideas (and perhaps even the major
part of his own ideas.) Everybody's ideas

5

save his own and all art, even his own if
represented in outer things, is "nature." His
business is first to get within himself exact
ideas of these things and second to classify
these exact ideas into a series which shall itself be an exact idea of the order of outer
things. As a race and as an individual man
gets his ideas helter skelter. When he starts
to think they are a disorderly mass, a chaos
of ideas which he must reduce to order by
classification. The final goal of his effort is
exact ideas of everything that is, arranged according to the real order of things in the
universe; the idea, in short, of the whole of
things, a whole which includes ideas and art
as well as nature. The process to that end
is classification or the putting together according to likeness.
What then again is likeness?
Likeness, as the ground of the putting together of things in classification is, in brief
terms, interchangeability — the state in which
some portion or element of any two things
is such that it can be taken from one and put
in the other and vice versa without changing
the real character of each. A homely example of this is the Waltham watch. Take two
machine-made watches of the better type, they
are so nearly alike in all their details that any
part of one may be exchanged for the like

6
part of the other, or vice versa, and both
watches will still go as before. They are
alike in all essential parts.
Likeness is to be distinguished from identity or sameness on the one hand and from
similarity or resemblance on the other. Note
therefore in the case of the watch that the
pieces exchanged are not "the same" or "identical," but "like" pieces, and note also that a
variation of the most trifling kind might stop
both watches. The pieces must on the one
hand do more than resemble or be similar.
They must be alike. They must on the other
hand be less than the "same" piece, otherwise
only one watch could be kept going at a time.
Likeness therefore is neither identity nor
mere resemblance.
Likeness thus on the one hand is less than
identity or sameness. One might possibly call
identity "absolute likeness," i. e.} likeness in
every conceivable respect including the position of each of its smallest parts in space, but
this is forcing language. In this state it is
the same substance.
Absolute likeness, or
likeness complete in every respect, including
position in space is not to be distinguished
from thingness itself, and is better called identity, or sameness.
Likeness might perhaps be described as
identity in kind but not in substance. Like

7
things are of the same kind, but not the same
substance, and here is where a mistake is
oftenest made. We say loosely that two gold
pieces are made from the same substance.
They are not; they are made of like substances or the same kind of substance, but
every molecule of gold is a separate thing by
itself and perhaps even every atom and every
ion of it. Like things are not the same but
equal, and perhaps the fundamental law of
the determination of likeness might be described as the law that things equal to the
same things are equal to one another. Likeness is therefore less than identity.
Likeness on the other hand is more than
resemblance or similarity. These latter may
be well described as partial likeness. Things
are more or less alike according to the amount
which they have in common, i. e. the amount
which can be taken from the one and put in
the other without material disturbance. It is
a mere question of subtraction or better of
algebraic substitution. The difference therefore between likeness and resemblance is the
difference between exactly alike, very much
alike and more or less alike.
We mean thus ordinarily by likeness or
exact likeness, such degree of likeness that no
test or experiment which we can apply will
reveal any condition under which one cannot

8
be substituted for the other. We do not exhaust likeness even in this since even the
minutest atom, which can be substituted for
any other atom of the same kind in every
known chemical compound is supposed to resemble its other atoms not as shot does shot,
but as two grains of sand, each with its own
individualities.
2.

KINDS OF CLASSIFICATION.

Classification being the putting of things
together according to likeness, there may be
as many kinds of classification as there are
kinds of likeness.
Likeness may be in respect of mass or
weight, it may be likeness of form or shape
(i. e., all circles, crosses, etc., together), likeness of color (black and white marbles or
children in a school), likeness in size (e. g.,
grenadier regiments), in hardness (your lead
pencils), in brittleness (table ware), in elasticity (golf balls), in conductivity (insulators). It may be in transparency, specific
gravity, radiating power or what not.
The likeness may be one of position in
space (geographical), or position in time
(chronological), or of origin (genetic), or of
power (dynamic).
The series in likeness which is formed may

9
be in respect of quality (better or worse),
quantity (more or less), extent or duration
(longer or shorter), position (near or far).
In every case a series is formed by taking
from many things what is common to each
and letting the more like follow the less like
or vice versa.
Where the likeness is one which is essential,
which resides in the very character of the
thing itself, the classification is called natural
or logical classification; and this is, in fact,
a classification according to the total amount
of likeness. Classification according to some
single mark of likeness is partial classification,
while arrangment according to some accidental feature is artificial classification — the
most familiar example of this being the alphabetical classification. Partial and artificial
are often not distinguished.
The commonest kinds of classification are:
(i.) The Logical Classification, or classification according to degree of likeness from
most complex to the simplest. This is to be
regarded as forming one face of what is
known as Natural Classification and of which
evolution is the opposite face. Each regards
all elements of real likeness, but the logical
leads the series along the path of the real
order of things back from the most complex
to the simplest, from the now back to the

10

beginning of things, whereas evolution leads
it forward over the same ground.
(2.) Geometrical Classification is classification according to the order of position in
space. It is founded on the fact that every
atom of the universe at a given instant of
time has a definite geometrical position with
reference to every other atom. Its commonest form is the geographical, which arranges
together all men, horses, cats, dogs, trees,
etc., in given geometrical position on the
earth's surface.
(3.) Chronological Classification, or classification according to position in time, is
founded on the fact that at every successive
instant of time every atom in the universe
has a changed position with reference to every
other atom. It groups together all things extant at a given time, e. g., all men born on a
certain day. Its commonest example is a
table of dates.
(4.) Genetic Classification is the grouping
according to likeness of origin and is seen
every day in family history.
(5.) Historical Classification combines the
chronological, the geographical and the genetic ideas and arranges, (1) according to position in space, (2) according to order in time,
(3) according to the order of genesis.
This carried to its highest power results in:

II

(6.) Evolutionary Classification or classification according to the order of likeness from
the simplest to the most complex. This is
as has been said the complement of logical
classification and both are faces of the one
"natural" order.
To these familiar general forms should perhaps be added:
(7.) Dynamic Classification, or classification according to the order of power.
(8.) Alphabetical Classification, or classification according to the letters of names —
one of the commonest of artificial classifications. And
(9.) Mathematical Classification, or classification according to the order of numerical
symbols —the prince of artificial classifications and servant of all the natural classifications.
3.

LAWS OR PRINCIPLES OF CLASSIFICATION.

A law is simply the way in which things
are in the habit of acting. It may be defined
as the like action of like things under like
circumstances. Any given law is simply the
historical fact that certain things under certain circumstances act in a certain way. The
idea of law is that things having always
acted in this way may be expected to act in
this way in the future, although there is no

12

guarantee of this, because some other "law"
may come in to modify.
A law is distinguished from an hypothesis
or a theory simply by the number of times
that a given thing has been known to happen. If like things under like circumstances
are seen to act in like fashion two or more
times, we affirm an hypothesis. Care is then
taken to note exactly, when it happens again,
whether things and circumstances are exactly
alike and whether the resulting action is still
like those before noticed. When experiments
have been carried to every conceivable extent,
it becomes a law. The shades of meaning between hypothesis, theory, law and principle
are such that one cannot quarrel much with
the interchange of bordering ones although
one must try and stop short of the interchange of hypothesis and law and principle.
Among the chief principles or laws which
have to be taken into account in classification
are,
(i.) The law of likeness. Likeness is the
universal principle of the order of things.
Things are either already put together according to likeness in nature or they are put together by man in his mind or in outer material. Things arranged according to likeness
without the aid of man are nature. Ideas arranged according to likeness are knowledge.

13

Outer things arranged by man according to
likeness are art. In every case the true likeness is the one which determines order.
In nature or outer things unmodified by
n:an this principle of likeness reigns in mathematics in the law that things like the
same thing are like one another, in physics
according to the law that like masses attract
in like manner. The most familiar example
of this is a pair of scales where if the masses
in each pan are equal they are equally attracted by the earth. If they are unlike in
mass, the amount which constitutes likeness
balances, but the remainder of mass is also
attracted and having no counterpoise approaches the earth.
The law reigns again in nature in the magnetic and electric laws that like quantities
attract (or repel) equally. It reigns again in
the law of chemical affinity according to
which like atoms attract more strongly than
unlike and the more complex a molecule the
more unstable it is.
The principle of likeness in living things
takes the form of the law of genesis, or that
like begets like, and the complementary law
of homology that real likeness among things
indicates common ancestry.
Among ideas likeness is the foundation of
all thought and every variation of the act of

14

thought can be summed up according to
Bain into likeness, unlikeness and retentiveness, or according to Spencer into likeness,
unlikeness and integration. Likeness is so
the essence of all human thought, that literally there is no smallest act of the human
mind which cannot be analyzed into just this
operation of distinguishing like and unlike
and either holding to or rejecting. Likeness
in particular is the foundation of that systematic thought carried to its ultimate which
we call logic.
And what is true of science is also true of
art, that every artistic impression is merely a classification of presentations of likeness
and unlikeness. What we see in a landscape
can be resolved into terms of contrast of light
and shade.
Indeed the law of likeness carries itself into
the active personality as well, for here it is
that character resolves itself simply into
choice, the classification of things into like
and dislike and the integration of the like.
Action itself is choice, or the classification
according to like and unlike.
In the field of Sociology, enlarging from
the sphere of individual character to the nature of men as a whole, it may be said that
all social relations, economic and political,
are founded according to the latest opinion

15

upon the fact of likeness, or, if you choose,
the consciousness of likeness, the "consciousness of kind," as Mr. Giddings says.
Likeness is therefore characteristic of all
things and its law may be expressed as the
law that all things in the universe are organized according to their likeness. Many if
not most laws are so to speak sub-laws of this
and among those especially interesting in our
task are: (a) The law that things like the
same things are like each other, (b) The law
that like draws like, (c) The law that like
begets like, and (d) The law that true likeness points to a common ancestry.
(2.) The second general principle useful
for our task is the historical law that the progress of things in space and time is also in
general a genetic progress in complexity.
(3.) The law of evolution adds to the law
of history the observation that the law of
historical progress from the simple to the
complex holds good of all things which tend
toward continued existence. In the general
use of the word it is a complex including
the ideas, (1) of logical progress in complexity, (2) progress in space and time corresponding with progress in complexity so
that the order of complexity is also the order
of appearance in time, (3) the genesis of the
more from the less complex, (4) growth in

i6

complexity the condition of life, and (5) degeneration which is the complement to evolution proper and adds the fact that wherever
things are not growing in complexity they are
proceeding toward dissolution. The net result
of the law is the doctrine that in the long
run those things which are constantly growing in complexity continue to have existence
while others perish.
These laws or principles are as you see
simply a sort of resume of what went before
as they are the foundation of what is to follow.

LECTURE I.
THE ORDER OF T H E SCIENCES.
I.

DIVISIONS AND UNITY.

The order of the sciences involves fwo
things, first, divisions, groups or classes; second, unity or order. The end is a whole,
the process is a defining of classes and the
binding of these classes together into a whole.
Each function of the process is a putting together according to likeness. The division of
the sciences and the putting of them together,
are alike classification. The end in view is an
organic whole in which there is a place for
everything and everything in its place. This
organic whole of sciences is science. It is a
whole of parts, a one from many, and the order of the sciences is a description of the
relative place which each part holds in the
organism.
It is to be remembered all the time through
this discussion that sciences are not separate
things, but only divisions in the sense that a
man's hands, feet, eyes, etc., are parts of a
whole. Every man is a unity. A distinction
between hand and wrist is practical and use-

18
ful, but who shall say just where hand stops
and wrist begins? So^tajof science and the
"branches of knowledge." Who shall say
where the trunk stops and the branches begin?
The phrase, "Classification of the Sciences,"
seems to point rather towards a division into
groups, the "Order of the Sciences" toward
a united whole without, however, losing the
idea of its being a whole of parts. It is for
this reason that "Order" instead of "Classification" has been chosen as caption for this
lecture, for it is likeness which rules, not
unlikeness, unity not variety, and classes are
sure soon to overstep one another's boundaries and get out of perspective unless a final
unity is held constantly in view. The real
problem is one of unity, for the rough groups
which every one can pick out at a glance only
adjust themselves within their own boundaries and to one another in their adjustment
to the whole.

H.

THE ORDER OF THE SCIENCES THE ORDER OF
THINGS.

The first thing to be remembered in trying
to get at the divisions and unity of the sciences, whether one in prosecution of the task
is facing toward divisions or toward unity, is

19

the fact that the order of sciences is the order
of things. The science itself is nothing apart
from the things or facts with which it deals.
To define a science one must define the group
of facts with which it deals. When a line
has been drawn around any group of facts
then the science is simply the analysis and
classification of those facts, the placing them
in their true order within the boundary.
What is true of any one science is true also
of the whole of the sciences. It depends directly on the whole of things. The bottom
fact thus from which attention must never
be diverted in this search is the fact that the
order of the sciences is simply a counterpart
of the order of things.
It is hardly too much to say that the chief
drawback to progress in the conception of the
whole of things has been this very confusion
between the inner realm of ideas and the
outer realm of things. Men have somehow
looked on their own ideas as the place where
the order of things was to be discovered, and
many systems of classification, such, e. g., as
that of Bacon, have been founded on subjective laws. It is, of course, within the mind's
sphere of ideas that a man must work. He
does not deal with the things themselves directly so much as with little brain maps (brain
drawings or brain models, so to speak) of the

20

things themselves. Yet at the same time it
is true that these very brain maps themselves
have no meaning or value save as they are
true and complete images of the outer reality. It is the outer universe which is the starting point and fixed factor of all the search
for order. As the inner idea corresponds with
the real fact or truth or not, it is worthy or
worthless.
If perchance any man's ideas were ever perfectly true and complete then the problem
of order would be simple enough and could
be performed wholly within the cloister of his
own mind. It would then be nothing more
nor less than putting together a picture puzzle
or "assembling" the parts of a locomotive,
and there is in fact a theory of "innate ideas"
which supposes just this, that every man is
born into the world with just such a stock
of ideas or intuitions, perfect in quality and
quantity. As a matter of fact, however, no
one will deny that a man's ideas, whether inborn or not (and the Librarian thinks that
there are inborn ideas), and whether they
are true-born or not (and the Librarian
thinks that they are not true-born), are certainly not true by the time the man gets to
the reflective age. So far from being true
that the problem is simply that of assembling
the finished parts of a locomotive, it is more
like arranging the battered and twisted frag-

21

ments of a locomotive after a wreck. The
only way that it can be done at all is by comparing with the original model, hammering
and forging twisted ideas and supplying lost
ones. But men forget this. They try to put
the whole together out of their distorted and
defective ideas as they are instead of comparing them often and strictly with the outer
world. If the attention is kept strictly on
things as they are, the ideas of things will
classify themselves including the ideas of things
as a whole, but there is no escape from the
method. Every man who starts to set up his
fragmentary ideas into a working whole must
then compare often with his model, the outer
whole. If, on the contrary, a man shuts himself up within the circle of ideas that he has
already gotten, as he has gotten them, he
simply goes round in a circle, stumbling over
the same contradictions because the ideas are
no more and have still the same deformities.
The starting point therefore of all progress
toward getting a clear conception of the order
of the sciences is the axiom: The order of
sciences is the order of things.
The history of the establishment of this
idea belongs rather to Philosophy than to our
present task. The School of Experience no
doubt paved the way; but it was the positivist Comte who gave the greatest recent

22

modern impetus, and Spencer and others of
his school who have done much to bring it
into clear-cut statement and something as
well to confuse the issue.
III.

ORGANIC UNITY.

Starting with this the way is cleared of its
greatest obstacle, but the order is by no means
yet reached. The matter is in fact hardly
less puzzling than before. The point of attention has been changed from the mass of
ideas to the objective world of things; but we
have not yet the answer even to question
whether there is a universal order of things
at all, or if there is of what nature this order
may be.
So puzzling is the question that there have
been those, of course, who have denied that
there was any such thing as an order to
things at all. Besides these skeptics there
have also been many (and they include a
large school of idealists) who have held that
the only order that there is among things is
an order of ideas; that there is no actual
counterpart to that order in external things
if indeed there be any external things at all.
They say that there may be an order to the
universe within the mind — the microcosm,
but that there is none to the outside world.

23

In spite of all the baffling contradictions
however there is such perfection of order in
minor groups of things that the more one
seeks the more he finds growing in him such
a sense, strong though elusive, that there is,
if it could only be grasped, some kind of relation for pretty nearly everything that is, that
he returns to the common habit of mankind
of taking it for granted that there is such a
thing as order, and this order one such that it
may be found out; that the whole of things
is in short a Cosmos, not a Chaos. At all
ages of the world, it has in fact been generally held as true that there is some such
order. What the nature of this order is has
been variously expressed, but there is a curious harmony between the most ancient and
the most modern views in calling it "living"
or "organic."
This idea that this whole is a "living thing,"
familiar to us in Plato's Timaeus, is contained
in the most primitive myth of the "world
tree" and in the nibst modern philosophies as
well. Indeed, if we may believe Herr Lotze,
human thought never does rest, and never
can rest until it reaches a place where "the
whole content of reality is conceived under
some principle of organic unity." (Ormond,
Found, of Knowl., p. 98) e. g., conceived of as
a tree or animal rather than as a molecule,
a crystal or a system of planets.

24

Most men therefore agree that there is a
''unity," but to find in what this unity consisted, and especially what Plato means by
calling it "living," and the moderns by calling it "organic," has puzzled librarians and
philosophers alike. Endless attempts have
been made from every point of view to solve
the riddle, and although these differences on
the whole are hardly so remarkable as the
resemblances, yet the solutions are practically as various as the attempts.
IV.

THINGS PAST AND THINGS PRESENT.

The greatest clearing of the lines came in
with the development of the idea or law of
Evolution. Thanks to this idea we have now
a clear view of a second great fact which cannot be kept too clearly in mind in our present task, to wit: the fact that the whole of
things includes not only things present, but
things past. The ignorance or neglect of this
fact has, like the neglect of the outer world,
led to the greatest possible confusion in the
past and leads constantly to confusion still,
when the conception is at all slighted.
The common if not exclusive popular idea
of a whole of things has been a great molecule or crystal or system of planetary systems. However true this may be of things

25

that now are, it does not include things that
have been. There is no place in such a system for plants and animals which have no
living specimens, no place for Julius Caesar,
and so on. The mechanical universe is in
short not a whole of things past and present,
but only of things present, whereas the real
universe had Julius Caesar in it, and what is
more the historian and the librarian have to
take concrete account of the fact, one to locate the actual point in history when and
where he was, the other to represent that point
in a system so that a book about him can be
put in a class.
The idea that things have a history is not
a new one. Applied to man, at least, the
idea is familiar enough, but applied to everything in the universe, from suns down to the
smallest molecule, the idea only finally came
to light with the doctrine of evolution. Now
it seems curious that we did not realize that
not only does every atom in the universe depend on its position at a given instant of
time on the position of every other atom, but
that it depends on its own position at every
previous instant of time, and that these positions were dependent in turn on the positions
of all others at that instant and they on it,
and so on every position of every atom at
every instant being dependent on every other.

26
Every animal, every plant, every molecule
at least, possibly every atom even, has thus
its history, and every one has affected every
other or has been affected by every other or
both throughout one organic whole from the
time when the first vortex entered the world
fluid until to-day.
V.

IDEAS AS THINGS.

Still a third thing which helps to clearness
in our task and the neglect of which has
caused confusion, is the fact that ideas are
real things, calling for a place in the order
of things. Every man's idea, whatever may
be the substance underlying it, whether matter or force, has a definite place in space and
time, and is at least accompanied by a definite
molecular form. These ideas are located
some in the minds of living men, real things
now existing each in its own definite place.
Some were located in the minds of men now
dead. We have fossils of these ideas now in
books, statues and pictures, just as the scientist has his fossil animals. The idea itself is in this case a thing of the past, but
it may fte reconstructed from books just as
the long extinct animal from its fossil remains. The true book, the true picture, the
true statue, is not the one of paper and ink

27

or canvas or marble, but the living thing in
the mind of the living artist, and we must
distinguish these living ideas both from
things past and things to come. In every individual man there are these ideas, some representing things that have been, some put
together out of ideas that have been to form
things that may be — ideas of nature and new
ideas, which are themselves art and created
also into material outer things are known as
Art.
These three things therefore are to be kept
clearly in mind, ( i ) that the order of the
sciences is the order of things, (2) that
things include the past as well as the present, (3) that things past or present include
ideas as well as nature or art.
VI.

THE ORDERING OF IDEAS.

With a clear idea of these three things we
are ready to apply the fundamental ideas
which have been worked out for us and have
been defined in the introduction, and among
them particularly the ideas (1) that all our
science is a search for likeness, (2) that the
order of things is the order of their complexity, (3) that things which are growing
more complex are tending towards life, and
conversely.

28

The situation now before us is this: we
stand face to face with a chaos of our ideas,
one vast jumble of ideas of houses, stones,
books, trees, other men's ideas, plants and
what not, piled up hap-hazard and stored haphazard. The problem of every man who
reaches thinking age is just this, to reduce
such a body of ideas to order so that he may
have a connected view of everything that is,
so far as his ideas go, and incidentally to enlarge the ideas themselves as far as possible
so as to get as nearly as possible a just idea
of the whole of things. This idea of ideas,
this idea of the whole, which includes all
other ideas organized into one idea should be
an exact counterpart of that other whole
which includes all things organized into one
thing — in short, it should be an inner cosmos
"mirroring" (as Haeckel would say) the
outer cosmos.
In attempting now to make a cosmos out of
an inner chaos of ideas by applying our principles to the conditions, we understand of
course thoroughly that in our task of arranging in continuous series according to
likeness from the simplest to the most complex we are arranging not things themselves
but our ideas of things. We understand
equally well, however, on the other hand, that
we can make no possible progress towards

20

this real arrangement of ideas unless our
units, our ideas of each thing are exactly like
the reality, and unless the groupings of
these ideas is also like the real grouping of
things in the universe. The first step is
therefore to make each unit idea exactly correspond with the reality. Then comes the
putting together of the ideas by likeness, or
their classification.

VII.

AN HYPOTHETICAL ORDER.

Looking now at our heap of confused ideas
(like a basket of various colored skeins of
silk), there are certain things which are easy
enough to notice. Men have heretofore long
had a rough idea that things may be divided
into "nature and the supernatural," and that
nature includes "the vegetable, animal and
mineral kingdoms." To-day we group nature
into lifeless and living — plant and animal,
but the general idea of vegetable, animal and
mineral is not changed nor the fact that we
then have a large class of alleged phenomena:
God, the angels, fairies, miracles, etc., left
over, the science of which, for convenience at
least, we may call Theology. Even the order
which we call "evolutionary" has long been
recognized to a degree in a vague idea that

30

the plant was "higher" than the mineral, animal than the plant, and God than man.
But however near the truth the older systems may have come in their vague way, it is
only with the growth of the new science that
infinite puzzling contradictions have been
done away with and clear lines definitely established. Of course even now we must be
far from the absolute goal, but this much at
least it is safe to say, that, thanks to modern
science and its laws, every one may now get
if not a perfect idea of the whole, at least a
clearer one than was ever possible before save
perhaps to a few seers like Plato and Moses.
Briefly expressed (and this you may call
Hypothesis), the clearest groups of things
are the lifeless, the living, the human and the
superhuman, and their corresponding sciences
are Hylology (or the mathematical-physical
sciences), Biology, Anthropology and Theology. This, too, is their order. It is the order of their appearance in time. It is the
logical order, the order of complexity and
the order of power. Those even who classify
the idea of a personal God under morbid psychology cannot refuse to consider a "cosmology" or science of the whole, a science more
complex than that of any of its parts and of
these few many like to call this wholeness
itself God.
Theist and Pantheist alike

31

therefore will call the science of the superhuman Theology, though the strict naturalist
may prefer to call this most complex of
sciences cosmology. So this tentative order
of Hylology, Biology, Anthropology and Theology may well stand. It is said that the
sciences themselves have grown up in this
order, but we cannot go into this now.
At first sight it seems curious to speak of
the superhuman as a climax in the order of
complexity, but regarded as the material of a
science it does at least include everything preceding plus angels, God, and, if there be such
things, fairies, etc.
Again, it seems more curious still to speak
of the superhuman as historically later in
time; but the theory of Christian theology
(as well as of the Vedic) is that God did
not "enter into time" or become flesh; that
is, did not take organic part in his universe
until after and through man. Regarding Theology as a science, therefore, we have the authority of the same religious theory for saying that there is no science of God save that
whose subject-matter is the Incarnate God.
I therefore repeat that the order of things
is lifeless, living, human and superhuman,
th<- order of sciences Hylology, Biology, Anthropology and Theology. This, of course, is
only the barest outline, but it gives classes to

32

hold everything and a reasonable order. It
offers at least an epitome of wholeness such
as the Baconian system, for example, does not
do.
When it comes to applying to detailed subdivisions, the principles of "likeness" and of
"growth in complexity," etc., which have just
been applied to the broad general divisions,
while we may not get everything clear, we
shall clear up many of the old puzzles which
have most troubled the classifiers (and librarians perhaps most of all for their task of
classification, dealing, as it does, with concrete things is more imperative than the classification of ideas). Thus, e. g., History, Art,
Literature and Technology, as well as Theology, emerge from their Mohamet-coffin position as not-sciences into solid earth as sciences, and the vexatious subjective distinction
of "abstract and concrete" science "pure and
applied" vanish.
This matter is pretty abstract to be discussed with any clearness, especially in nontechnical terms, within the limits of a single
lecture, yet we will try to get some notion of
it — some "tail-feathers" of the idea, as a certain distinguished professor of Theology
might say.

33

VIII.

COSMIC HISTORY.

It will simplify the matter if we begin by
trying to trace the objective history of the
whole of things in space and time from the
beginning until to-day from the simplest to
tht most complex, as well as the present state
of our knowledge will allow. If we can thus
get a general view of this connected historical whole of which the material universe of
to-day is the front rank of the advancing
march of an army of atoms through time, the
front wave of a stream reaching back to its
scurce, we can then divide and name the sections at pleasure.
Suppose in the beginning then only little
things in a world fluid, all alike, or a single
little thing only. It is immaterial to us
whether these little things are vortex rings
or hard particles, so that they be exactly or
substantially alike, so alike at least that no
distinction can be made in them by the human mind. This was once the conception
that we had of atoms. Now we suppose that
atoms may be redivided into ions. Suppose
this to be true, and we have then to begin
with, first, a world fluid, second, loose ions in
a world fluid uniting here and there in groups
of greater or less number, more or less

34
densely, to form atoms of various degrees of
complexity.
The point about each atom now is that it
is itself a "discrete" thing, which "moves as
a whole, so that its parts, if it has any, do
not part company" under ordinary conditions.
Ii has a separate individual being which is not
simple but a complex of ions. This complex
is, however, so firm that under ordinary conditions of substance its ions do not part company, though it is conceivable that there
might be conditions of heat, electricity and
light under which they would do so. The
world fluid filled with these ions in various
degrees of density short of the atomic stage
may be supposed to be what we call ether
(and all this applies quite as well to what is
known as the condensation theory as it does
to the atomic), unless indeed we are to suppose that in the ether the ion stage has been
already passed and the atomic begun. The
nature both of ion and of atom is somewhat
recondite but this much at least seems clear
that the atom is no longer to be looked on
as simple and indivisible but as a complex of
ions.
The next stage of world history or evolution is when these ion-complexes, or atoms,
themselves unite with one another in various
degrees of complexity to form again a series

35
of things each of which "moves about as a
whole" and is not broken under any ordinary
conditions. These independent groups are
called molecules. Here we begin to walk on
firmer ground. We know that we have some
seventy different kinds of atoms. These
atoms are united, some with like atoms to
form the elements, some with unlike atoms
to form still more complex molecules all the
way up to the very high degree of complexity
of the carbon compounds and their topmost
branch protoplasm. It is not said that these
cannot be resolved into their elements by sufficient heat or made more solid by cold
(probably they can), but that under ordinary
conditions they keep their thing-ness, their
separate individual identity. It is to be remembered, too, all the time that from the beginning we are dealing with things which
however much alike they may be, are at least
each separate in space, and that this is true
even if their boundaries are the same; for in
this case they may simply interpermeate as
whole molecules of sugar in water, or broken
up into parts as in the case of salt in water.
Now all the time that the nearer things are
forming more and more complex groups of
atoms or molecules the process of grouping
is going on, not in one part only, but in all
parts of the world fluid, groups of atoms

36
formed into molecules are again formed into
new groups or masses, and these wholes are
themselves separate individuals in space, yet
not unrelated to all other masses, and in
some cases, at least, in the universe, united
into groups of masses themselves separate individual things, to wit, planetary systems.
Some of these masses are, we understand,
wholly of one kind of atom, say hydrogen
vapors. Others, like the sun, contain nearly
every element or every kind of group of like
atoms. Others, like the earth, contain both
elementary and complex molecules, although
so far as human knowledge goes, this earth
alone contains complex molecules. Whatever the fact may be, so far as our knowledge
of the fact is concerned, i. e., so far as science
is concerned, the earth is the only place in
the universe where complex molecules are
gathered. It is therefore, so far as the classification of science is concerned, the most
complex of all molecular aggregates in the
universe.
Glancing back over matters, we have, up
to this point, ions, groups of ions=atoms;
groups of atoms = molecules'* groups of molecules =r planetary systems, and each of these
has left behind it in each case many individuals not organized into a system.
This same process now continues among

37

complex molecules, certain members of one
kind of which alone, i. e., protoplasm, become
organized themselves into independent groups
which we call cells. These cells are again in
turn of various degrees of complexity, vegetable, animal, etc., up to the human. In the
human cells alone is the mass of the most
complex cells, the idea-cells (?) organized
again into a new independent molecular unity,
a logical idea of ideas, a human personality.
Among these new molecules again, to wit,
these human personalities or men, there is
again a tendency towards union into individual nucleated groups called societies, separate
things in space. These include voluntary societies, families, nations, churches, etc., perhaps the best example being so far as appearance is concerned and so far as relates
to things that now are, the Roman Catholic
Church.
According to the theory known as Christianity, the true organism of human personalities is a certain definite if unlimited number of persons organized into a group whose
nucleus is the historic Christ. These form
a new independent organism which "moves
about by itself" and leaves behind many persons not organized into it. Its own individual
particles can only be disintegrated when they
have broken from the organism of this new

3»
molecule or cell. This new organism is known
as the (Invisible) Church, and is supposed to
have a real existence dating from a given
point in space and time (that is the historic
Christ), at which time, however, the human
cells previously formed were taken into the
organism. This organism is to be regarded
as a thing now existing as a real entity.
Whether this be so or not, the visible church
at least is such a real society, and is one of
the things which must be taken into account,
analyzed and classified under any theory of
science. Whether the matter falls under the
science of Theology or that of Anthropology
may be hard to decide, but then all border
lines in classification are hard to distinguish.
There is no real cleavage.
Whether again this is the end or not;
whether in the future there is to be any
group of such groups distributed anywhere in
space and forming a society of societies
throughout the universe is only a speculation,
and sounds somewhat fantastic, even as speculation, and yet it seems to be the logical result of the evolutionary process if it is to
continue.
It is to be remembered that all this development of complexity has been a development in time as well as development in
space and a development in complexity of

39
nature. Each more complex has followed the
less complex in its appearance in time. We
have now arrived at the "now." We have a
mass of more or less highly organized things,
groups, atoms, molecules, planetary systems,
cells, men, societies of men. They are the
things with which we deal in science, and
this order of their history is the general order
of their sciences.

IX.

T H E ORDER OF COMPLEXITY.

In order now to get further divisions than
those mentioned at first and to give them
names we trace the history backward and
forward and mark the lines of its branches
from point to point.
The simplest thing that we can think of is
a single ion in a world fluid at a single instant
of time, but even with this the science of
Mathematics has begun, for simple discreteness makes two things, and Arithmetic, the
science of number, has had its birth. There
may be any number more ions in the world
fluid at a single instant of time, and Mathematics be advanced to a most complex stage,
but Physics does not come in until the idea of
time is added. Given, however, one ion at
two successive instants of time and we have
the idea of motion in the passing of this ion

40

from one point in the world fluid to another
and with the idea of motion the science of
Physics is born. Chemistry does not come in
until things have reached the molecule stage.
It does however apply even to the simplest
one atom molecule and to molecules of like
atoms, as well as to compound molecules of
the utmost degree of complexity. It has
its beginning thus in the first molecules,
whereas Astronomy only takes its beginning
with the union of two molecules in a mass.
Biology again does not exist even in the most
complex carbon molecule, but only comes in
when molecules are organized into a nucleated
cell, although it belongs to the very simplest
single cell as truly as to the most complex animal. Anthropology again, as distinguished
from Zoology, only comes in with the organization of ideas, but it does exist in the most
rudimentary organism of classified ideas. It
is open to some question whether a man does
organize ideas except as a consequence of social activity, and whether the Anthropology
itself is not Sociology, and indeed Comte does
put Sociology at this stage instead of Anthropology. Nevertheless every individual man does
have a classified body of ideas, such as no animal has, and is what may be called an organic
consciousness in a sense in which the animal
is not. It therefore seems better to mark off

41
this stage, as Anthropology including ( i ) the
science of organized ideas in their exact correspondence with outward things, or knowledge (epistemology), and (2) Aesthetics, the
science of the construction of new ideas, or
creation, (3) Ethics, the science of perfection
both in inward correspondence with reality
and in the construction of new ideas, whether
within or without, and if without whether in
reality or in symbol. If psychology is admitted here and not relegated to biology it is
practically identical with anthropology, or
may be regarded as the physiology, as epistemology and aesthetics are the morphology
of human personality.
It is by the further analysis of man as a
creator that we arrive best at the fourth division of Anthropology or Sociology.
The science of aesthetics includes as its subject-matter new ideas in various stages of embodiment. First they are formed in a man's
own molecular brainstuff, afterwards in outward reality. With human creations in outward reality the series begins over again, lifeless, living, human (superhuman?). A man's
art ideas include (1) ideas embodied in lifeless things, tools, houses, clothing, etc.,
the mechanical arts generally, (2) ideas
embodied in living things, to wit, agriculture, animal-culture, fishing, hunting, breed-

42

ing, etc., (3) ideas embodied in the minds
of other men. The instruments to this
final embodiment are what we call the fine
arts — music, gesture, painting, sculpture,
words, following again a series from simplest
to most complex, the crown and climax being
the embodiment in another personality of
one's own body of ideas, the creation therefore in another of one's own organized ideas
as a whole, the binding idea being one's own
idea of the whole. If this could be done perfectly in its entirety a man's own whole personality would be embodied in another, yet
notice that the two persons though exactly
alike would yet be two different (if perhaps
somewhat monotonous) persons.
This art of embodying one's own ideas in
another we call education.
Now by this production of likeness of idea
in one another, through art, and especially
that form of art which we call language, the
possibility of Sociology comes in, and so far
a» ideas have been made alike there society
exists. Where this likeness is society is, and
unity in such a society is specially promoted
by having some central person or central book
or some central idea such as Liberty to organize ideas about — to furnish a common
ground of likeness — a likeness which runs
through everything.

43
Theology only comes in in this series when
the organization of ideas in the man has a
superhuman center. We have now gotten beyond our limit, but may suggest that Theology includes ( i ) Cosmology, or the idea of
things below the human personality as being
centered in a divine person. (2) Christology
or humanity in its individual nature centered
in a person. (3) Ecclesiology or the society
of personalities centered in a divine person
united by "likeness" to him, and (4) Theology
or the science of all things living, lifeless, human and superhuman centered in a person.
The applications of our various laws to current conceptions in these matters is obvious.
X.

T H E ORDER STATED.

We have therefore (1) Mathematics, the
science of number and of relative position in
space at a single instant of time; .(2) Physics,
the science of motion or change of position,
up to and including the organization of like
ions into like and unlike atoms; (3) Chemistry, the science of organized atoms or molecules; (4) Astronomy, the science of organized masses; (5) Biology, the science of life
or of the cell; (6) Anthropology, the science
of the human, including (6a) epistemology,
.(6b) aesthetics, (6c) ethics; (7) Sociology, the

44
science of human groups; (8) Theology, the
science of the superhuman or of all things,
lifeless and living, organized in a single center; (a) Cosmology, (b) Christology, (c)
Ecclesiology, (d) Theology proper.
Following is the graphic statement:
Hylology:
Mathematics.
Physics.
Chemistry.
Astronomy.
Geology.
Biology:
Botany.
Zoology.
Physical anthropology ( ? ) .
Anthropology:
Psychology (Human).
Epistemology.
Aesthetics.
Useful arts.
Fine arts.
Language and literature.
Ethics ( ? ) .
Sociology (incl. "History"). .
Theology:
Cosmology.
Christology.
Ecclesiology.
Theology proper.

45
This, of course, is not to be regarded as
final in any sense, but as an hypothesis on
which we may climb to a better. It certainly
includes some elements of clearness not possible until recent years.

LECTURE II,
THE CLASSIFICATION OF BOOKS.
I.

BOOK CLASSIFICATION AN ART.

THE aim of this paper has been described
as practical. By'this is meant that it aims
chiefly to suggest certain adjustments or
adaptations of the strictly logical order which
are made necessary in the matter of book
classification by the fact that we are dealing
not with ideas but with concrete things.
This need of adjusting theoretical classification to practical conditions is not peculiar
to the classification of books, but is characteristic of the treatment of all complex concrete things. It is sometimes said that the
classification of books differs radically from
classification as used in science in that many
books are made up in such way as to cover
a great variety of subjects, e. gy periodicals,
books of essays, etc. It is true that books are
complex, but for that matter so are things
in the universe; the crust of the earthy for example, is made up not merely of seventy different elements, but of seventy times seventy
combinations of these elements massed in

47
every imaginable sort of form. A book could
hardly be more complex as to subject than
a lump of rock may be as to elements. The
classification of books is like classification of
specimens in a museum. Each is an art.
Neither is theoretically exact.
If we attempt to rearrange things strictly according
to likeness with scientific exactness, we have
to vaporize them so that the elements may
be brought together. This is precisely what
the chemist does, and what he does with
molecules we can do pretty well with ideas
so long as they remain in that more or less
volatile condition where we call them
"thoughts." We cannot, however, do this so
well where the ideas have been crystallized
into books.
Even among ideas vaporizing
them so as to re-crystallize according to
their real likeness is a painful task and few
enough men have mental heat or enthusiasm
sufficient to do it very often or very perfectly.
They prefer to let their ideas stay in the original mixed masses in which they first cooled,
and in the order in which they then happened
to be. This is what is generally though falsely called conservatism when applied to
thoughts. It is in reality intellectual petrification. Books on the other hand are real
petrifications, or rather planets in an advanced stage of evolution, where the mass

48

of ideas has passed out of the fluid into a
solid unchanging state. They do not therefore, however, differ "radically" from other
complex masses in the matter of their classification. All masses alike, whether books or
stones, are conditioned in the attempt to arrange them in space according to their likeness by the fact of their complexity and need
to be adjusted accordingly. But this does
not, however, make the theoretical order of
less value; on the contrary, this ideal order
is in the end the only one which can serve as
a real basis without ending in a chaos of self
contradictions. The librarian can no more
afford to ignore the question of the real scientific order in arranging his books than
the professor of mineralogy in arranging his
specimens. It is identically the same thing.
I wish I could say that the average librarian
had the same scientific attitude towards his
problem that the average professor of mineralogy does towards his. The fact is that
the practical modifications which complex concrete things call for in their actual classification in space are similar for all masses. The
classification of books is, however, in some respects the best example of this — so much so,
in fact, that if there were a philosopher here
present I would commend to him the study
of book classification as being as valuable to

49
him as I have urged that theoretical classification is important to you.
The main fact about the classification of
books is in brief the fact that it is an art
not science. The classification or order of
things is nature and is not a human creation.
The classification or order of ideas follows
the order of this classification of things and
is science. The classification of books, on the
other hand, is an art — a human creation for
a human end. The order of sciences is its
backbone, but in the adjustment of books in
this order there are many practical accommodations to be made, determined by not merely
complexity of material but by the end in
view.
This classification of books deals, as we
have said, with concrete objects, not with
ideas.; its end, too, is not a scientific law, but
a rule; not the discovery of how things are
done, but the formulation of a decree as to
how they shall be done. The end' of ends in
scientific study is, properly, a scientific law
suited to produce in a man the exact knowledge of what is, the end of ends in the rules
of art is to produce in concrete substance
something which never yet has been, suited
to a certain purpose. If you say that in this
statement the analogy with other complex
things falls through, I say that it is of no
4

50

great importance if it does come to an end at
this point, and yet the fact is that the mineralogist who arranges his specimens with
strict reference to illustrating the real order
of things does face nearly the same artistic
problem. Suppose, e. g., a vein o f gold em"
bedded in quartz. In a metallurgical collection it could be arranged according to its
metal, in a collection illustrating, e. g., the
strength of materials, it might be arranged as
quartz. This is the chief book classification
problem in a nutshell — the arranging of complex material with a view to its practical end.
The main factor is the end sought. The adjustment of material depends on this end.
In describing this paper as practical, therefore, it is intended to imply not a systematic
technical treatise, but only the treatment of
the practical modifications of the theoretical
order called for by the fact that we are here
treating complex material with reference to
a practical end. No attempt will be made
here to give a survey of the history of classification, or a history of that discussion of its
individual points and problems of which our
American library history is full, nor yet in
any sense will the attempt be made to give
detailed description of technique. This is
the ordinary commonplace of library school
routine. You are doubtless referred in your

5i
classes to Kephart's bibliography in the
World's Fair papers, to the introductions of
the Dewey and Cutter systems as well as to
the pages of the library periodicals, and in particular to the index to the LIBRARY JOURNAL,

not to mention the treatises of Maire and
Graesel and the like. When these papers are
printed they will have something of the nature of a historical sketch with outlines of
various systems both theoretical and practical; but for the brief treatment of this lecture the historical and technical must be
largely disclaimed. Even what I have called
the practical aim of this paper is therefore in
a way theoretical, but it is the theory of an
art, not the theory of a science. In short,
it is method, and, as has been said, its aim
is to distinguish the difference between book
classification and theoretical classification.

II.

BOOK CLASSIFICATION AND CARD CLASSIFICATION.

The first step in this process of differentiation is evidently to explain what it is here
intended to include under book classification.
In speaking of the classification of books here
then, it will be understood that both the classification of the material books on the shelves
and the analytical classification of the con-

52

tents of these books in catalogs and bibliographies will be included. Although there are
some differences between the two kinds which
will, from point to point, be noted, the principles and practical difficulties of these two
forms of book classification are substantially
the same. The chief difference lies in the fact
that the card classification can be carried
nearer to scientific completeness than that of
books on the shelves, for it is not conditioned
by the paper and binding, and the analysis
can therefore be carried further. The librarian who analyzes his books in this way approaches nearer to the chemist who vaporizes
his material and yet he never reaches his
point. He is rather like a mineralogist who is
so situated that he cannot apply the blow pipe
and must get as pure a lump of ore as may
be by breaking. It is only the author who
uses the contents of books to make new books,
breaking up the very ideas in the alembic of
his own mind, who is the scientist of books.
He alone makes the book-atoms free to take
their affinities. Nevertheless as has been said,
the difference between shelf-classification
and analytical card-classification is considerable in this respect and is like the difference
between big rough lumps of mixed ores and
smaller purer specimens which can be arranged with greater exactness.

53
But whatever differences there may be between these kinds they are alike as to ( i )
the object that they have in view and (2)
the different ways in which the classification
can be carried out.
III.

THE OBJECTS AND IMPORTANCE OF BOOK
CLASSIFICATION.

If we come down to the real fact why we
put books or cards together according to subjects in a library, we find that it is to get together those books' or cards which will be
most used together. The object is a practical
one just as the object of the library itself is a
practical one. Libraries are not gotten together as a museum to exhibit what we have
called the fossils of knowledge. It is a machine got together to instill that knowledge
into men's minds. The books are collected
for use.
They are administered for use.
They are arranged for use; and it is use
which is the motive of classification.
The putting of the most used books together saves in the first place actual labor
on the part of users and librarian in assembling any given mass of material for use. No
catalog can take its place. It is sometimes
said that the bibliography or catalog serves
as well or better, but suppose the user or

54
librarian does get bibliographical references
to all the things that he wants in a classified
catalog. The work then has only begun.
Somebody must either go from one point to
another and examine the different book3
where they stand on the shelves, or else some
one must go^ to each point and bring together in a class temporarily the things wanted. In an unclassified library the books are
thus classified over again every time a man
wants to use them. It is a labor saving device to assemble them in classes once for all
instead. It is sometimes objected to this that
no classification actually does get all the material that a man wants together, and that a
man wants to use it from various points of view
at different times. This is entirely true, but
what of it? It is aside from the point. One
might just as well refuse to pick up pound
nuggets in gold mining, if he should have the
good luck to find them, on the ground that
there were still gold dust to be gotten by
panning. Any roughed out group of books is
a positive and great gain to economy in bibliographical search and promotes economy in
the actual use by bringing the books together
in space and thus saving innumerable steps
on the part of the man who goes to the
shelves to consult them. The actual advantage to science which comes from having

55
books closely classified, through this economy
of labor in the work of research must be,
even in our present hardly fully developed
usage, hundreds of years annually to the
highest of all skilled labor— that of the
highly trained expert scholar.
When you
put it down as a cold concrete fact that good
classification in any group may save in a few
years the research-work of a man for a century it begins to be a very practical matter.
The saving of actual dollars in administration
{for a given efficiency) must figure out as
equally great. I believe the statement will
stand the most careful examination, that
in a large scholarly library, doubling the entire delivery and reference force would not
give the efficiency to an unclassified library
of even a barely tolerable classification. A
prime advantage of having most used books
in classes together, therefore, is the fact that
the rough bulk of material so gathered together saves a vast amount of bibliographical work and a vast amount of work in actual
gathering together and use of material.
A second and great advantage of having
the most uted books together in the classes
in which they are used together, is that they
furnish in this way an incentive to the user
to get a full view of his material. This is a
matter of the utmost value. Men are natur-

56
ally lazy. They are too little inclined anyway to exhaust material, and when you add
to this also the fact that the scientific man is
generally also extremely ignorant of books,
you open a vast field of profit in a method of
setting out before a man so that he can get at
it with the least trouble a large amount of
his material. In looking over much material,
too, he is pretty sure also to be tempted by
references to look up other material (such
as articles in proceedings of academies) not
grouped in the class — at least he is more likely
to than if his only resource was chasing up
bibliographical references apart from the
books. Men not librarians are almost invariably surprised to find how much material
has been written on their subject. It very
often happens that they find that work on
which they have been wasting much time has
already been done by some one else, and it is
of the utmost importance that they should
discover this at the earliest date in order
that they may turn their attention as soon as
possible to more profitable channels. This
end is greatly promoted by the simple fact
of having the material grouped together so
that men can glance over it and get their eye
on what has really been done. On the other
hand, as a guide especially to men in looking
over the field to see beforehand what fields

57
are still comparatively unworked, this classification of books becomes of still greater importance to the progress of knowledge.
And what is true of trained scientific research I take is still more true of popular
work — on the one hand, there is a great
economy to the librarian who has to help in
school work, essay work, club work, etc., in
his task of hunting up references, and on the
other hand, where there is access to shelves
especially, there is the greatest educational
advantage in the actual incentive to the reader
to read or at least, what is of almost greater
importance, browse through books in order
to pick out certain things. The "average
reader" will hardly study even a classed catalog, and is utterly at sea with an alphabetical list or an unclassified library. If, however, he can look over the shelves in a classified library he is surprised to find how much
there is that is interesting, he learns to get
facts that he wants more readily, and in the
end saves much time for himself and for the
librarian, while at the same time he gets far
better cultivation in the same time than he
could possibly have thought of getting in an
unclassified library.
And besides this economy of time and
labor there is a third advantage in classification, by no means to be despised, in the fact

58
of the psychological or mnemonic training of
those who, through seeing books arranged in
certain classes, get in the habit of running
over these categories in their minds and associating their own ideas in these classes.
Men are bound to make up such pigeon holes
for themselves, otherwise there is no thought
at all — they must make up for themselves
some sort of schedules in which to associate
their ideas together. The nearer these schedules approximate the real order of things, o f
course, the better it is, the more retentive the
memory, the more intense the developed
power of attention, but they must have the
schedules, and any well thought out system
of classes is better than the rubbish heap of
odd boxes which serves most men in lieu of
pigeon holes.
The object of classification is thus economy
and increased efficiency in the use of books.
"Use" is the watchword of book-classification as "truth" or "true order" is of theoretical classification.
Any variation whatever
from the scientific order is permissible if so
be it promote this end of use — the motive of
the whole process is "getting together the
books most used together."
But just here is a snag on which many
have split, including the whole school of the
go-as-you-please librarians who consider it

59
very practical to make every petty little adjustment to temporary needs that they hap
pen to think of when they think of it. It is
also one which we must keep in mind in saying what we do most earnestly say, that any
well-worked-out system is better than no system. The fact is that while it is true that
any system is better than no system and even
the artificial schedules of mnemonic subjects
are a vast improvement over the common goas-you-please schedule which every one makes
up for himself, nevertheless it is true that the
nearer classification gets, as a rule, to the
real order of things, the more fully it serves
the purpose of getting together the books that
will be most used together, and especially of
getting the ideas together which belong together. Thus those nearest right serve the
purpose of use best. The nearer, too, the
classification is to the real order of things
the longer it will serve men's needs before
breaking down. Men will surely cling for
sound reason to a familiar and well established order just as long as they can and
will not lightly give it up for a new one, but
there must come a time for every system
when, as of late in botany, the system long
clung to must be given up because the new
one has been clearly established as the real
order.

6o
Passing now to:
IV.

THE KINDS OF BOOK CLASSIFICATION.

We have already spoken in the first lecture
of the theoretical kinds of classification. The
kinds of book classification are the same but
they have more concrete applications, combinations and variations. It will be worth
while to note some of those which are more
familiar in ordinary use. You have seen in
use, < . g., (a) the natural or logical classifica?
tion—books arranged in series according to
degree of likeness, the ordinary form to
which we refer in the use of the word. You
have seen that classification arranged forward
in an evolutionary form from simple to complex and also backward in the strictly logical
form from the complex to the simple. You
have seen the Baconian and the inverted Baconian.
You have seen also (b) the purely artificial
alphabetical system where books are arranged
strictly by author throughout the library as
used to be the case in the New York State
Library under an earlier administration.
I am not sure that I have ever seen (c) a
strictly alphabetical subject arrangement, but
we have often seen large subdivisions of a
system arranged chiefly alphabetically by subjects. In fact almost all classifications have

6i

this element in it, as they usually reach sooner
or later the point of arranging in the order of
the "person biographed" and here it becomes
a strict alphabetical classification by subjects.
In the same way again (d) the strictly
chronological by periods throughout a whole
library may not be exclusively applied anywhere, but it enters into almost all classification and is a legitimate principle in its place.
This principle like all others is sometimes carried to excess, but it is hard to think of a system where at certain points the recognition of
dates and periods is not a practical advantage.
(e) This is still more true of geographical
classification which is still a favorite notion
with many as a semi-universal principle.
While this again may not be absolutely in use
as an exclusive first principle, in many libraries there is a strong tendency to urge it as
at least one of a few primary principles and to
arrange, for example, things under Europe,
History, Geology, Mining, Agriculture, etc.,
rather than under Geology, Agriculture, etc.,
with geographical subdivisions. As a subordinate principle it is of course in use in substantially ev^ry practical library system.
(f) The primary division of all books by
size into three classes, folios and over, quartos, octavos and under, is one of the commonest of the older classifications, and even to-day

62

we are obliged, for reasons of space, to observe it in a sense, though, as a principle of
classification, it has practically gone out, and
in libraries the principle of the "dummy" has
taken its place.
Another artificial principle of arrangement
which we have met is (g) the arrangement
by color. This is ordinarily an ex post facto
principle, and the colors are applied to the
classes rather than the classes made an induction from the color. In this form it is common
enough, e. g.f green books may be books on
Greece, red books on France, etc. One can
imagine a man arranging books in a private
library on the strict principle of color for the
sake of artistic effect, but I have never actually quite met it, although I fancy almost everybody makes some concession to harmony of
color in a library with colored bindings not
otherwise classified.
This classification by color differs somewhat
from the principle of (h) classification according to binding. There are said to be
known instances in which the principle of
placing the best bindings nearest the door
in a comprehensive series from the best bound
to the worst was the actual ruling principle of
the classification — and a most excellent principle it was in a library which, like one of
these that I knew, was perhaps more suited to
be looked at than looked into.

63
You have of course heard also of the theological library where the ruling principle was
.(i) orthodoxy, the separation of the sound
from the unsound — the sheep from the goats.
What a chance by the way for the application
here of the "mnemonic binding" — say white,
sheep; and black, goat; or blue, orthodoxy;
and yellow, heterodoxy. This indeed is one
of the earliest classifications of Christian theology. The ante-Nicene fathers divided their
books into those "received" and "not received"
or else "orthodox" and "heretical."
(j) The form principle of classification is
also sometimes practically a universal first
principle. It is used in fact in all systems
where, e. g., all encyclopaedias are picked out
from the other books in their subjects and it
becomes a prime principle in the case of those
libraries which put together all encyclopaedias
including such as those of Medicine, Political Economy and the special sciences in a department of encyclopaedias. The same thing
is true in the matter of periodicals.
An example of what may be called (k)
classification by literary value is the putting
together of select books in a reading room.
Another possible distinction is (1) classification according to interest. This usually has
the utilitarian purpose of saving steps, but is
illustrated by the putting out on special

64
shelves of the latest books and the putting of
fiction and biography and in general the most
used books nearest the delivery desk. The
principle of (m) linguistic classification is
also much used. In the popular library this is
liable to be a fundamental principle, books
being arranged first of all according to language throughout, etc. This principle always
comes in, too, at the point where we separate
an author's works into editions and translations. (n) The classification which is chronological by books may arrange either in the
order of their publication or of their accession to the library.
This list of kinds of book classifications in
actual use might be extended still further —
(o) breadth of book sometimes governs location, as in the case of oblong folios, (p)
thickness even, in the case of broadsides and
pamphlets generally. There is hardly a characteristic imaginable which may not modify
the grouping on shelves at least: (q) weight
(as in the case of inscriptions), (r) fragility
(as in the case of papyri), (s) financial value
(in the case of rare books), etc., etc., All
these principles are not only in use but are
legitimately in use, for it is the useful purpose which determines, and if in any case
the most useful service which classification
can perform for its users is, say, to separate

65
the orthodox and unorthodox, then this becomes legitimately the prime principle, and
after it but only after it the logical, historical,
etc., principles may come in. It is clear therefore that the kind of classification to be
used —judged by its leading principle — depends on the kind of use to which it is to be
put.
This gives us a clue in the case of the special libraries, but what of the general libraries? What is the prime principle for them,
and is there any order of subordination in the
application of the secondary principles? With
so many principles in actual use as dominating principles is there any way of deciding
when doctors disagree? I say yes. When
doctors disagree we let some principle decide.
In this case, as the first lecture tried to show,
the fundamental law is the law of likeness.
The order which dominates is the one which
takes into account the greatest number of
points of likeness, and in the use of subordinate principles the order of sequence in use depends on the same law. The true order, according to total points of likeness as here interpreted (whether interpretation iL just or not
each must judge for himself) is as follows: ( i )
The logical order or order of likeness of contents following the order of real things from
the complex to the simple. This, which is the
«5

66
inverted evolutionary order, is on the whole
better practically as well than the evolutionary
or the order from the simple to the complex,
because the most complex books containing
the greatest variety of subjects should precede
instead of follow their inclusive subdivisions
in the book classification.
Nevertheless in
subordinate parts the evolutionary (or, what
is identical the "historical") order is often
the more useful. (2) The geographical order or classification according to the position of things in space includes all kinds of
things, though each at only a single instant
of time. (3) Chronological classification by
subjects indicates the position of only a single
thing in space though showing it at different
instants of time. This exhausts the "natural"
order.
(4) The alphabetical now follows,
taking up an artificial series at the point
where the natural stops. It may be alphabetical by subjects or alphabetical by authors.
(5) To this should be added, and ordinarily
only after we have gotten past the alphabetical by subjects and the alphabetical by authors, a second artificial form, the linguistic.
(6) Finally we have the chronological by
books (not subjects), or the arrangement by
dates or dates of first edition, of the works
of any individual author in his particular
language. This should only come in as a rule
after others have been exhausted.

67

This I take to be the true sequence of principles as applied to a classification for any
general library: Logical, geographical, chronological by subjects, alphabetical, linguistic,
chronological by books: e. g., History (logical or natural) ; France (geographical); the
Revolution (chronological); Carlyle (alphabetical) ; French translation (linguistic) ; 1865
(chronological by books). Note that by
chronological is here meant not the chronological by accession, which is a very common
usage at this stage, but chronological by date
of publication, which is a very different thing.
The accession sequence only comes in where
there are two books of the same date and
hardly deserves to be called a "principle."
We have here thus no less than six distinct
principles of classification all legitimately used
in one system and all in use in most approved
systems.
V.

LIKENESS BETWEEN THEORETICAL CLASSIFICATION AND BOOK CLASSIFICATION.

Having defined thus the object and kinds
of book classification we return again to the
prime object of the paper, which is to call
attention to the differences between theoretical and practical classification and the adjustments of the former necessary in the latter. We must not forget, however, that the

68

two things are essentially the same, and that
the principles which guide in forming as well
as the actual sequence of the theoretical order
are to be regarded as the normal which hold
except as they have to be modified by practical conditions.
Attention was called in the introduction to
the first lecture to the meaning and laws as
well as to the kinds of classification, universally considered. The same considerations as
to the real nature of the act and the laws
which govern the process hold in the formation and application of a practical book classification. Among these the chief thing to
be kept in mind is the fact that the arrangement of your books as a whole and in detail
is a discrimination of likeness and an arranging of the books according to likeness or unlikeness from the most complex to the simplest. There is no definition that was there
given or law there defined which does not
hold equally well for your book classification
as principles, however much the application
of them may consist of exceptions, and the
quintessence of the whole is the law of likeness itself— especially the law of sequence
from the like to the like-and-unlike, or vice
versa. The principle of likeness and of sequence through the more to the less alike
governs the whole process of practical clas-

69
sification; the order of the classes in the making of schedules; the preparing of notation,
the plan of arranging the books on the shelves
or the cards in their cases, and the actual
practice of assigning of books to their places.
It may be said therefore that theoretical and
practical classification are absolutely alike in
their principles, however radically they may
differ in their application to concrete things.
VL

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEORETICAL CLASSIFICATION AND BOOK CLASSIFICATION.

These differences may be roughly summed
up as differences which come to light in making the schedules, in making a notation, in
arranging cards, in locating books on shelves,
in the practical work of assigning books to
their classes. Under each of these classes
variations arise, chiefly from the nature of the
material and circumstances and the intended
use.
i. Making the schedules.
The basis of the schedules for book classification is of course the order and divisions
of the sciences. It has already been said that
in general the closer a classification can get
to the true order of the sciences and the
closer it can keep to it the better the system
will be and the longer it will last. True as
this is, it is nevertheless also true that there

70

are many adjustments of the pure order of
the sciences useful and even necessary in
making the classes in book classification, and
that the too wooden insistence on having the
schedules follow the order of the sciences
will often miss the real spirit of classification
and result in putting books where a delicate
common sense would not put them. In short,
the common sense adaptation is often at bottom the more scientific.
(A). Modification by circumstances.
If you wish this expressed in technical
terms I should say "variations arising from
environment."
For most librarians the making of a classification is merely a selection of one already
made. They make their schedules thus wholesale. An important question in the selection
of such a ready made system of classification
for any individual library is the question
whether that system is actually much used.
After all that I have said about conservatism
and the petrifaction of ideas, I shall not be
misunderstood in saying that the first principle in the construction (or choice) of a
classification is a true conservatism. The
very fact that a large number of people do
think already in certain schedules, that large
amounts of actual material have already been
arranged in these schedules, is in itself a rea-

71

son for wise conservatism. This, you will
note carefully, is especially true when the
general spirit of the prevailing classification
is not directly contradictory to the natural
order. The great gain to librarians trained
in one set of schedules or to users similarly
trained, in being able, in passing from one
library to another, to use the same system
is obvious. In cases therefore where the main
classes do not overlap and contradict one
another and especially when the variations
are merely matters of geographical order or
personal taste, the giving up of a practical system actually in use for one ideally better is
to be deprecated, except when the'new is so
markedly better that it is likely to command
general use. For this reason the Dewey Decimal Classification, from the very fact of its
wide use, will probably endure long after
some of the systems now rising, which have
more pretension to follow the true order of
the sciences are dead (though having said
this much it should be said also that the tenacity of the Dewey Qassification is due even
more to a certain versatility and hospitality.
towards adjustments within its limits). It
is for this reason, too, together with the other
very important circumstance that they are
more fully worked out than others, that librarians generally, even those who like the

72

writer have a special system better adapted
as they think to their own libraries, always
advise other librarians to "take Dewey or
Cutter" rather than their own. What is true
of a general system is true also of its parts,
and one must take into account in any attempt
to make a system, e. g., the conventional divisions of Economics or Philosophy and the
Hagenbachian divisions of Theology.
The
fact that men are in the habit of looking for
things under certain heads is quite reason
enough for a strict conservatism when there
is question of changing to some other order.
(B).

Variation arising from the nature of
books.

The order of things and the corresponding
order of sciences follow naturally in their
statement the order of progress from the
simple to the complex, from the like to the
like and unlike, from the less various, therefore, to the more various, from the less to the
more inclusive.
The classification of books on the other
hand does not in the first instance follow the
historical order or order of complexity, but the
inverse evolutionary order, the more to the
less inclusive, the unlike to the like. It follows
thus rather the order in which the human
mind proceeds in tracing out the order of

73
things than the natural order of things itself. If we were following the order from the
less to the more inclusive we would place,
say, first tieatises on individual animals, then
treatises on a class of animals, then treatises
on alt animals, then on all living things, then
on all things living and lifeless. This would
be most awkward in practical classification,
where we are accustomed to the idea that the
whole should precede the parts. The awkwardness comes perhaps partly as the result
of habit. Certainly it would look queer
enough (although the matter is not wholly
unprecedented) to put encyclopaedias, essays
and periodicals at the end rather than at the
beginning of each class. It seems like standing a tree on its branches. But the reason for
the queerness lies fundamentally in the fact
of the composite character of books like encyclopaedias which makes them "more complex" than any part and puts them logically
after rather than before. In an inverted evolutionary order, however, this comes out right.
While therefore it is of no very great practical importance in this matter whether we
write backwards or forwards provided we get
all the letters in their proper order, and while
either method or a mixed method is proved
to be practical in use, nevertheless at present
writing I incline to prefer an order of The-

74

ology, Anthropology, Biology, Hylology, rather than Hylology, Biology, Anthropology, and
Theology, but in this I do not feel very dogmatic.
(C). Differences arising from intended use.
Again, the practical classification of books
is conditioned by the kind of use which is to*
be made of the books. The kind of classification, e. g., which is needed in a free public
library is not necessarily the same in its
details as that which is suited to a university library, although the general outline may
be the same. The chief differences regard
( i ) the adjustment to building, (2) the principles of subdivision, (3) the question of degree and proportion in subdivision.
(1). Adjustment to building.
The general order in which the main classes
are to be placed with reference to one another
in a library may not be so much determined
by their natural relation as by the shape of
the library building and by the rule that the
most used books are to be placed nearest the
delivery desk. Most public libraries keep fiction nearest the door. One famous library
already mentioned and not wholly without
its counterpart in others, classified its books
so that the best bound ones should come

75
nearest the door. This was correct. This
being the chief use, the books were placed
where they would be most used. According
to the law of use books should be arranged
from the-most to the least used. In a reference library, therefore, where the reading
room is at the top of the building, as will be
the case in the New York Public Library,
there most used classes should be nearest the
top, and where, as is generally the case, the
reading room is at the bottom, there they
should be nearest the bottom. In case it happens to be a stack after Mr. Winsor's favorite
scheme, exemplified in the Cambridge Public
Library, where delivery desk is at the middle
of three floors, then most used classes should
be on the middle floor. In all circulating libra-.
ries the most used classes should be nearest the
door. In an agricultural college, therefore,
Agriculture should be nearest the desk, and
in medical, theological, engineering, etc.,
schools, the same law would prevail. In the
Massachusetts Historical Society Library,
Massachusetts history, and in the New Jersey
Historical Society Library, New Jersey history would be nearest the desk. As a matter of
actual practice, something like this is actually done even when the notation follows a different order. It is regarded as a small matter whether main divisions follow the nota-

76
tion order or not. It is this practice by the
way which tends to remove the chief practical objection to the D. C. by allowing the
400s and the 800s to be put side by side.
(2). The principles of subdivision.
This question of the 400s and 800s in the
D. C. is a good illustration of a possible
modification of the scientific order by the law
of putting together the books most used together. In some libraries "Language" and
"Literature" are main classes and books are
arranged under each in the order of languages. In other libraries "Language and
literature" is one class divided by languages
and then under each language again divided
into "Philology and literature." This latter
rather than the D. C. method is usually preferred in a college library according to the
law of the most used, since a "department"
generally is linguistic and the same professor
handles both language and literature. This
is typical of all branches in a college library
where the department generally rules — and
departments (strange as it may seem) by no
means strictly follow the real order and divisions of the sciences. In each case, whichever order is finally pitched on, the ground of
choice is, rightly, less the "real order" than
the order in which the books are used together.

77
(3). The question of degree and proportion
in subdivision.
This question is in brief the burning question of close or broad classification; or at
least the question which once was burning —
the question in other words whether classification distinctions shall be carried beyond the
limit even of the minutest subdivision of the
sciences or shall be limited to the most general schedules. The controlling law in the
matter is the principle of usefulness and the
general rule is "the greater the number of
different books the closer the classification."
So long as there is only a shelf-full or two,
a class subdivision is of little importance;
when there are a hundred or two shelf-fulls
it becomes a matter of great importance. It
follows therefore that every library feels this
need of minute classification in its specialties
and can be satisfied with broad classes in the
rest. Thus the Halle Library devotes about
one-third of all its schedules to a very minute
subdivision of Law. In the same way we
at Princeton wish to use three times as many
prime schedules for New Jersey history as
we do for the history of any other state, and
fifty times as many for the United States as
for Holland.
The library of a zoological
museum really needs to follow the scientific
subdivisions of animal classes to the very

78

farthest sub-class, but it may arrange such
botanical works as it happens to have in a
very few classes. The proportion in subdivision therefore depends on the kind of
books that the use of the library calls for.
That this proportion would be, in a general
classification, a pretty hard thing to judge,
is witnessed by Dr. Wire's complaint against
the Decimal Classification, that it gives ioo
places each to Philosophy and Theology
where they should be joined in one! There
are still, probably, as many books on theology in existence as on all the other sciences
put together, and for a universal system surely
one-tenth of the schedules is none too many.
The question of degree of subdivision is
really included in what has been said. No
general scheme of classification has ever been
carried out in all its parts to the minuteness
with which these parts have been carried out
in special libraries. I doubt if 100,000 schedules would do this. As a rule the best general systems carry to about 10,000 places, and
the question over which dispute has raged so
violently may fairly be said to reduce itself to
a question, between 100, 1000 and 10,000.
I hope that we are now agreed on close
classification, but for fear that we may not
all be fully persuaded, a word or two more
on the matter. The practical use of the

79
broad classification is simply to help a man
who wants a specific book and has access to
the books to go somewhat more quickly to
that specific book in a broad class by beginning the alphabetical arrangement by authors
earlier. But this help would be a greater one
still if the whole library were arranged alphabetically, and this I take to be the inevitable
logical end of a refusal to carry close classification to a somewhat extreme degree of
minuteness. As a matter of logic, too, if the
broad classifier is consistent he must not even
arrange by authors under one of his broad
classes (for that is making alphabetical
classes) but must leave helter skelter. In reality the broad classifier is as close as the closest
and differs merely in insisting that the logical
subdivision according to likeness shall be
abandoned for an artificial division according
to name, size, color, or what not, at an earlier
stage than his "close" adversary. For my own
part I see no good scientific reason, and indeed no practical reason why, even for a
small number of books, it is not better to
have the most minute logical subdivision, providing there is a good index to the classification and an author index to books. All the
books of a given subject are together just the
same in the close as in the broad, and at least
in the cases where you are after the more

8o

specific subject you make a great gain through
getting the greater bulk of material together
at once, whereas on the other hand, if you are
referring to a specific book, the reference
from catlog to this book is just as specific,
and there is no loss. The rule of this matter
seems to me to be to carry classification to
the last degree of real natural likeness, and
as much farther in the various artificial forms
as the special conditions of the library require, but the "broad classifier" will, if he
thinks it more useful, properly increase or
diminish the natural subdivisions according
to the special needs of-his library.
2. Making a notation.
A notation is simply a shorthand series of
names for classes. There are three methods
which may be distinguished among attempts
at a representation of the whole of things:
( i ) The systematic encyclopaedia, which attempts to give a description of all things in a
form more or less full of detail as the case
may be, from a complete treatise down to the
barest definition. (2) The "system of classification" with which we librarians are familiar,
which gives the same outline, but defines each
class by a single word only or a phrase at
most. (3) The "notation" which is really a
condensed word for each class, but which

8i

nevertheless may and should convey a representation not merely of the division, but also
of the sequence, and not only of the artificial
sequence, but of the logical sequence, so far
as it can be expressed.
In preparing a notation therefore the logical
and mnemonic element is of prime importance.
This element may exist either with the alphabetical or with the decimal or with the mixed
system of notation. It cannot so well exist
with the consecutive whole number and does
not exist at all in the notation which is mnemonic in the sense of beginning with the first
letters of the name of the class — the system
which is, I believe, in use in the Sorbonne,
and in some American libraries, and which
has been accepted by Mr. Langton and M.
Maire.
It is not a part of the plan of this lecture
to go into the discussion of the various combinations which serve as notations, except to
say that the idea of a notation seems to be
one distinctly numerical, and that every practical system sooner or later does make use of
both letters and figures. It is only a question
of at which end or where in the middle the
letters shall go, and whether the figures shall
be decimal (t. e., logical) or consecutive,
Roman or Arabic. As a matter of personal
opinion, I hold that a classification should be
6

82

strictly logical throughout in one series with
decimal notation, but that where portions of
the library must be differentiated into separately located collections of Reference, Kept
books, Mss., etc., this should be so done by
the prefixing of letters. Theoretically, however, one may hold himself free to introduce
his new symbol at any point whatever in his
number. It is a matter of practical judgment as to whether points shall be introduced
after three figures or four figures, or whether
the decimal series shall be broken up after
certain distance or not, e, g., by introducing
the initial letter with the author number, as
in the Cutter table, or keeping the decimal
still with authors, as we do. However that
may be, the strictly logical notation must be
broken at times by the need of separating
certain classes of books from their logical order and indicating this difference in the notation.
The choice of notation again is limited by
the ability of the users, and what will pass
iftell in a learned library may not do so well
in a popular one. Theoretically therefore one
may use Roman, Italic, Greek, Hebrew and
what not letters, Roman and Arabic numerals
all together, and there are systems which attempt nearly all, but practically the simpler
a system is the better.

83
3. The classification of the card catalog.
The practical adjustments required for use
are less in card classification than in the actual location of books on shelves, simply because the list of the contents of books can be
broken up on cards while the books themselves cannot. It conies therefore near to
being the science of which book classification
is the art. Books are in card catalogs resolved into their elements in some sort as
molecules into their atoms by the chemist.
This breaking up is, however, only relative
and partial — no one, e. g., analyzes an encyclopaedia in the general catalogs or wants to.
The catalog would get altogether too cumbersome. Moreover, the breaking up must
still leave unbroken sections, and is rather
the breaking of rocks into fragments than resolving them chemically into their elements,
as has been already suggested. The variations are at bottom, therefore, the same as in
book location, though less marked.
4

The classification of books on the shelves.

The actual putting together of books in
groups on the shelves is conditioned practically in the first place by the heterogeneous
character of many books, such £s encyclopaedias, essays, periodicals, etc. There are

84
those who on a small scale go so far as to attempt to break up their periodicals and to
classify the individual articles, but this scheme
cannot be carried very far. Books must, as a
rule, be handled as a whole just as the physiographer handles his conglomerate mass, not
as the chemist who resolves his into the individual atoms.
A second practical conditioning of the classification of books on the shelves is the matter
of size. I have gone so far as to stand up the
Paris Polyglot beside the little Stevens edition, but the most fanatical advocate of complete sequence on the shelves would not dare
put some elephant folios that you have seen
next to the Pickering classics. There must
be a limit somewhere. This does not necessarily affect the schedules. It need not even
affect the notation, although it generally does
so. The user must simply know that he must
go to two or three series of books instead of
one series in order to completely exhaust the
material of his subject, and the modern system of "dummies" even saves him much of
the need of this, and he need only examine
one series in nine cases out of ten, if he is
tolerably familiar with the bibliography of his
subject. At the very best, however, the size
does limit the actual putting of all books together in their "natural" order.

85
This same thing is true where books of
special value, or books considered unsuitable
for general reading on account of immorality
or (in special libraries) unorthodoxy, have
to be locked up behind the scenes. The theoretical order is practically disturbed.
5. The putting of the books in their classes.
By this is meant the actual work of classification on the part of the classifier. Even
at this stage, after the schedules, the notation and all the rules for location have been
well settled, the need of adjustment of the
theoretical to practical use continues. If, for
example, a university has a Department of
Economics and no Department of Agriculture,
why, then, should a book on agricultural
prices be placed the whole distance of the library away from Economics under Agriculture, instead of under Agricultural production in Economics? Yet in a university with
an agricultural department it might be much
more important under Agriculture than under Production. In the same way a book on
railways in all their aspects in a technological school might belong under Engineering,
and in a business college under Business, and
in an arts college under Economics.
It is just such common sens£ adjustments
as this which test the mettle of the classifier,

86
and it is the fact of this need which makes
the really good classifier so rare.
If it were possible to make classification in
such way that a mechanical application
would provide for all cases it would be another matter. As it is, the variety is endless
and the thing to be remembered is that the
controlling law for all variation is the law of
use. Add to this the fact that the prevailing
law of all normal classification is likeness,
and you are (theoretically) pretty well
equipped for your work.
By this law of likeness is meant chiefly that
law of systematic progression from the like
to the like, and unlike which we have called
progress in complexity. The whole art of
classifying in a nutshell lies in the ability to
discriminate the like from the unlike, the
less from the more inclusive. It is intended
to suggest that the fact that classification i£
by nature a putting together of like things
makes this idea of "likeness" the prevailing
idea to be kept in mind in every aspect of the
process.
VII.

CRITERIA OF A PRACTICAL BOOK CLASSIFICATION.

What, then, are the criteria of a good classification for books?

87

i. It should follow as nearly as possible the
order of things. A properly classified library
is perhaps the nearest thing that there is to
a microcosm. A human mind which knew
all things might be more perfect in this regard, but in reality no one can or does keep
the whole of things in mind as a library does.
It must therefore follow the order of complexity or of history, or, if you please, of
evolution.
2. It should be carried out in minute detail.
3. It should be provided with a notation
which will allow for indefinite subdivision,
using mixed symbols, but with a predominant
decimal base.
4. It should be provided with a detailed and
specific index.
5. The value of such a system is increased
in direct ratio to the generalness off its
use.
How do existing systems answer these requirements? The Halle system is disproportionate and its notation entirely too complex;
but it is in some respects the most logical of
leading systems. The system of Bonazzi is
too brief and broad, and its notation is not
satisfactory. Rowell's University of California system is also too brief, and its notation
cumbersome for interpolation. But it is sen-

88

sible in its order and division. Practically
speaking, the Decimal Classification and the
Expansive Classification are the only ones
of considerable extent which can be counted
finished, and the E. C. is still a little short
of that. In the matter of criteria of use,
complete indexing and general practicality,
the D. C. is of course without rival. It
is somewhat out of proportion at certain
points, but perhaps not seriously so. Its general order, though in many classes admirable,
is less satisfactory logically on the whole than
either the E. C. or the Halle system. The
E. C. is sensible, logical, applies a predominant alphabetical notation with great success,
is well indexed up to the sixth expansion and
is coming to be a good deal used. The final
expansion, so far as it has gotten, is a monument of patience and adequate scholarship,
and demonstrates, as it has never been shown
before in any system, that the alphabetical
base is a truly logical and very flexible base.
As classification itself is the highest function
of the librarian's work, calling into play
every faculty and every attainment of knowledge— the acme of bibliothecal work — so
these two systems of classification mark the
high water line of American library science
and are the climax of its achievement.

89
VIII.

CONCLUSION.

Do you ask what then is left of the theoretical order after all these modifications?
That is the question which we used to ask
of our Latin grammars. Is the "rule" anything but a hook on which to hang the exceptions? To this question I answer that the
theoretical order is yet the rule, however
many exceptions there may be. It is the
guide, master, and familiar in every act and
thought. It is the norm by which every application is tested, every variation judged. It
is in short the soul of that complex body,
often curiously modified by its attempt to adjust to environment and sometimes sadly
twisted and deformed by unfortunate accidents, which we call practical classification.
Please remember that I am speaking not so
much now of that theoretical order which I
myself have worked out in these lectures, and
which may or may not be a contribution to
the matter, as of the theory which underlies
the Dewey and the Cutter system with which
you have most to do. Every system has its
theory of order, and with whatever system
you have to do, whether anything that is now
or something which you or some one else shall
make, the more thoroughly you understand
and the more steadily you keep in mind the

go

theory which underlies, the better you will be
able to make those little adjustments which
you inevitably must make of any system and
the more easily and satisfactorily you will
be able to put the books into the classes of
that system.

APPENDIX.
SYSTEMS OF CLASSIFICATION.
I.

METHOD.

THIS appendix is to be regarded as illustrative of the lectures rather than as a monograph. It aims to furnish a bibliographical
guide for the student of classification, especially for the library school student, and its
method looks chiefly to the exhausting of the
most accessible sources in such way that the
student may feel that he has references to
information on all the most generally recognized systems, rather than the information
itself. Brief outlines are, however, given of a
few systems and longer ones of a very few
systems significant practically at the present
time, and there is rather a large amount of
matter which may be called original in that
it is not contained in any of the usual sources
and has not before been incorporated in the
literary "tradition" of the history of classification. While, therefore, the matter has not
been carried to a final degree of scientific
precision, it is what may be called a "rough"
or "trial" bibliographical history of classifi-

92

cation. The chief "roughness" lies in the
fact that many references, taken from secondary sources, are unverified, as it seemed more
important for the purpose to get the material
together and in shape for use than to attempt an accuracy which would require a long
postponement of publication. A good deal of
the matter, however, is actually from the original or has been verified by the original, and
this applies to almost every one of the significant systems.
The plan has been to include all systems
recognized in the histories of classification
without much regard to their value, but, in
the supplementary matter, to introduce only
those which for one reason or another are of
some historical significance. The list could,
of course, have been greatly increased by
the introduction of mere variations or insignificant schemes, and some of more or less
importance may have been omitted by inadvertence, but in general if omitted the system may be counted obscure or unimportant.
In the bibliographical references some special pains has been taken to indicate at least
one place where the outline of the system may
be found.
In dating the systems the date of first publication is the basis, but in the case of libraries where the system has been long in use

93
before the first memorandum of publication
(British Museum) date of first use is givien.
Owing to the fact that the form of classification often changes in various editions it is
necessary to remember that the outline when
given is not always either the earliest or
latest form.
II.

CLASSIFICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS.

Systems of classification, or as they used
generally to be called "bibliographical systems," are chiefly of five kinds: ( i ) The philosophical, or scientific — those concerned abstractly with the order of the sciences or
the order of things; (2) the pedagogic, or
those constructed with reference to courses
of education; (3) the encyclopaedic, closely
resembling in aim the pedagogic, but intended
to include some material as well as outline;
(4) the bibliographic, or those suited to the
arrangement of titles of books in a bibliography; and finally (5) the systems for classifying books o;i the shelves of a library, which,
if you need a technical name, may be called
"bibliothetic." The first three may be regarded as coming under the heading of the
theoretical, in that their authors ane free to
arrange the subjects at will according to their
ideas. The two latter belong to practical

94
classification, in that they deal with masses
which are already concretely formed and they
must therefore be adjusted according to the
nature of this material. The classification of
titles or the bibliographic is more flexible
than the "bibliothetic" in that it does not have
to take account, in the location of titles, of
size, shape, material, etc., as in the case of
library classification.
III.

LITERATURE REFERRED TO.

It is usually a matter of surprise to the
new student of classification to find how many
systems have been proposed and especially
how many times their history has been written, more or less fully. Following is a list
of those sketches chiefly used in this appendix as being the most comprehensive and accessible to the student.
ACHARD, C. F. Cours elementaire de bibliographic Marseille, 1806-7. 2 v., 8°. [Not
seen recently. Quotations made from Petzholdt]
AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION.

Reports on

classification of Larned, 1882; Lane, 1885;
Bliss, 1889; Nelson, 1894; Wire, 1898; in
the Proceedings as published in the LIBRARY JOURNAL for the respective years.
BAIN,, Alexander. Classification of the sci-

95
ences. In his: Logic. N. Y. (1886) 627639 (Appendix A.) [A considerable number of philosophical systems with good critical discussions.]
BROWN, J. D. Manual of library classification
and shelf arrangement. Lond., 1898. 120.
[Valuable as bringing up to date and introduces some new-old systems but does not
treat old exhaustively.]
CAVE, Alfred. An introduction to theology.
Edin., 1896. 8°. pp. 68-80: Place of theology in the classification of the sciences.
[A few well handled theoretical systems.]
CLARKE, Adam. Bibliographical systems. In
his: Bibliographical miscellany. Lond., 2
(1806) 198-218. [Few but detailed.]
CLARKE, Archibald. Some old treatises on
libraries and librarian's work. In: The Library 10 (1898) 327-9; 385-95. [Few.]
CLASSIFICATION Schemes. In: The Library 9
(1897) 203-6; 10 (1898) 97-100; 162-3.
[Several of standard systems in outline.]
COLLAN, K. Om bibliografiska Systemer och
Bibliotheksmethoder. 1861. 8°.
"A sort of extract" in Neuer Anzeigier
(1862) 360-4. [This extract in the source
quoted in this appendix. Original not
seen.]
Petzholdt (1866) 21 (full title and memorandum of systems included.)

—

96
CONSTANTIN, L. A. Bibliotheconomie. Paris,
1839. 8°, also 1840; tr. German 1840, also
1842; tr. Spanish 1864. [Ed. quoted is the
German 1842 refs. as given by Petzholdt]
DENIS, F. et alt. Nouveau manuel de bibliographic universelle. Paris, 1857. 8°. v.
1, pp. x.-xvi. [Reprints from the Neuer
Anzeiger. Not seen.]
EDWARDS, Edward. Memoirs of libraries.
Lond., 1859. v. 2, pp. 761-831, with two
folding tables, Classification systems. [Admirable full and useful survey.]
FAUCHEUX. In: Bulletin du bibliophile, iv.
13 (1841) 565-73. [French only according
to Petzholdt. Not seen.]
FISKE, John. Outlines of cosmic philosophy.
v. 2. Bost., 1875. 8°. pp. 188-233, Organization of the sciences.
[Comte and
Spencer.]
FLINT, Robert. Classification of the sciences.
In: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 401-35J 7 (1886)
483-536. [Admirable and thorough critical survey of a large number of philosophical systems. With Shields, best source for
theoretical systems.]
FUMAGALLI, Giuseppe. Sistemi di collocazione praticati nelle diverse biblioteche
italiane e straniere. In his: Delia collocazione dei libri nelle Publiche Biblioteche.
Firenze (1890) 91-153- [Excellent. Many

97
suggestive outlines and specially interesting
as dealing somewhat with notations. Admirable method and proportion. Makes the
best supplement to Petzholdt.] Compare
also his Cataloghi di Biblioteche, 1887,
h 33-7&
GAR, Tommaso. Rassegna di sistemi bibliografici in ordine cronologico. In his: Letture di Bibliologia. Torino (1868) 257281. [A considerable number but not many
full outlines.]
GRAESEL, Arnim. Grundziige der Bibliothekslehre. Lpz., 1890. 120. pp. 152-5, 384-8.
[Excellent. Very brief and compact enumeration of perhaps thirty or forty systems,
including a few partial systems which do
not come within the scope of this appendix.]
HORNE, Thomas Hartwell. General treatises
on libraries and systems for classifying
books. In his: Introduction t6 the study
of Bibliography. Lond., 2 (1814), 554-563.
[Seldom gives outlines.]
HOTTINGER, Joh. Hen.,

Bibliothecarius qua-

dripartitus. ,Tiguri, 1664. 8°. pp. 79-88,
[Topothesia Hbraria sive] methodus disponendae et distribuendae bibliothecae in locos
communes, etc. [Of considerable value for
older systems.]
KEPHART, Horace. Classification, in: U. S,

98
Commissioner of Education. Report for
1892-3, Ch. IX. Papers prepared for the
world's library congress, pp. 861-897.
LEGIPONTIUS, Oliv. De adornanda et ornanda
bibliotheca. Norimb., 1747- sm. 4°. PP44-51, De rei librariae disposition. [Of
considerable value for older systems.]
LYONS, P. A. Encyclopaedia. In: Enc. Brit.
8 (1878) 190-204.
[Admirable survey 6f
encyclopaedia systems.]
MAIRE, Albert. Des systlmes bibliographiques.
In his: Manuel pratique du bibliothecaire%
Par. (1896) 181-248. [Largely supplementary to older surveys. Many new systems
and many of these in fairly full outline.]
MIRA, Giuseppe. Diversi sistemi bibliografici
tenuti dai signori Ameilhon, Camus, Achard.
Peignot, Debure, Barbier, Brunet, etc. In
his: Manuale teorico-pratico di bibliografia.
Palermo, 2 (1862) 121-140. [Fair but with
Fumagalli, easily dispensed with.]
OTTINO, Giuseppe. Sistema bibliografia. In
his: Bibliografia. Milano (1892) 119-147[A few select only.]
PEARSON, Karl. The grammar of science.
Lond., 1900. 8°. pp. 504-532, The classification of the sciences, [Bacon, Comte,
Spencer.]
PEIGNOT, G. Systeme bibliographique, In
his: Dictionnaire raisonnfc de bibliologie.

99
Paris, 2 (1802) 200-281. [Good descriptions with frequent rather full outlines.]
PETZHOLDT, Julius. Bibliographische systems
In his: Bibliotheca bibliographica. Leipzig, (1866) 20-65. [113 systems with full
titles and outlines. The best general survey to his date and still the best for the
period before 1866.]
PETZHOLDT, Julius. Chronologische Uebersicht
von bibliographischen Systemen. Separatabdruck aus dem Neuen Anzeiger fSr Bibliographic und Bibliothekswissenschaft. Dresden, i860.
ROGERS, Walter Thomas. Bibliographical systems. In his: Manual of bibliography.
Lond., (1891) 129-148. [Plagiarized bodily from Ottino.]
ROUVEYRE, Edouard. De la classification systematique des livres. In his: Connaissances
necessaires a un Bibliophile. Par., 2 (1882)
1-66. [Few but some very full outlines.]
SHIELDS, Charles W. Philosophia ultima, or
science of the sciences, v. 2. N. Y., 1889.
8°. pp. 52-79. [With Flint the best source
for theoretical systems.]
Of these Petzholdt (113 titles) is best as
far as he goes; and among the more modern
Fumagalli, Maire, and Brown are of primary
value for book systems, Shields and Flint for
theoretical systems.

100

This list by no means exhausts the number
of sources even of those which the author
has now at hand {e.g. Michael Denis,
Greenwood's Public libraries, various articles
on Encyclopaedia, etc.), but, so far as he can
judge, there is little new material in other
sources.
IV.

THEORETICAL SYSTEMS.

It may not be too far fetched to say that
the history of theoretical classification began
with the division of knowledge into the
knowledge of good and the knowledge of
evil, in which case Eve's tree would rival the
famous tree of Porphyry, and the origin of all
evil would apparently be traced to the effort
to convert theoretical into practical classification.
However this may be, the art of classification came in with the very first exercise of
human thought. Whether Adam's naming of
the animals (which was in the strict sense
an act of practical classification) was historical or not, it is almost certain, from the
nature of human thought, that the very first
act of man as distinguished from his act as
ape (if he was one) was one of classification.
This act of classification made the ape a man.
Before it he was ape, after it man. Human
thought, as distinguished from animal thought,

101

seems to lie in just this power of binding
things together in a group according to their
likeness and unlikeness and keeping clearly
discriminated on these lines.
If by history, however, we mean what is
alone history in the modern sense — a genetic
relationship in which the influence of former
on later systems can be traced — then the history of theoretical classification only begins
with Aristotle or perhaps Plato, but from this
point on may be traced with some definiteness.
B.C. 428-347. System of Plato.
PLATO.

Republic bks. 3 and 7.

Cicero. Academicorum lib. 1, 5, ed. MulLer. Lips., 1889, P. I 0 C% Life and morals,
2. Nature and 3, Discussion.") Sextus Empiricus. Adv. Math. 1, 7, 15 ed. Bekker
(Berl., 1842, 193-4.)
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 405-9; Shields,
Philos. Ult. 2 (1889) 55.
Flint rejects the division usually attributed
to Plato of "dialectics, physics and ethics"
and finds the only authority for it in the testimony of Sextus Empiricus who says (p.
193) that Plato was probably the father of
those who divide into Physics, ethics and
logic "since he discoursed concerning many
physical and ethical and not a few logical

102

Subjects." Flint overlooks the fact that Cicero recognizes almost precisely these divisions, but may nevertheless well be right in
thinking that Plato did not use them since
Diogenes Laertius says that Zeno was the
first to use them, Flint gives a survey of
Plato's "systematic distributions of knowl
edge" which abridged runs as follows: Visible world including things and images of
things, intelligible world including conceptions
(Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy, Harmonics, Ideas, dialectic.) It might be quite as
just to represent this system, as given in the
Plato Republic Books. 3 and 7 as follows:
Useful arts, Music, Gymnastics, Mathematics,
Dialectics.
B.C. 384-322. System of Aristotle.
ARISTOTLE. Metaphysics 5.1.2; 5.1.4; 7 ( 8 ) . i ;
10.7.2; 10.7.4. Ethics 6.3-8. Politics 5 (or
8) 3 (or 2.3.)
Cave. Introduction p. 70; Flint, in: Presb.
R. 6 (1885) 409-13; Shields, Philosophia
Ultima 2 (1889) 55-56 (outline.)
Aristotle divides [Met. 10.7.2 ed. Christ
Lips. 1895, p. 232 (1064 a 16-17) also 5.12
ed. Christ, p. 125 (1025 b 25)] into practical
productive (poietic) and theoretical. The
theoretical or speculative again he divides
[Met. 5.1.4 and 10.7.4. (ed. Christ 1026 a 18-

103

ig; 1064 b 2)] into Mathematics, Physics
(or Natural Philosophy) and Theology (or
Metaphysics.)
If one may, as has been done, classify the
five intellectual virtues (as Ethics 6.3-8)
as Theoretic = Wisdom = Science and intuition, Practical = Prudence and Productive =
Art we have the following outline of Aristotle's system.
Practical or Ethics:
Economics.
Politics.
Law.
Politics proper.
Productive or Creative Art.
Theoretical:
Mathematics.
Physics.
Theology (or Metaphysics.)
To this should be added the fact that in
his Politics (5 or 8.3 ed. Christ, p. 166) treating of the teaching of children, Aristotle
gives the curriculum as Grammar, gymnastics,
music and "according to some" "graphics."
B.C. 366-264. System of Zeno.
ZENO OF CITIUM.

On Reason.

DIOGENES LAERTIUS.

De vitis philos. 7:33.

(Tauchnitz, Lips., 1833) 18-19.

104

Flint, in: Presb. R.6 (1855) 413-15; Shields,
Philos. Ult. 2 (1889) 56.
Logic, Physics (Natural philosophy) Ethics. Zeno was the first to make this division,
according to Diogenes Laertius, and was followed by Chrysippus, Apollodorus, Syllus Endromus, Diogenes the Babylonian, Posidorus,
although some, with Diogenes of Ptolemais,
put Ethics first, with Apollodorus put Ethics
second or with Panaetius and Posidonius begin with Natural philosophy. To this list the
name of Philo at least should be added among
those who put Ethics first, and Plutarch with
those who arrange as Physics, Ethics, Logic.
B.C. 347-339- System of Speusippus.
DIOGENES LAERTIUS.

De vitis philosophorum.

cf. Themistii Paraphrases Aristotelis, ed.
Spengel (Lips. Teub. 1866) 92 1. 15.
According to Diogenes Laertius on the authority of Diodorus, Speusippus was the first
man to maintain the connection of the several
sciences with one another. He was therefore
if this be true the father of scientific classification. His system was probably the prevailing Dialectics, ethics and physics carried
out quite minutely into subdivisions. But cf.
Plato Rep. Bk. 7 on the "intercommunion"
and "Natural relationship" of studies which

105
dispute this, and also cf. Aristotle who has
more claim to the title of paternity.
B.C. 339-314. System of Xenocrates.
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS.

Adv.

math.

1.7.

147

ed. Belcker. Ber., 1842, p. 223.
The sensible, the intellectual and the conjectural.
B.C. 263. System of CUanthes.
DIOGENES LAERTIUS.

De vitis philosoph. 7.33

(Lips. Tauchnitz 1833) 19.
Six divisions: Dialectics, Rhetoric, fithics,
Politics, Physics, Theology. He seems to
have been followed by Zeno of Tarsus and
others.
B.C. 116-27. System of Varro.
LIBRI novem disciplinarum cf. Ritschl, Fr. De
M. Terentii Varronis disciplinarum libris
commentarius. Opuscula 3 (1877) 352-402
esp. 371Flint, in: Presb. R. 6.(1885) 415 (The seven
liberal arts, medicine and architecture);
Shields, Philosophia Ultimo 2 (1889) 56.
Grammar, Dialectics, Rhetoric, Geometry,
Arithmetic, Astrology, Music, Medicine, Architecture.

io6
B.c. 25-A.D. 39. System of Philo.
PHILO Judeaus. De congressu quaerendae
eruditionis gratiae. Opera 3 (Lips. 1828)
70-108 passim.
The encyclical studies are hand maids to
Philosophy and include Grammar (reading,
writing, literature and history), Geometry,
Astronomy, Music, Rhetoric, Logic, Dialectic.
23-79- System of Pliny.
C. PLINI Secundi Naturalis historiae libri
xxxvii, ed. Sillig, 1 (Hamb. 1851) 1-100.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 191 (outline.)
Pliny's order follows the line of: The Universe (Astronomy), The Earth (Geography),
Man, Animals, Plants, Agriculture and horticulture, Medicine, Metallurgy, Art.
35*95- System of Quintilian.
QUINTILIANUS.
Inst. 11.18.1, ed. Bonnell
(Lips. 1882) 98-9.
Q. divides into Theoretical, Practical and
Productive (or poietic.)
BEFORE 305. System of Porphyry.
PORPHYRIUS. Introduction to the Categories
of Aristotle.

107

Jevons, W. S. Principles of Science (N. Y.,
1875) 381-6 (tabular outline); Bain, Logic
(1886) 716-7. ("Body, animated body, animal, rational animal, man.")
This became the "tree" or "ladder" of Porphyry or the "Ramean tree" given with variations by many mediaeval writers; e. g., Nicephorus, Aquinas, Roger Bacon, etc.
Roger Bacon's form of representation of
the order of substance may be taken as practically identical with Porphyrys's ladder and
is a most interesting suggestion of the modern evolutionary order. It may be represented
as follows:
Substance,
Spiritual.
Corporal.
Celestial.
Terrestrial.
Elementary.
Mixed.
Lifeless.
Living.
Vegetable.
Animal.
Irrational.
Rational.
Man.

io8
354-430. System of Augustin.
AUGUSTINUS, Aur.

De Ordine II 12- ed.

Migne. Patrol, lat 32 (1865) 1011-13; also
Retractiones, do. 591 (Grammar, Music,
Dialectic, Rhetoric, Geometry, Arithmetic,
Philosophy) ; also De doct. christ. do. 315766 ("quas liberales vocant")
Schaff, Ph. Theol. propaedeutic. N. Y.,
1894, p. 7; also Hist, of Church 4:611-.
BEFORE 439. System of Capella.
CAPELLA, Martinus. Satyricon [or De septem
artibus], ed. Kopp. Frf.a.M. 1836. 4 0 ;
ed. Eyssenhardt. Lips. 1866. 120.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 191; Flint, in:
Presb. R. 6 (1885) 415; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 56-7; Teuffel,
Hist Rom. Lit. 2 (Lond., 1892) 446-9.
Grammar, Dialectic, Rhetoric, Geometry,
Arithmetic, Astronomy, Music. He also mentions, but counts out from among the liberal
arts "medicine and architectonics."
ABOUT 550. System of Cassiodorus.
CASSIODORUS. De artibus et disciplinis liberalium litterarum. In: Opera ed. Migne 2
(1865) 1150-1218.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 415-6 (Trivi-

log
um and quadrivium, known also as Logica
and Mathematica and correspond to Logic
and Physics of the Stoics) ; Shields, Philos.
Ult. 2 (1889) 57.
Arts:
Grammar.
Rhetoric.
Dialectics.
Mathematics:
Arithmetic.
Music.
Geometry.
Astronomy.
This is the famous "trivium" and "quadrivium" of Mediaeval education.
636. System of Isidore of Seville.
ISIDORUS HISPALENSIS. Origines sive Etymol.
Lib. I. Cap. II., ed. Migne, Patrol, lat. 82
(1878) 74.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 191 (outline); Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 416
(Men. same as Cassiodorus); Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 57 (mention.)
"Seven liberal arts." 1, Grammar; 2, Rhetoric; 3, Dialectic; 4, Arithmetic; 5, Music;
6, Geometry; 7, Astronomy.

no
673-735- System of Bede.
BEDE. Opera didascalia. Ed. Migne, Patrol.
lat. go (1862) 123-606.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 416 (Men.
same as Cassiodorus) ; Shields, Philosophia
Ultima 2 (1889) 57 (mention.)
Besides works on orthography, metrics, etc.,
Bede's work On the nature of things treats of
the formation of the world and its nature, of
the elements and then of what may be called
astronomy, meteorology, oceanology, geology,
geography and in this order. This is followed by various works on times and seasons,
including what may be called a history of the
world in six "ages."
736-804. System of Alcuin.
ALCUINUS. De grammatica. Ed. Migne
Patrol, lat. 101 (1863) 854.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 416 (Men
same as Cassiodorus); Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 57Grammar, Rhetoric (dialectic), Arithmetic,
Geometry, Music, Astrology.
ABOUT 844. System of Hrabanus Maurus.
HRABANUS MAURUS. De universo. Ed Migne

Patrol, lat. i n (1864) 1-614.

Ill

HRABANUS MAURUS.

De clericorum inst

Liber III., ed. Migne Patrol, lat. 107 (1864)
378-405.
(Science of Holy Scripture; Seven Liberal
arts (form of Cassiodorus) Philosophy.)
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 191-2.
God, Man, The animals [The heavens], The
seasons, The waters, The earth, Public buildings, Philosophy, Language, Minerals, Weights
and measures, Agriculture, War and naval
arts, Sports, Fine arts and costume, Domestic
economy.
1071-8. System of Psellus.
PSELLUS, Michael Constantine. Didascalia.
In: Fabricius. Bibl. graeca 5 (1712) app. 2
pp. 69-186.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 .(1878) 192.
P's order may roughly be described as God;
The mind and soul, The body, The virtues,
The elements, Astronomy, Meteorology, The
earth, The waters, Agriculture.
FL. 1120. System of Hugo de S. Victore.
HUGO DE S. VICTORE.

Eruditionis didascalicae

Ed. Migne Patrol, lat. 176 (1880) 739-838
especially 751.
Theoretical or speculative:
Theology.

112

Mathematics.
Arithmetic.
Music.
Geometry.
Astronomy.
Physics.
Practical or Ethics.
Mechanical.
Logical.
Subdivisions are worth studying.
ABOUT 1200-1300. Scholastic System.
SHIELDS. Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 58
(outline.)
The system of Albertus Magnus (ab. 12001280) Duns Scotus (ab. 1265-1308) and
Thomas Aquinas (ab. 1225-1274) is synthetized by Shields as: Theology, Ethics, Metaphysics, Mathematics, Physics; Quadrivium,
Music, Astronomy, Arithmetic, Geometry;
Trivium, Rhetoric, Dialectic, Grammar.
1221-1274. System of St. Bonaventure.
BONAVENTURA, S. Joh. De reductione artium
ad theologiam, in: Opera, v. 6 (Romae
1596) 1-4.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 4*6-7 (Natural:
Physics, Mathematics, Metaphysics; Rational: Grammar, Logic, Rhetoric; Moral:

H3

Ethics, Economics, Politics.)
Philos. Uit. 2 (1889) 57.
1240.

Shields,

System of Vincent of Beauvais.

VINCENTIUS BELLOVACENSIS.

Speculum quad-

ruples Argent 1473-6 and often.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 192 (outline); Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 417;
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 58
(mention.)
Naturale, Doctrinale, Historiale, Morale.
1260-1267. System of Latini.
LATINI, Brunetto. Li livres du Tresor. Paris, 1863. 4°.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 192-3.
1266. System of Roger Bacon.
BACON, Roger. Opus majus, ed. J. H.
Bridges. Oxf., 1897. 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 417; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 58 (mention.)
The order of the Opus Majus compared
with the plan of the Scriptum principale seems
to yield the following order: Philology,
Mathematics, Physics (incl. Optics, Astronomy, Barology, Alchemy, Agriculture, Medicine, Experimental science), Ethics (incl. Re-

II*

lations to God, Civic morality, Personal morality, the Christian religion.)
Elsewhere B. gives an ingenious graphic
representation of what is substantially Por, phyry's ladder.
1297. System of Dante.
DANTE Alighieri. II Convito 2.14-16. Opere
minori, ed. Fraticelli. v. 3 (Fir., 1893)
151-67.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 417 (detailed
ace.) ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889)
571360. System of Glanville.
GLANVILLA, Bartholomeus de. De proprietatibus rerum. Printed [Lugd., 1480] and
often.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 193 (outline.)
1362. System of Berchorius.
BERCHORIUS, Petrus. Opera omnia. Mogunt.,
1609. 3 v. f°, etc.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 193 ("plan
of Glanville.")
1491.

System of Poliziano.

POLIZIANO, Angelo. Panepistemon. Florent,
1491.

4°.

H5
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 .(1885) 417-8 (detailed ace.); Shields, Philosophia Ultima
2 (1889) 58 (mention.)
1496. System of Reisch.
REISCH, Gregor. Margarita philosophica.
Heidelberg, 1496, etc.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 193.
1501.

System of Valla.

VALLA, Georgius. (Placentinus) De expetendis et fugiendis rebus. Venetiis, 1501.
2 V.

f°.

Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 193 (outline.)
1506. System of Maffei.
MAFFEI, Raphael. (Volaterranus) Commentarii Urbani. Roma, 1506. f°.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 193 (outline.)
1540- System of Vanegas.
VANEGAS, Alexio. Primera parte de las differencias de libros que ay en el universo.
. . . Valladolid, 1583. 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 22 (full title and outline.)
r
548. System of Gesner.
GESNER, Conrad. Pandectarum sive partitionum universalium libri xxi.
Tiguri,

u6
1548 (.Bibl. Univ. II. i.-xix.] Partitiones
Theol. 1549 [Bibl. Univ. III. xxi.]
Edwards 2 (1859) 762-3; Table I. no. I.
(outline) ; Hottinger (1664) 82-4 (outline) ;
Petzholdt (1866) 22 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 258 (outline) ; Rouveyre
2 (1882) 11-13; Flint, in: Presb. R. 6
(1885) 435 (mention); Ottino (1892) 121;
Maire (1896) 183 (title); Brown (1898)
40 (outline.)
1553.

System of Nisolio.

NIZOLIO.. Mario. De veris principiis et vera
ratione philosophandi contra pseudophilosophos.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 418 ("some
originality" "extreme nominalist." Detailed
ace.) ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889)
58 (mention.)
BEFORE 1560. System of Taschkoprisade.
HAJI KHALFA. Lexicon bibliog. I. (1835)
31-41 (cf. previous pages for H. K.'s discussion of sub.) ; Petzholdt (1866) 21- (full
title and outline.)
1587. System of de Savigny.
SAVIGNY, Christone de. Tableau . . . de tous
les arts. Paris, 1619. 37 P- f°.
Edwards 2 (1859) 7^4-5 (outline) ; Petz-

ii7

holdt (1866) 23 (full title and outline);
Gar (1868) 258 (full title); Maire (1896)
183 (3 lines.)
1605. System of Bacon.
BACON, Francis.
Partitio Universalis doctrinae humanae, De dign. et aug. Scientiarum, lib. 2, in: Works, ed. Montagu 8
(Lond., 1828) 87 sq.
Edwards 2 (1859) 765-7, Table 1 no. 2;
Petzholdt (1866) 23 (full title and outline;
also mentions 15 editions) ; Gar (1868) 2589 (7 lines only) ; Flint, in: Presb. R. 6
(1885) 421-5; Bain, Logic (1886) 627-8;
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 61-3
(outline); Cave, Introduction (1896) 71-2;
The Library 9 (1897) 203 (outline) ; Brown
(1898) 29 (outline.)
Outline.
[I.] History (Memory) :
Natural History.
Generations (Physics, Physical
Geography, Species, etc.).
Praetergenerations (Monsters) :
Arts.
Civil History:
Ecclesiastical.
Literary.
Civil history proper.

n8
[II.] Poetry (Imagination) :
Narrative.
Dramatic.
Parabolical.
[III.] Science or Philosophy (Reason) :
Philosophy.
Divine Philosophy ( = Natural
Theology.)
Natural Philosophy.
Speculative.
Physic.
Metaphysic.
Operative.
Mechanic.
Magic.
Human Philosophy (=r Anthropology.)
Philosophy of Humanity.
Human physiology (or Physical anthropology.)
Human psychology.
Logic.
Ethics.
Civil philosophy ( = modern
Sociology.)
Society (Social relations.)
Commerce (Economics.)
Government (Politics.)
Theology (Revealed religion.)

I ig

1615.

System of Zara.

ZARA, Antonio. Anatomia ingeniorum et scientiarum. Venetiis, 1615. 40.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 193 (outline.)
1620. System of Alsted.
ALSTED, Johann Heinrich. Encyclopaedia septem tomis distincta. Herbon. Nassov., 1630.
7 v. f°.
Lyons, in: Enc. Brit. 8 (1878) 193-4 (out
line); Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 .(1885) 425-6
("rigidly methodical" detailed ace.)
1638.

System of Campanella.

CAMPANELLA, Thomas. Philos. rationalis . . .
gramroatica, dialectica, rhetorica, poetica,
historiographia, etc. Par., 1638. 4 0 . also,
De reformat sci. Ven., 1633. 40, etc., etc.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 418-20; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 58.
1644.

System of Descartes.

DESCARTES, Rene. Les principes de la philosophic Oeuvres, ed. Cousin. v. 3, Paris, 1824. 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 420-21 ("nearly same as that . . . by Sylvain Regis,
Clauberg, Geulinx—viz. . . . Logic, Meta

120

physics, Physics, Ethics") ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 71.
1649.

System of Fichet.

FICHET, Alexander. Arcana studiorum omnium methodus. Lipsiae, 1710. f°.
Petzholdt (1866) 25-6 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 259.
1650.

System of Hobbes.

HOBBES, Thomas. Leviathan. Lond., 1651.
f°. Molesworth 3 (1839) 71-3. "Of the
several subjects of knowledge" [table.]
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 428-30 ("deeper and truer insight '. . . than Bacon." Detailed outline); Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 68.
1657.

System of Comenius.

COMENIUS, Joh. Am. Opera didactica omnia.
Amst, 1657. 4 v.
Laurie, S S. John Amos Comenius.
Lond., 18S1. 8°. 2 ed., 1884.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 426-7 (outline) ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889)
60 (mention, "religious.")
1678.

System of Anonymous—Flint.

Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 430 (outlined

121

i<588. System of Locke.
LOCKE, John. Essay concerning human understanding. Lond., 1741. 8°. Bk. 4, Ch.
21. "Of the division of the sciences;" ed.
Fraser 2 (Oxf., 1894) 460-3.
Petzholdt (1866) 28 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 260; Flint, in: Presb. R.
6 (1885) 430-1 ["inferior to Bacon and
Hobbes"]; Brown (1898) 30 (outline.)
BEFORE 1609. System of Weizel.
WEIZEL, Erhard, Idea totius encyclopaediae,
etc.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 427-8.
I725- System of Vico.
Vico, Giambattista.

Oeuvres.

Paris, 1835

1 p. 222, II. p. 22-3.

Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 432-3.
1726. System of Wolff.
WOLFF, Christian.
[Commentatio de Deo,
etc., 1726?. Cosmologia gerieralis, 1731 ?,
etc.]
Flint, in: P^resb. R. 6 (1885) 433-4 (detailed
ace.) ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889)
63.

122

1728.
CHAMBERS, E.

System of Chambers.
Cyclopaedia.

Dub., 1740. f°.

v. 1, p. 3-8.
Clarke 2 (1806) 206-7 (with folding sheet) ;
Petzholdt (1866) 31 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 262 (men.)
1748.

System of Girard.

[GIRARD, Gabr. Abbe.] Diderot. Encyclopedic v. 2 (Par., 1751) f°, 161-5. (Given
from ms. full outline.)
Peignot 2 (1802) 233-4; Achard 2 (1806-7)
282-6; Edwards 2 (1859) 778-9, Table 1, no.
4; Petzholdt (1866) 34 (full title and outline.)
1750.

System of Sulzer.

SULZER, Johann Georg. Kurzer Begriflf aller
Wissenschaften 2 aufl. Frf. or Lpz., 1759.
8°.
Flint, in: Presb. 6 (1885) 435 (mention.)
1751.

System of d'Alembert.

D'ALEMBERT. Ouvres 1 (Par., 1821) 99-109.
also in Oeuvr. philos. 1805; also in Diderot
and D'Alembert 1 (Paris, 1751) 47-53 and
folding table.
Edwards 2 (1859) 76-8, Table 1, no. 2

123

("Modification of Bacon," outline given
both in text and table) ; Petzholdt (1866)
42 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 263;
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 425 note; Bain,
Logic (N. Y., 1886) 628; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 61-2; Brown (iSgS)
2Q (outline.)
1760.

System of De Montlinot.

MONTLINOT, Leclerc de. In: Journal Encyclopedique, Sept., 1760.
Edwards 2 (1859) 784-5 ("fantastically
symmetrical.")
1767. System of Bielefield.
BIELEFIELD, Jak. Fr. Erste Grundlinien d.
allgem. Gelehrsamheit. Breslau, 1767. 3
v. 8°.
1775* System of Biisch.
BUSCH, I. G. Encyklopadie der histor. philos.
u. math, wissenschaften. Hamb., 1775. 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 435 (mention.)
1775 (1787 ?). System of Reimarus.
REIMARUS, Herm. Sam.(?) Encyclopadie.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 6 (1885) 435 (mention.)
1778.

System of Schmid.

SCHMID, Christian Heinrich. Abriss der gelehrsamkeit fur encyclopadische vorlesungen.

124

Ber., 1783. 8°. also in Gothaischen magazin, 1778. 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 35 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 264.
1781.

System of Kant.

KANT, Immanuel.
Critik der reinen Vernunft. Riga, 1781, 8°; ed. Hartenstein.
v. 3. Lpz., 1867, 8°; tr. Max Muller. Lond.,
1881, 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 483-5 (outline
and crit.) ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2
(1889) 63-4.
1782.

System of Klugel.

KLUGEL, Georg Simon. Encykl. Uebersicht d.
kenntnisse u. Wissenschaften. Neubrandenb., 1790, 8°; cf. also his Encyklopadie.
Berl., 1782-4, 8°; 2 ed. 1792-1816.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 485 (mention.)
1783.

System of Meinecke.

MEINECKE, J. H. Friedrich. Synopsis eruditionis universae. Quedlinburgi, 1788, 8°;
also 1783-5.
Petzholdt (1866) 35 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 264 (men.); Flint, in: Presb.
R. 6 (1885) 435 (mention.)

125

179Q.

System of Buhle.

BUHLE, Johann Gottlieb. Grundziige einer
allgemeinen encyklopadie. Lemgo, 1790, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 35-6 (full title and outline) ; Gar .(1868) 264 (men.); Flint, in:
Presb. R. 6 (1885) 435 (mention.)
1790.

System of Roth.

ROTH, [Jh. Frd.?] System menschlicher (?)
Kentnisse (??).
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 485 (mention.)
1792. System of Eschenburg.
ESCHENBURG, Johann Joachim. Lehrbuch der
wissenschaftskunde; ed. 3 enl. Berlin, 1809;
also 1792 and 1800.
Petzholdt (1866) 36 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 264 (men.)
1794.

System of von Berg.

BERG, von. Versuch iiber d. zusammenhaug
aller theile der gelehrsamkeit.
Frankf.,
1794, 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 485 (mention.)
1796. System of Krug.
KRUG, Wilhelm Trangott. Versuch einer systematischen enzyklopadie der wissenschaften. Lpz. and Jena, 1796-7.

126
Petzholdt (1866) 37 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 264 (men.); Flint, in:
Presb. R, 7 (1886) 485 (outline); Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 61 (mention,
"political.")
1798.

System of Regnault-Warin and others.

REGNAULT-WARIN, J. B. J. I. P. and others.

Tableau d Tentendement humain . . . Introduction aux etudes encyclopediques.
Paris, 1798, 8°.
Edwards 2 (1859) 768, Table 1, no. II. 3.
(modification of Bacon.)
1799.

System of Meusel.

MEUSEL, Johann Georg. Leitfaden zur geschichte der gelehrsamkeit I. (Lpz., 1799)
196-216.
Constantine2 (1842) 195; Petzholdt (1866)
39 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 264
(men.)
1802.

System of Thiebaut.

THIEBAUT, Arsenne. Exposition du tableau
philosophique des connaissances humaines.
Par., 1802, 8°.
Peignot 2 (1802) 248-56 (very detailed);
Clarke 2 (1806) 198-206 (detailed) ; Petzholdt (1866) 41 (full title and outline);
Gar (1868) 265.

127
1802.

System of Butenschoen.

Peignot 2 (1802) 212-18; Achard 1 (18067) 246-52; Edwards 2 (1859) Table 1, no. 5;
Petzholdt (1866) 40 (outline); Gar (1868)
264 (men.)
1803.

System of Schelling.

SCHELLING, Friedrich Wilh. Jos. v. Vorlesungen ii. d. methode d. acad. studium.
Tub., 1803, 8°; also 1813; 1830, etc.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 485-6 ("in no
sense a classification of the sciences.")
System der gesammten Philosophic, 1804;
first pub. in: Werke, Stuttgart 6 (i860)
131-6.
This is a full detailed tabular statement
much more to the point than that quoted by
Flint and in every sense a classification of the
sciences.
1804. System of Oken.
OKEN, Lorenz. Uebersicht d. grundrisses d
systems der naturphilosophie. Frkf. a. M,
1804, 8°; also various other similar works.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 486 (mention,
"so original as to be altogether unintelligible.")
1806. System of Hefter.
HEFTER, Karl Chr. Philosoph. darstellung alter wissenschaften. Lpz., 1806, 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 486 (mention.)

128

1806. System of Topfer.
TOPFER, Henr. Aug. Encyklop. generalkarte
aller wissenschaften. Grimma, 1806, f°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 486 (mention.)
1807. System of Ortloff.
ORTLOFF, Jh. Andr. "Systematic distribution
of the sciences" perhaps his: Ueb. geschichte
d. wissenschaften u. kiinste. Coburg, 1807,
8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 486 (mention.)
1809.

System of Burdach.

BURDACH, Karl Fr. Der organismus menschl.
wissenschaft u. kunst. Lpz., 1809, 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 486 (mention.)
1809.

System of Kraus.

KRAUS, Christian Jacob.
Encyklopadische
ansichten einiger zweige der gelehrsamkeit. . . . Konigsberg, 1809, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 43-4 (full title and outline.)
1810.

System of Simon.

SIMON, [Joh.? Fried.?] Tabular survey of
the sciences (cf. Flint.)
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 486 (mention.)

129

I8IO. System of Schmid.
SCHMID, Carl Christian Erhard. Allgemeine
encyklopadie und methodologie der wissenschaften. Jena, 1810, 4 0 .
Petzholdt (1866) 44 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 268.
1815.

System of Destutt de Tracy.

TRACY, Destutt de, A. L. C. Cours ^Ideologic Paris, 1801-15, 5 v.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 490; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 63.
1815.

System of Stewart.

STEWART, Dugald. Encyclopaedia Britannica.
Supplement. Preface to the first dissertation, v. 1 (1815) 1-17.
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 62-3.
1816. System of Bentham.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. Chrestomathia. London,
1816-17, 2 pt, 8°, Works ed. Bowring 8
(Lond., 1843) 63-128.
Edwards 2 (1859) 791-2, Table 1, no. vii.;
Petzholdt (1866) 46 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 268; Flint, in: Presb. R.
7 (1866) 490-2 (outline "reminds . . . of
. . . Hobbes . . . but less vigor . . . and
9

130
more . . . pedantry") ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 60 (mention, "Utilitarian/' )
1816. System of Jdsche.

4

JAESCHE, Gottlieb Benjamin. Einleitung zu
einer architectonik u. systemat. Universal
encyklopadie d. wissenschaften. Dorpat,
1816, 4 0 ; Grundlinien, etc., 1818, 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 4&7 (mention.)
1816. System of Hasse.
HASSE, Fr. Chr. A. Encyklopadische tafeln.
Lpz., 1816-20, 12 0 .

Petzholdt (1866) 46-7 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 269.
1817. System of Coleridge.
COLERIDGE, Samuel Taylor.
Encyclopaedia
metropolitana; or, Universal dictionary of
knowledge . . . Lond., 1817-45, 4°; Introduction.
(Lond., 1845, etc.,) p. x., also p.
44.
Edwards 2 (1859) 792, Table 1, no.
viii.; Petzholdt (1866) 47 ( M l title and
outline) ; Gar (1868) 268; Flint, in: Presb.
R. 7 (1886) 490-2 ("Coleridge . . . complained that under editorial revision his
work was . . . 'so bedeviled that I am
ashamed to own it'") ; Bain, Logic (N. Y.,
1886) 628-9; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2

131

(1889) 64-5 (outline); Cave, Introduction
(1896) 72; The Library 9 (1897) 204;
Brown (1898) 31 .(outline.)
Outline.
I. Div. Pure Sciences:
[1.] Formal Sciences.
Grammar.
Logic, Rhetoric.
Mathematics.
Metaphysics.
[2.] Real Sciences:
Morals.
Law.
Theology.
II. Div. Mixed and Applied Sciences:
[1.] Mixed.
Mechanics.
Hydrostatics.
Pneumatics.
Optics.
Astronomy.
[2.] Applied.
I. Experimental Philosophy.
II. Fine, Arts.
III. Useful Arts.
IV. Natural History.
V. Application of Natural History.
III. Div. Biographical and Historical.
IV. Div. Miscellaneous and Lexicographi
cal.

132

1817. System of Hegel.
HEGEL, Geo. W. F. Encyklopadie d. philos.
wissenschaften.
Ed. Henning 6 (Berl.,
1843) 27-8 et passim.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 487-90 ("whatever be the faults . . . for the first time
. . . something like what a science of the
sciences ought to be") ; Shields, Philosophia
Ultima 2 (1889) 66-7.
1817. System of Janelli.
JANELLI, Cataldo. Cenni sulla natura e necessita della scienza delle cose e della storie
umane, 1817.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 493 (outline,
"no intrinsic merit")
1819.

System of Gruber.

GRUBER, J. G. Ueber encyclopadisches studium. In: Ersch u. Gruber; Encyclop. T,
2 (Lpz., 1819) Hi. p.
Petzholdt (1866) 48 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 269; Boccardo. Nuova
enc. ital. 20 (1886) 262-4 (very full outline.)
1819. System of Riidiger.
RUDIGER, C. A. Uebersicht der wissenschaftlichen erkenntniss. Freyberg, 1819.
Petzholdt (1866) 48-9 ( M l title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 269.

133
1819.

' I

System of Schopenhauer.

SCHOPENHAUER, Arthur. Die welt als wille
und vorstellung. Lpz., 1819, 8°; 2 ed., 1844,
8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 509-10 (detailed outline, "deserves to be noted only
as an ingenious curiosity") ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 64.
1820.

System of Longo.

LONGO, Agatino [various works mentioned in
appendix of Di Giovanni's Storia della
Filosofia in Sicilia ace. to Flint.]
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 493 (mention.)
1822.

System of Comte.

COMTE, Aguste. Systeme de philosophic positive 1 (1830) 57-115; also Positive polity,
Eng. tr. 1 (1854) 355-68; iv. 161-8, 549,
597, etc.
Bain, Logic (N. Y., 1886) 629-30; Flint, in:
Presb. R. 7 (1886) 496-501 ("He claimed
but had no right whatever to claim that he
originated the classification which he adopted. If that classification possess any merits
they must be ascribed to Dr. Burdin who
conceived it and to Saint Simon who first
received and published it.")
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 72-6
(outline and excellent resume of criticisms

134
by Whewell, Huxley, Spencer, Fiske,
Lewes, Bain, Littre, Mill) ; Cave, Introduction (1896) 72-5.
Form of 1830.
Mathematics.
Astronomy.
Physics.
Chemistry.
Physiology.Social Physics.
Form of 1851.
Natural Philosophy.
Cosmology.
,
Mathematics.
Astronomy.
Physics.
*
Chemistry.
Biology.
Social Philosophy.
This much abused system to which its enemies grudge any pretention to originality or
merit has nevertheless been almost the chief
stimulus to progress in classification during
this century.
1827. System of Arnott.
ARNOTT, Neil. Elements of Physics. Lond.,
1827.
Bain, Logic (N. Y., 1886) 629.

135
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 495-6 ("all
phenomena physical, chemical, vital, mental") ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889)
69.
1828. System of Ferrarese.
FERRARESE, Luigi. Saggio di una nuova classificazione della scienze.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 493-4; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 60-61 (mention, "ethical.")
1828.

System of Ventura.

VENTURA, Giovachino.
De methodo philosophandi. Rome.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 493; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 61 (mention,
"ecclesiastical.")
1829.

System of Pamphilis.

PAMPHILIS, Giacinto de. Geneografia dello
scibile. 2 ed. 1869.
cf. Longo. Osservazione sulla G. del sig.
Pamphilis, in: Giorn. di sci. per la Sic. v.
35Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 494-5; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 61 (mention,
"aesthetical.")
1830.

System of Rosmini.

ROSMINI, Antonio. Sull' origine delle idee
tr> Lond., v. 3 (1884) 351-65. On the first

136
division of the sciences [Pure (or formal)
Logic, Applied.]
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 504-6; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) (outline);
Davidson, Thomas, Philos. syst. of R.
(Lond., 1882) introd. p. civ. [gives tabular
outline.]
1834.

System of Ampere.

AMPERE, Andre Marie. Essai sur la philosophic des sciences, 1834-43, 8°.
Lubbock (1838) app. p. ix.; Edwards 2
(1859) 797-8, Table 1, no. ix.; Petzholdt
(1866) 51 (full title and outline); Gar
(1868) 271; Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886)
501-4; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889)
71-2 (outline.)
1836-7. System of Hamilton.
HAMILTON, Sir Wiliam. Lectures on metaphysics, 1 vii. 1 (Edin., 1875) 111-120.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 516-8; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 69.
1838.

System of Lubbock.

LUBBOCK, J. W. Remarks on the classification of the different branches of human
knowledge. Lond., 1838, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 54 (Ml title and out-

137
line); Gar (1868) 272; Flint, in: Presb. R.
7 (1886) 509 ("hardly any value," outline )
1839. System of Lowe.
LOWE, Maximilian Leopold. Grundriss der
allgemeinen hodegetik . . . Dresden, 1839,
8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 54 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 272.
1840.

System of Whewell.

WHEWELL, William. Philosophy of the inductive sciences. Lond., 1840, 2 v., 8°;
3d ed. greatly altered, 1858, 2 v., 8°; Novum
organon renovatum, B 2, ch. 9.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 506-9 (detailed outline) ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 65-6 (outline.)
1840.

System of Gioberti.

GIOBERTI, Vincenzo. Introduzione alio studio
della filosofia. Brusselle, 1840, 8°, v. 3, c. 5.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 506; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 67.
1842.

System of Kirchner.

KIRCHNER, C. Hodegetik; oder, Wegweiser
zur universitat fur studierende. . . . Lpz.,
1852, 8°.

138
Petzholdt (1866) 56-7 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 273.
1843.

System of Proudhon.

PROUDHON, Pierre Joseph. De la creation de
Tordre dans rhumanite. Ed. 2. Paris,
1849, 12 0 .

Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 504.
1844.

System of Arnold.

ARNOLD, August. Wissenschaftskunde; oder,
Encyclopadie und methodologie der wissenschaften. Konigsberg, i. d. N. 1844, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 57 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 273.
1844.

System of Voigt.

VOIGT, Bernh. Fr. Wissenschafts-uebersicht
Weimar, 1844, 4 0 .
Petzholdt (1866) 57 (full title and outline.)
1846. System of Lindsay.
LINDSAY, A. W. C. Progression by antagonism. Lond., 1846, 8°.
Edwards 2 (1859) 804-5, Table 1, no. x.;
Petzholdt (1866) 57-8 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 273-4 (outline); Flint,
in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 509; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 63 (mention);
Brown (1898) 31 (outline.)

139
1847. System of Albert.
ALBERT, M. J. F. M.

Recherches sur

les

principes fondamentaux de la Classification
Bibliographique. Paris, 1847, 8°.
Edwards 2 (1859) 798-800, Table 1, no. xii.;
Petzholdt (1866) 57-8 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 274 (outline.)
1847. System of Richter.
RICHTER, Franz J. Wissenschaftskunde. Wien,
1847, 12 0 .

Petzholdt (1866) 59 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 274 (outline.)
1847. System of Ramsay.
RAMSAY, Sir George. A classification of the
sciences in six tables. Lond., 1847, 4 0 .
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 509 ("altogether of an external and unphilosophical
kind.")
1850.

System of Dove.

DOVE, Patrick Edward. Theory of human
progression. Lond., 1850, 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 510-14 ("an
order of ever increasing complexity");
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 69-

140

1851.

System of Coumot.

COURNOT, Ant. Augustin.

Essai sur les fon-

dements de nos connaissances. Paris, 1851,
8°, v. 2, ch. 20-22.

Flint,, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 514-15;
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 72.
1856. System of Wilson.
WILSON, Dr. W. D.

Treatise on Logic. 1856,

341-46.
Edwards 2 (1859) 808-10, Table 1, no. xiii.;
Petzholdt (1866) 62 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 278; Flint, in: Presb. R.
7 (1886) 515-6 (outline); Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 61 (mention,
"aesthetical"); Brown (1898) 31 (outline.)
1856. System of Helfferich.
HELFFERICH, Adolf. Organismus der wissenschaft. Lpz,, 1856, 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 516 (mention,
"haiy and confused.")
1858.

System of Hill.

HILL, Pres't Thomas. Liberal education.
Camb., Mass., 1858.
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 61
(mention, "pedagogical.")

141

i859- System of Renouvier.
RENOUVIER, Charles. Traite de psychologie
rationnelle ch. 18, in his: Essais de critique
generate (Paris, 1854-64, 8°.)
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 518-20;
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 78.
1859.

System of Schmitz.

SCHMITZ, Bernh. Encyclopadie des philologischen studiums der neueren sprachen.
Greifswald, 1859, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 64 (full title and outline):
Gar (1868) 279.
1861.

System of Predari.

PREDARI, Francesco. Enciclopedia nazionale
. . . 1 (Milano, 1861) 1-96.
Petzhold (1866) 64 (full title and outline);
Gar (1868) 279.
1863.

System of Di Giovanni.

Di GIOVANNI, Vine. Principii di filosofia
prima, v. 1, lez. 3.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 520 (outline);
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 .(1889) 67
(mention.)
1863.

System of Peccenini.

PECCENINI, Melchiore. Nuovo albero enciclopedico. Napoli, 1863.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 520; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 63.

142

1864. System of Spencer,
SPENCER, Herbert.

The classification of the

sciences. Lond., 1864, 8°
Compare also the ed. in essays 2 (N. Y.,
1899) 74-H7, esp. p. 78 and the folding
tables.
Bain, Logic (N. Y., 1886) 630-9.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 521-6; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 76 (outline) ;
Cave, Introduction (1896) 75-6 (Fiske's
form); Pearson, Grammar of science
(1900) 510-13.

Outline.
Abstract Science.
Logic and
Mathematics.
Abstract-Concrete Science.
Mechanics,
Physics.
Concrete Science.
Astronomy,
Geology, Biology,
Psychology,
Sociology, etc.
Whatever may be the judgment as to its
finality, this system is probably the most important modern system both as regards its
nature and influence. It was first published
as a sort of polemic against the system of

143
Comte. In the above table the three division*
are not exactly correlative, but the abstractconcrete and concrete form a group over
against the abstract. The sub-classes, too,
are by no means correlative as they appear in
this. It is impossible to give anything like ?.
complete view of the system without reproducing the elaborate folding tables.
1868.

System of Zeller.

ZELLER, Ed. Ueber die aufgabe der Philosophic und ihre stellung zu den iibrigen
wissenschaften. Heidelb., 1868. Also in:
Vortrage 2 Samml., 1877.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 526 ("touches
on . . . but does not directly treat.")
1869.
HARMS,

F.

System of Harms.
Philosophische

einleitung,

in:

Karsten, Gustav. Allgemeine Encyklopaedie der Physik. v. 1, Lpz., 1869, 8°.
.(only physical sciences.)
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 526-7.
1870.

System of Bain.

BAIN, Alexander. Logic, deductive and inductive. N. Y., Appleton, 1886, 120, pp.
25-30.

Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 527 ("best
part of it derived from Comte. Were it not

144
for . . . practical sciences . . . would . . .
be an improvement on Comte's and much
superior to Spencer's.") Bain divides into
abstract, concrete and practical.
1870.

System of Cantoni.

CANTONI, Carlo. Corso elementare di Filosofia 1. Milano, 1870, 160.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 527-8; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 69-70.
1870.

System of Valdarini.

VALDARINI. Principio intendimento e storia
della classificazione della umane conoscenze secondo Francesco Bacon. Firenze,
1870, 160. 2d ed., 1880.
Flint, in: Presb. R..7 (1886) 528 ("gives
. . . ace. of classifications of science");
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 63
(mention.)
1873.
RIBOT, Th.

System of Ribot.

Heredity. N. Y., 1875, 120, p. 193-

Mathematical, physical, biological, moral,
and social sciences.
1874.

System of Peyretti.

PEYRETTI, G. B. Instituzioni di filosofia tec*
retica I. Torino, 1874 8°.

145
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 528 (outline,
etc.) ; Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889)
67 (mention.)
1875.

System of Fiske.

FISKE, John. Organization of the sciences.
In his: "Outlines of Cosmic Philosophy/' 1
(Bost., 1875) 188-233.
An extremely lucid presentation of the
Spencerian system.
1875.

System of Labanca.

LABANCA, Baldassare. Dialettica. Firenze,
1874, 8°, v. 2, lib. iv., c. 1.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 528-9; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 70.
1876. System of Conti.
CONTI, Aug. II vero nell' ordine. Firenze,
1876, 2 v., 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 529-30;
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 70
(mention.)
1877. System of Erdmann.
ERDMANN, Benno. Gliederung der wissenschaften, in: Vierteljahrsschr. f. wiss.
Philos. 2 (1877.)
10

146
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7.(1886) 530-31; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 70.
1879.

System of Corleo.

CORLEO, Simone. Sistema della filosofia Universale. Roma, 1879, 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 531; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 70 (mention.)
1882.

System of Shields.

SHIELDS, Charles W. The order of the
sciences. N. Y., 1882, 120. Also his Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 79-H2.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 532-4.
1882.

System of Bourdeau.

BOURDEAU, M. L. Theorie des sciences. Paris,
1882, 2 v., 8°.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 531-2; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 78.
1884.

System of Stanley.

STANLEY, H. M. On the classification of the

sciences. I n : Mind 9 (1884) 265-74.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 534-5; Shields,
Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 78-9.
Chemistry, Molecular Physics, Molar Physics, Biology, Psychology, Sociology, Theology.

147
1884. System of Thompson.
THOMPSON, Daniel Greenleaf. System of Psychology, v. 1. (Lond., 1884) 76-7.
Flint, in: Presb. R. 7 (1886) 535-6.
1889. System of Wundt.
WUNDT, Wilhelm. Ueber die Einteilung der
wissenschaften, in: Philos. studien 5 (1889)
1-55.
Outline.
[I.] Individual Sciences.
A. Formal or Mathematical sciences.
B. Material sciences.
1. Natural sciences.
2. Intellectual (spiritual?) sciences
(incl. Psychology, Philology,
Economics, History, etc.)
[II.] Philosophy.
1. Doctrine of knowledge.
2. Doctrine of fundamentals ("principien" ?)
The above outline is only an abstract of
what is carried out in detail in the essay.
The admirable and suggestive essay is preceded by a critical account of the history of
classification which is on the critical side (not
the bibliographical, however) unequalled, at
least in any of the sources consulted for this
work.

148
1896. System of Cave.
CAVE, Alfred. Introduction to Theology,
Edinb., Clark, 1896, 8°; pp. 79-8o.
Outline.
I. Mathematics.
(1) Arithmetic and Algebra.
(2) Geometry.
II. Physict.
III. Chemistry.
IV. Astronomy.
(1) Sidereal.
(2) Planetary.
V. Biology.
VI. Geology.
VII. Pneumatology.
(1) Psychology.
(2) Logic.
(3) Ethics.
(4; JEsthetics.
(5) Philology.
VIII. Sociology.
IX. Theology.
1896. System of Stadler.
STADLER, August. Zur klassification der wissenschaften, in: Archiv f. Syst. Philos. 2
(1896) 1-37, w. folding table.

149
Outline.
A. Knowledge.
(A) Doctrine of phenomena.
a. Natural science.
(a) Doctrine of bodies.
1. Cosmology.
2. Astronomy.
3- Science of the earth.
4. Mineralogy.
5. Biology.
(b) Psychology.
1. Subjective.
2. Objective,
3. Comparative.
b. Mathematics.
a. Geometry.
b. Arithmetic.
c. Kinetic.
f

(B) Doctrine of ideas.
a. Teleology.
(a) Pure teleology.
(b) Applied teleology.
i. Eudaemonistic pedagogy.
2. Doctrine of "Goods."
( i ) Economics (material
goods).
(2) ^Esthetics
(spiritual
goods).

150

b. Ethics.
(a) Pure ethics.
(b) Ethical pedagogy.
B. Theory of knowledge.
(A) Formal logic.
(B) Material logic.
Subdivisions given as applying to some or
all classes under Natural science are as follows:
I. Morphology.
II. Chemistry.
III. Histology.
IV. Physics.
V. History.
This is the most suggestive of recent systems—that of Wundt possibly excepted. The
lettering of notation is not exactly that of
Stadler, but is changed to avoid use of Greek
and German letters.
1898.

System of Goblot.

GOBLOT, Edmund. Essai sur la classification
des sciences. Paris, Alcan, 1898, 296 p., 8°.
Polybiblon Pt. Litt., 1898, 399-402 (outline.)
1808.

System of Naville.

NAVILLE, Adrien. Le principe general de la
classification des sciences.
In: Arch.
f. syst. Philos. iv. (1898) 364-81.

151
Class, ace. to the possible (Theorematique)
the real (Histoire) and the good (Canonique.)
1900. System of Pearson.
PEARSON, Karl. The grammar of science. 2
ed. Lond., 1900, 8°, pp. 514-527.
Outline.
A. Abstract Science.
Logic, orthology, methodology (qualitative.)
Arithmetic, algebra, calculus, etc., (quantitative.)
Geometry, trigonometry, etc., (Relations
of space.)
Kinematics, etc., (Relations of time.)
B. Concrete Science.
Precise physical sciences.
Physics of the ether (light, heat, electricity, magnetism, etc.)
Atomic physics.
Molecular physics.
Molar physics.
C. Concrete Science. Organic Phenomena.
Geography and natural history (old sense).
(Space.)
History (including evolution of species.)
Biology.
Morphology, etc., (Form and structure.)
Embryology, etc, (Growth, etc.)

152

Physiology.
Psychology.
Theory of instinct, etc.
Psychics.
Sociology.
1901.

System of These Lectures.

Hylology:
Mathematics.
Physics.
Chemistry.
Astronomy.
Geology.
Biology:
Botany.
Zoology.
Physical anthropology (?)
Anthropology:
Psychology (Human).
Epistemology.
Aesthetics.
Useful arts.
Fine arts.
Language and literature.
Ethics (?)
Sociology (incl. "History").
Theology:
Cosmology.
Christology.
Ecclesiology.
Theology proper.

153
V.

PRACTICAL SYSTEMS.

Systems of book classification are in general distinguished from theoretical systems
not merely by their object but by the fact
that they are provided with a notation. It is
true that the purely theoretical systems are
also often provided with what might be called
a notation whose purpose is to indicate the
logical subordination of classes. But notation in general, whether logical or artificial, is
an important and essential characteristic of
bcok classification, and for this reason is
touched on from time to time in the following sketch, although without any attempt at
exhausting a matter with which this work is
not directly concerned.
There is a strong presumption that the
practice of classifying books in libraries extends back nearly to the accepted date for the
deluge. It is probable that the Egyptian and
Hebrew (and for that matter the Vedic and
Confucian as well) temple libraries were classified at a very early date, as the distribution
of the Thoth literature and the arrangement
of the books in the Hebrew canon seem to
indicate, even if the present form of the latter
as some contend is not older than 200 B.C.
That Assyrian and Babylonian libraries
were classified is certain, and we know that

154
in at least one instance the books of poetry
were located together on the north side of the
library, and in another instance we have a
classed catalog, giving 25 tablets, of which
14 contained a knowledge of the earth and 11
a knowledge of the heavens, subdivision 3 of
this second class being Works on the planet
Venus, 4 On the planets in general, 5 and 6
On the moon, and 8 On the comets (cf. North
Brit. Rev. 51 (1870) 168).
There are many other similar suggestions
of early classification and doubtless better examples than those given, but the proper history of book classification only begins with
that of the Alexandrian library as expounded,
if not invented, by Callimachus. There is a
curious possibility that this system, too, may be
traced to Aristotle, and that he may be found
to be the father of book classification as well
as of theoretical systems, for Strabo not only
says that he was the first collector of books
of whom we have knowledge, but that he
taught the kings of Egypt ("suntaxin") "library economy"! — at least this seems much
more literal and probable than Falconer's
translation "suggested to the kings of Egypt
the formation of a library"!
(Strabo 13,
i:54)
The historical tradition, however, begins
with Callimachus.

155
B.G. 260-240. System of Callimachus .(Library
of Alexandria, Egypt.)
Catalogue of the Alexandrian Library in
120 books (or classes?). The work is lost,
but fragments and references from Athenaeus, Diogenes Laertius, Suidas, Dionysius
Halicarnassus, and others are collected in:
Wachsmuth, C. Die pinakographische thatigkeit des Kallimachos. Philologus 16 (i860)
653-66.
The outline of classification seems, so far
as one can pick it out, to have been as follows:
Poets.
Lawmakers.
Philosophers.
Historians.
Rhetoricians ( Orators.)
Miscellaneous writers.
We have also many hints of subdivisions
such as Epic, Comic, Tragic, Dithyrambic,
under poetry, also Birds, Fishes, Geometry,
Medicine, Cheesecakes, Feasts, etc.
The subdivisions seem to have been, in
some cases at least, chronological by periods,
and in the short miscellaneous subjects at
least probably alphabetical by authors, since
Athenaeus mentioning four writers on the
subject of Cheesecakes (Class 6) gives them

156
:n alphabetical order.
The description included author, title or first words of work
and number of lines and apparently also date
and place. If it is true, as has been alleged,
that Callimachus used the catchwords of a
title or first word of work to indicate the
place of the book, this was a true "Abbreviation notation."
812. The Mediaeval Libraries.
In the mediaeval period the monastic libraries generally {e.g., Staffelsee 812, Reichenau
822, Friaul 837, Lorsch (10th cent., etc., etc.,)
arranged their Bibles and commentaries first
and then the works of the Fathers. Sometimes the service books come before and
sometimes after, and secular books also
formed a separate class.
831. System of the Monastic Library of St.
Requier.
D'ACHERY, Spicilegium, iv., 115-188; Becker,
Gustav. Catal. Bibl. ant. (Bonnae, 1885)
24-9; Edwards 2 (1859) Table 2, no. 1.
Subdivisions differ slightly from those
given by Edwards, e.g. Divinity includes nos.
1-195 and is divided into Bible and Commentaries, Fathers (alphabetically), Canonics, etc.

157
1347- System of the Monastic Library of St.
Emmeram at Ratisbon.
SCHMELLER. Ueber Blichercataloge des xv.
und fruherer Jahrhunderte. In: Serapeum
2 (1841) 16-18.
Edwards 2 (1859) Table 2, no. ii.; Collan;
Petzholdt (1866) 21 (full title and outline.)
1451.

System of the Aldersbach Monastic
Library.

SCHMELLER. In: Serapeum 2 (1841) 260;
Becker, Catal. bibl. ant. (1885) 289; Gottlieb, p. 325.
Classified into Magna, Mediocria, and Manualia.
1498. System of Manutius.
MANUTIUS, Aldus. Libri Graeci impressi.
Edwards 2 (1859) 761, Table 2, no. iii.
(gives 5 classes); Rouveyre 2 (1882) 10;
Ottino (1892) 120 (outline) ; Maire (1896;
182 (outline) ; Brown (1898) 40 (outline.)
1504.

System of Syon Monastery.

BATESON, Mary, ed. Catalogue of the library
of Syon Monastery, Isleworth. Cambridge, 1898, 8°.

158
A, Grammar and classics; B, Medicine and
astrology; C, Philosophy; D, Commentaries
on the sentences; E, Bibles and Concordances; F-I, Commentaries; K, History; L,
Dictionaries; M, Lives of saints; N, Fathers;
O, Devotional tracts; P-S, Sermons; T,
Canon law; V, Civil law. Not divided according to size, but subject only.
1546. System of Estienne.
STEPHANUS, Henricus. Index librorum qui
officina ejusdem H. S. hactenus prodierunt.
Par., 1560, 8°.
Edwards 2 (1859) 762 (gives 14 classes),
Table 2, no. iv.; Rouveyre 2 (1882) 11;
Ottino (1892) 120-21 (outline); Maire
(1896) 182.
1560.

System of Trefier.

TREFLERJ Florian. Methodus exhibens . . .
quorumlibet librorum, ordinationem . . .
Augustae, 1560, 8°.
Edwards 2 (1859) 763-4 (gives 17 classes) ;
Petzholdt (1866) 22-3 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 258 (full title.)
1583.

System of La Croix du Maine.

LA CROIX DU MAINE.

Bibliotheques fran-

Qoises. Paris, 1684; also ed. de Juvigny.
Paris, 1772-3, 6 v-> 4°, H. v. 2, p, 25 sq.

159
Maire (1896) 183 (full title) 193-5 (outline, 107 classes.)
J

597- System of Maunsell.

MAUNSELL, Andrew. Catal. of English printed books. Lond., 1597.
Brown (1898) 41.
1631.

System of Araoz.

ARAOZ, Francisco de. De bene disponenda
Bibliotheca . . . Matriti, 1631, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 23-4 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 259 (2 lines.)
163.1. System of Rhode {University of
Padua.)
HOFFMANN.

(Ein)

bibliothekswissenschaft -

liches Gutachten, abgegeben zu Padua im
jahre 1631 . . . Hamburg, 1856, 4 0 ; also
in: Gratulationsschrift 1856, p. 47-64, and
in: Serapeum 17 (1856) Intelligenzbl., no.
2-5, and in: Neuer Anz. 1856, p. 71-8.
Edwards 2 (1859) p. 769-71, Table 2, no. vi.
(model of Naude) ; Petzholdt (1866) 24
(full title and outline); Gar (1868) 259
(full title.)
J

635- System of Clemens.

CLEMENS, Claudius. Musei sive Bibliothecae
. . . instructio, etc., libri. iv.
Lugduni,
163S, 4°.

i6o
Peignot 2 (1802) 220-80; Home 2 (1814)
556; Edwards 2 (1859) 796, Table 2, no.
vii.; Mira 2 (1862) 134-5; Petzholdt (1866)
25 (full title and outline) ; Maire (1896)
183; 195-6 (outline); Clarke, in: Library
10 (1898) 327-9; 385-7 (outline.)
1635. System of Arias Montanus.
ARIAS MONTANUS.

Regiae Bibliothecae S.

Lavrentii Escorialis descriptio . . . Lugduni, 1635, 4°Peignot 2 (1802) 203-4; Achard 1 (1806-7)
216-8; Petzholdt (1866) 24 (full title and
outline) ; Gar (1868) 259 (full title.)
1643.

System of Naude.

NAUD£, Gabriel. Bibliotheca Cordesianae
catalogus . .
Parisiis, 1643, 4 0 .
NAUD£, Gabriel. Dissertatio de instruenda
Bibliotheca (Schmidt, De Bibliothecis.
Helmst, 1703, 4°, P- J22, 123.)
NAUD£, Gabriel. Advis pour dresser une bibliotheque. Par., 1627, 8°.
Hottinger (1664) 80-1 (outline) ; Legipontius (1747) 42; Peignot 2 (1802) 246;
Home 2 (1814) 561-2; Constantin 2 ed.
(1842) 158; Edwards 2 (1859) 771, Table
2, no. v.; Mira 2 (1862) 135; Petzholdt
(1866) 25 (full title and outline); Gar
(1868) 259: Maire (1896) 183; Clarke, in:
Library 10 (1898) 387-90 (outline.)

I6I

1646. System of Jacob.
JACOB, R. P. Lud. Bibliographia Gallica universalis, 1646. Elenchus materiarum bibliographiae parisinae. Parisiis, 1647, 4 0 .
Home 2 (1814) 558; Maire (1896) 183;
196-7 (outline.)
1658.

System of London.

LONDON, William.
Catalogue of the most
vendible books, etc. Lond., 1658.
Brown (1898) 42.
BEFORE 1664. System of Mabunus.
MABUNUS, Johannes.

Hottinger (1664) 80 (Three classes: Moralia, Theoretica, Ascetica); Legipontius
(1747) 47.
BEFORE 1664. System of Frisius.
FRISIUS, Jacobus.

Hottinger (1664) 81-2 (outline.)
1664.

System of Hottinger.

HOTTINGER, Johann Heinrich. Bibliothecarius
quadripartitus. Tiguri, 1664, 4 0 , p. 84-88.
Petzholdt (1866) 26 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 259 (2 lines.)
1669.

System of Fabri.

FABRI, Honoratus.
1669, 120.

Euphyander.

Legipontius (1747) 47 (outline.)
11

Lugd.,

l62

1669.

System of Lomeier.

LOMEIER, Johann. De bibliothecis liber singularis. . . . Helmstadii, 1705, 4° J also
Zutphaniae, 1669, 8°; Amst, 1669, 8° ?; 2
ed. Ultraj., 1680, 8°.
Home 2 (1814) 560; Petzholdt (1866) 26
(full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 259.
1678.

System of Gamier.

GARNIER, Jean.
Systema Bibliothecae Collegii Parisiensis Societats Jesu.
Parisiis
. . . 1678. . . . Francofurti, 1728, 4°; also
in: Serapeum 11 (1850) Intelligenzbl. 105io, 113, 121-26, 129-33, 137-40.

Home 2 (1814) 557-8; Constantin (1842)
154; Edwards 2 (1859) 774-6, Table 2, no,
viii. (461 subdivisions. Main ones given
here); Mira 2 (1862) 135-6; Petzholdt
(1866) 26-7 (full title and outline); Gar
(1868) 259; Maire (1896) 183; Brown
(1898) 42 (outline.)
1679.

System of Bouilleaud.

BOUILLEAUD. Bibliotheca Thuana. Paris,
1679, 8°; Hamburg, 1679, 8°; also in: Serapeum, Jahrg. 13 (1852) ; Intelligenzbl. 1059, 113-17, 121-26, 129-33, 137-41, 145-49,
153-56.

163
Legipontius (1747) 49; Edwards 2 (1859)
773-4, etc., Table 2, no. ix. ("usual French
system"); Petzholdt (1866) 27 (full title
and outline); Gar (1868) 259-60; Maire
(1896) 183.
1683.

System of Baillet.

BAILLET, Adrien. Jugemens des savans sur
les principaux ouvrages des auteurs . . .
Amst., 1725, 4 0 ; first Par., 1685-6, 12 0 ; 172230, 4°.
Peignot 2 (1802) 204-7; Achard 1 (1806-7)
218-19; Petzholdt (1866) 27-8 (full title
and outline); Gar (1868^ 260.
1683.

System of Ott.

OTT, Johann Heinrich. Neujahrsblatt hrsg.
von der Stadtbibliothek in Zurich. [Zurich,
J
845j 4°, P. 79, "Series Repositorium . . .
bibl. Tigurinorum a 1683"; also in Serapeum (1849) Intelligenzbl., p. 93-4.
Petzholdt (1866) 27 (full title and outline.)
1688. System of'Morhof.
MORHOF, Daniel Georg. Polyhistor. literarius, philosophicus et practicus. . . . Lubecae, 1747, 4°; also Lubec, 1688, 4 0 ; 169^,
4°; 1708, 4 0 ; 1714-1732.
Petzholdt (1866) 28-9 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 260 (full title.)

164
1697. System of Rostgaard.
ROSTGAARD, Frederic. Projet d'une nouvelle
methode pour dresser le catalogue d'une
bibliotheque . . . Francofurti, 1728, 4°.
Petzholdt (1866) 29 (full title and outline) ; Gar, (1868) 260.
1705.

System of Gabriel Martin.

MARTIN, Gabr. Bibliotheca Bultelliana, etc.,
8°. Paris, 1711, 12 0 ; .(also the catals. of
Dufay, Hoym, de Rothelin and Bellanger.)
Diderot et D'Alembert. Encyclopedic, v. 2,
(Paris, 1851,) art.
Catalogue p. 760-1
("best and most generally adopted at date";
outline given.)
Peignot 2 (1802) 236-7; Achard 2 (1806-7)
107; Edwards 2 (1859) 781-2, Table 2, no.
ix.7 ("Modification of Bouilleaud") ; Petzholdt (1866) 29-30 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 260-1; Rouveyre 2 (1882) 14-151709.

System of Marchand.

MARCHAND, Prosper. Catalogus librorum
bibliothecae Ioachimi Faultrier. Paris, 1709,
8°.
Peignot 2 (1802) 235-6; Achard 2 (1806-7)
10-16; Edwards 2 (1859) 777, Table 1, no.
iii.; Petzholdt (1866) 30 full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 261.

i65
1709.

System of Fontanini.

FONTANINI, Justus. Dispositio catalogi Bibliothecae Josephi Renati . . . Romae, 1709,
4°; also 1711, f°, p. 583-720; also Francofurti, 1728, p. 145-88.
Edwards 2 (1859) 777-8 (17 classes given,
1828 in all; alphabetical arr. in general) ;
Petzholdt (1866) 30 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 261.
1718.

System of Leibnitz.

LEIBNITZ, G. W. Idea bibliothecae publicae
secundum classes scientiarum ordinandae,
in: Otium Hanoveranum, etc. Leipz., 171S,
8°, p. 128-38; also in Opera omnia. Genevae, 1.768, 4 0 , v. 5, p. 209-14.
Home 2 (1814) 559; Edwards 2 (1859)
776-7, Table 2, no. x. (10 main classes);
Petzholdt (1866) 30-1 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 261-2; Flint, in: Presb.
R. 6 (1885) 431-2 (outline); Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 60 (mention "academic")
1723.

System of Middle ton.

MIDDLETON, Conyers. Bibliothecae Cantabrigiensis ordinandae methodus qaedam . . .
Cantabrigiae, 1723, 4 0 ; also in: Misc. works,
1755, 8°; 1752-7, 4°, v. 3, p. 475-502; also

i66
in: Serapeum n . ( ^ o )

Intelligenzbl. p.

81-83, 89-91.
Edwards 2 (1859) 779-81, Table 2, no. xi;
Petzholdt (1866) 31 .(full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 262.
1736. System of Cocchi.
COCCHI, Antonio. (Biblioteca Magliabechiana
now part of the B. Nazionale at Florence.)
Fumagalli (1890) 93-4 (Forty classes by
subjects, each divided again by size and
books arranged alphabetically by author in
each class outline.)
1742.

System of Frobesius.

FROBESIUS, JO. Nicolaus. Bibliotheca Meibomiana. Helmaestadi, 1742, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 31-2 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 262 (full title.)
1746. System of Formey.
FORMEY, Samuel. Conseils pour former une
bibliotheque peu nombreuse, mais choisie
. . . Ber., 1756, 8°; (also 1746, i75<>, 1754,
1764, 1775.)
Home 2 (1814) 557; Petzholdt (1866) 32
(full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 262.
1747. System of Beccelli.
BECCELLI, Julius Caesar. De bibliotheca instituenda ac ordinanda liber. Veronae, I747>
4°.

167
Petzholdt (1866) 32 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 262 (men.)
1747-

System of Legipontius.

LEGIPONTIUS, Oliver. Dissertationes philologico-bibliographicae . . . Norimbergae, 1747
4°, P. 51-65; also in Spanish, 1759, 8°.
Home (1814) 559-6o; Petzholdt (1866)
32-3 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868)
262 (full title.)
J

747- System of Crucemannust.

Legipontius (1747) 46-7 (outline.)
1747- System of the Wolfenbuttel

Library.

Legipontius (1747) 47 (outline.)
1748.

System of Francke.

FRANCKE, J. M. Catalogi Bibliothecae Bunavianae specimen. Lipsiae, 1748, 4 0 .
Petzholdt (1866) 33-4 (full title and outline) ; Gar .(1868) 263.
1760.

System of Casiri

CASIRI, Michael. Bibliotheca Arabico-Hispana Escurialensis. Matriti, 1760-70, f°.
Peignot 2 (1802) 220; Petzholdt (1866) 34
(full title and outline) ; Mira 2 (1862) 136;
Gar (1868) 263 (men.)

i68
1763.

System of De Bure.

DE BURE, Guillaume. Catalogue des livres de
la Bibliotheque de feu . . . le Due de la
Valliere. Par., 1783, 8°, v. 1, p. xxxv-lx.
De Bure, Guillaume, Bibliographie Instructive. Par., 1763, 8°, p. xv-lxvi.
Peignot 2 (1802) 237-44; Clarke 2 (1806)
162-197; Achard 2 (1806-7) 107-161; Edwards 2 (1859) 781-2, Table 2, no. ix. (Modification of Bouilleaud) ; Mira 2 .(1862) 15059 (detailed) ; Petzholdt .(1866) 34-5 ( M l
title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 263.
1773.

System of Cels.

CELS, Jacques Martin, and Lottin, A. M.
Coup d'oeil eclaire d'une grand bibliothdque
a l'usage de tout possesseur de livres, 1773.
Clarke, in: The Library 10 .(1898) 390, 39*,
394-5 (outline, adaptation of Bouilleaud's.)
1774.

System of Denis.

DENIS, Mich. Einleitung in die biichkunde,
1777-8; Ed. 2. Wien, 1795-96, 4°.
Denis, Mich. Grundriss d. Bibliographie.
Wien, 1774, 8°.
Peignot 2 (1802) 232-3; Achard 1 (1806-7)
281-2; Edwards 2 .(1859) 789-90 (gives 7
main classes) ; Mira 2 (1862) 137-8; Petzholdt (1866) 35 (full title and outline);
Gar (1868) 263-4.

i6g

1793- System of S chutz-Huf eland and Ersch.
[SCHUTZ-HUFELAND] & ERSCH. Allegemeines

repertorium der literatur fiir die jahr 1785
bis 1790 (-1800?) Jena, 1793-94.
Ersch, Johann Samuel. Handbuch der
deutschen literatur. Lpz., 1812-14, 2 v., 8°.
Peignot 2 (1802) ; Achard 2 (1806-7) 4298; Constantin 2 ed. (1842) 195; Edwards
2 (1859) P. 789, Table 2, no. xii. (1200
classes, of which E. gives 16 principal,
"translated at length in Achard") ; Petzholdt (1866) 36-7 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 264 (men.); Grasel (1890)
152-3 (outline.)
This system is honored by Grasel as "beyond a doubt one of the best," with first
place and most attention, and he recommends
it to the librarian as in many respects a model.
Its notation is certainly not a model, for it
seems liable to run to I. 2. B. b. a. aa. aa. bbb.
bbb, bbbb-Art of war—the italics here representing the corresponding Greek letters.
1798. System of Camus.
CAMUS, A. G. Observations sur la distribution et le classernent des livres d'une bibliotheque. Par., 1798. I n : Memoires de
lTnstitut . . . Litterature. v. 1 (1798) 64366, 675-6.

170
Peignot 2 (1802) 218-20; Achard 1 (1806-7)
252-80; Home 2 (1814) 555-6; Edwards 2
(1859) 786; Mira 2 (1862) 139-40; Petzholdt (1866) 37-8 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1866) 264 (men.)
1799.

System of Ameilhon.

AMEILHON. Projet sur quelques changemens
. . . a nos catalogues de bibliotheques. In:
Memoires de PInstitut National Litterature
et Beaux Arts 2 (Paris, 1799, 4°,) 477-92.
Peignot 2 (1802) 202-3; Achard 1 (1806-7)
197-216; Home 2 (1814) 554-5; Edwards 2
(1859) 785-6, Table 2, no. xiii.; Mira 2
(1862) 139; Petzholdt (1866) 38-9 ( M l
title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 264 (men.)
1800.

System of Coste.

Peignot 2 (1802) 230-2; Achard I (1806-7)
280-1; Petzholdt (1866) 39 (outline from
Peignot) ; Gar (1868) 264 (men.)
1800.

System of Daunou.

DAUNOU, P. CI. Fr. Memoire sur la classification des livres d'une grande bibliotheque
. . . In: Bulletin du bibliophile 4 (184041) 402-10; also, abbreviated. Paris, 1841.
Constantin (1842) 188-90; Edwards 2
(1859) 787-8 (gives 33 classes in 8 ) ; Petzholdt (1866) 39 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 264-5 (6 lines.)

I7i
I8OI. System of Loire.
Peignot 2 (1802) 234-5; Achard 2 (1806-7)
98-100; Edwards 2 (1859) 768-9; Petzholdt
(1866) 39-40 (outline from Peignot); Gar
(1868) 264 (men.)
1801.

System of Parent.

PARENT, aine. Essai sur la bibliographic
Par., 1801, 8°.
Peignot 2 (1802) 246-7; Achard 2 (1806-7)
9-12; Home 2 (1814) 561-2; Edwards 2
(1859) 788, Table 2, no. xiv.; Petzholdt
(1866) 40 (full title and outline); Gar
(1868) 265 (men.) ; Maire (1896) 197 (outline.)
1802. System of Ferrario.
FERRARIO, Giulio. Progetto per un catalogo
bibliografico. Milano, 1802, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 40-1 (full title and outline) ; Gar .(1868) 265.
1802.

System of the Bibliotheque Nationale,
Paris.

RAPPORT de M. Leopold Delisle, administrateur general de la Bibliothdque nationale a
M. le Ministre de Tlnstruction publique, 3
juin, 1885. (Bulletin des bibliotheques et
des archives 4 (1885) 23 sq.
Peignot 2 (1802) 208-13 (outline); Rou-

172

veyre 2 (1882) 63-66 (outline) ; Fumagalli
(1890) 99-101 (outline); Maire (1896) 223
(outline.)
Thirty main classes indicated by letters, the
extra ones being D3, E* O2, O3, P2, Vm, Y2.
Minute subdivisions. Order on shelves (1)
Main classes; (2) Accession periods: period
1 arr. ace. to old catalogue.
1802.

System of Massol.

Peignot 2 (1802) 244-6; Achard 2 (1806-7)
6-9; Petzholdt (1866) 40 (outline from
Peignot) ; Gar (1868) 264 (men.)
1802.

System of Peignot.

PEIGNOT, G. Dictionnaire raisonne de biblio logie 2 (Paris, 1802) 256-80.
Ciarke 2 (1806) 208-18; Achard 2 (1806-7)
12-42; Home 2 (1814) 562-3; Edwards 2
(1859) 768-9; Mira 2 (1862) 140-5 (detailed) ; Petzholdt (1866) 41 (full title and
outline); Gar (1868) 265.
1803.

System of Barbier.

BARBIER, A. A. Quelques idees sur les divisions du catalogue de la bibliotheque du
Conseil d'etat. Paris, 1803, f °; also in: Bulletin du bibliophile 7 (1845) 119-21; also
in: Leipziger allgemeinen press-zeitung 2
(1841) sp. 53-55, 201-7.

173
Achard I (1806-7) 219; Home 2 (1814)
556; Constan.tin (1842) 161-80; Edwards 2
(1859) 796, Table 2, no. ix. (arrangement
of Bouilleaud) ; Mira 2 (1862) 59-79 (detailed); Petzholdt (1866) 41-2 (full title
and outline) ; Gar (1868) 265.
1806.

System of v. Demidoif.

DEMIDOFF, Paul de. Catalogue systematique
des livres . . . v. 1. Moscou, 1806, 4 0 .
Petzholdt (1866) 42 (full title and outline) ;
Gar (1868) 265-6 (outline.)
1807. System of Achard.
ACHARD, C. F. Cours elementaire de bibliographic 2 (1807) 161-243.
Mira 2 (1862) 145-50 (detailed.)
Edwards 2 (1859) 796, Table 2, no. ix. 2
(modification of Bouillaud) ; Petzholdt
(1866) 42-3 (full title and outline); Gar
(1868) 266 (outline.)
1808.

System of Olenin.

OLENIN, E. A. Essai sur un nouvel ordre
bibliographique pour la Bibliotheque Imperiale de St. Petersburg . . . St. Peters^
burg, 1808, 4 0 . (Reprinted in the first Report on British Museum, 1835, App., 457.)
Edwards 2 (1859) 790, Table 2, no. xv.;
Petzholdt (1866) 43 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 266 (outline.)

1/4
1809. System of Girault.
GIRAULT, CI. Xav. Systeme de bibliographie.
. . . Dijon, 1809, 8°.
Achard 2 (1806-7) 73-85; Edwards 2 (1859)
790-1, Table 1, no. vi.; Petzholdt (1866)
43 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 266
(outline.)
1810. System of Brunei.
BRUNET, Gustav. Manuel du libraire et de
l'amateur de livres. Paris, 1860-1865, 6 v.,
8°; v. 6, col. xxvii. 4 ed. 5 (Paris, 1844,
8°) 1-798; 1 ed., 1810.
Constantin (1842) 180-3; Edwards 2 (1859)
796, Table 2, no. ix. 1 (modification of
Bouilleaud); Mira 2 (1862) 79-202 (detailed) ; Petzholdt (1866) 44 (full title and
outline); Gar (1868) 266-7 (outline);
Rouveyre (1882) 21-40 (very detailed);
Ottino (1892) 123-238; Maire (1896) 186
(contains a long series of special criticisms
by Prieur); Maire (1896) 198-208 (detailed outline) ; Brown (1898) 43 (outline) ;
The Library 10 (1898) 162-3 (outline.)
Outline.
Theology.
Jurisprudence.
Sciences and arts.
Belles-lettres.

175
History (including literary history and
bibliography.)
More than eleven hundred subdivisions are
given in the table to the 5th edition (1864.)
Founded as this system was on a very large
number of actual titles, it has many elements
of practicality.
This practicality combined
with its accessibility and the fact that the
titles were actually classified have combined
to make this the most used of all bibliographical systems, up to very recent times at
least.
1812. System of the Bibliographie de la
France.
BIBLIOGRAPHIE DE LA FRANCE.

Tableau

bib-

liographique des ouvrages en tous genres
qui ont paru en France . . . Par., 1812, sq.
Constantin (1842) 183-5; Petzholdt (1866)
44-5 ( M l title and outline); Gar (1868)
267-8.
This is not the same as the system of the
present periodical of this name whose outline
is given by Maire.
1814. First System of Home.
HORNE, Thomas Hartwell. An introduction to
the study of Bibliography. Lond., 1814, p.
373-402.
Petzholdt (1866) 45 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 268.

176
1819.

System of Fortia d'Urban.-

FORTIA D'URBAN, Agricole.

Nouveau

sis-

teme de bibliographie alfabetique . . . ed.
2.

Par., 1822, 12 0 .

Constantin (1842) 186-7; Petzholdt (1866)
47-8 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868)
269; Maire (1896) 197-8 (outline.)
1819.

System of Schrettinger.

SCHRETTINGER, Martin. Versuch eines vollstandigen lehrbuchs der bibliothekswissenschaft . . . Miin., 1829, 8°.
Constantin (1842) 196; Petzholdt (1866)
49 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 269;
Clarke, in: The Library 10 (1898) 391-2.
1821. System of Thun.
THUN, Johann Paul. Neues biichverzeichniss. Lpz., 1843-48, 8°.
Constantin (1842) 195-6; Petzholdt (1866)
49-50 (full title and outline); Gar (1866)
269-70 (outline.)
1825.

Second System of Home.

HORNE, Thomas Hartwell. Catalogue of the
library of Queen's College, Cambridge . . .
Camb. (Eng.,) 1827, 2 v., 8°; also in: Outlines for the classification of a library.
Lond., 1825, 40 (100 copies.)
Edwards 2 (1859) 793-6, Table 2, no. ix. 3

177
(modification of Bouillaud); Petzholdt
(1866) 50 (full title and outline); Brown
(I8Q8) 43-4 (outline.)

1826.

System of Reuss.

REUSS, Ferdinand Friedrich. Ordo Bibliothecae Universitatis Caesareae Mosquensis.
Mosquae, 1826, 4 0 .
Petzholdt (1866) 50-51 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 270; Flint, in: Presb. R.
6 (1885) 435 (mention.)
1826.

System of Pipitone.

PIPITONE, Stefano. Discorso ossia Progetto di
un nuovo piano di classificazione.

Paler-

mo, 1826, 100 p., 8°.
Gar (1868) 270 (full title and outline.)
1827.

System of Mortillaro.

MORTILLARO, Vincenzo. Studio bibliografico.
Palermo, 1827, 8°; also 1832, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 51 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 270.
1828.

System of the Tableau compare des
productions bibliographiques.

TABLEAU COMPARE" DES PRODUCTIONS BIBLIO-

GRAPHIQUES. Quoted, in: Bailly. Notices
sur Ies bibliotheques. Paris, 1828, 8°.
Edwards 2 (1859) 796, Table 2, no. ix. 4
(modification of Bouilleaud.)
12

178
i834- First System of Namur.
NAMUR, P.

Manuel du bibliothecaire . . .

Bruxelles, 1834, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 51-2 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 271 (outline.)
1835.

System of Thienemann.

THIENEMANN, T. G. Verzeichniss eines ansehnlichen theils der bibliothek zu Rochlitz.
. . . Lpz., 1835. Repr. in: Serapeum, 8
(1847) Intelligenzblatt 155-158, 161-166.
Edwards 2 (1859) Table 2, no. xiv., "too fine
spun for common use"; Petzholdt (1866)
52-3 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868)
271-2.

1835.

System of Friedrich.

FRTEDRICH, Joh. Cph. Kritische erorterungn.
zum iibereinstimmenden ordnen und verzeichnen offentlicher bibliotheken. Lpz.,
1835, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 52 ( M l title and outline) :
Gar (1863) 271.
1835.

System of the London Institution.

THOMSON, R., Bragley, E. W., and Maltby,
William. Catalogue of the library of the
London Institution systematically classed.
Lond., 1835Brown (1898) 44.

179
1836. System of the British Museum.
GARNETT, R. On the system of classifying
books on the shelves followed at the British
Museum. Lib. J. 2 (1877) 194-200 [descriptive outline] same art. Trans, of Conference of Librarians. Lond., 1877, 108-114,
188-193.
Harris, G. W. The British Museum system
of press-numbering. In: Library Journal,
12 (1887) 331-4.
Fumagalli (1890) 107-8; The Library 9
(1897) 205 (10 class outline); Brown
(1898) 45^-8 (outline.)
I., Theology; II., Jurisprudence; III., Natural history and Medicine; IV., Archseology
and arts; V., Philosophy; VI., History; VII.,
Geography; VIII., Biography; IX., Belles
Lettres; X., Philology.
l

%37- System of Aime-Martin.

AIME-MARTIN, L. Plan d'une bibliotheque
universale . . . Bruxelles, 1837, 120.
Petzholdt (1866) 53 (full title and outline); Gar (1866) 272.
1838.

System of Levot.

LEVOT, Prosper Jean. Catalogue general des
livres composant les Bibliotheques du Departement de la Marine et des Colonies.
Par., 1838-43. 5 v., 8°.

i8o
Petzholdt (1866) 53-4 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 272.
1838.

System of Bliedener.

[BLIEDENER, Alexander.] Kayser. Vollstandiges Biicher Lexicon, Sachregister. Leipzig, 1838.
Petzholdt .(1866) 53 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 272; Maire (1896) 214
(outline.)
1839.

System of Muquardt.

MUQUARDT, C. Bibliographie de la Belgique
ou catalogue general de Fimprimerie et de
la librairie Beiges . . . Bruxelles, 1838,8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 54 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 272.
1839.

Second System of Namur.

NAMUR, A. Catalogue de la bibliotheque de
TAthenee Royal Grand-Ducal de Luxembourg . . . Luxembourg, 1855, 8°.
Namur, A. Pro jet Tun nouveau systeme
des connaissances humaines. Bruxelles,
1839, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 54-5 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 272 (men.)
1839.

System of Preusker.
senhain.)

(Lib'y of Gros-

PREUSKER, Karl. Wissenschaftliches System
einer Aufstellung statlicher Burger- u. an-

i8i
dere bibliotheken, in: Serapeum .(1850) Intelligenz-Blatt, p. 97-101; also separately
Miessen, 1850, 8°.
Preusker, Karl. (Die) stadt-bibliothek in
Grossenhain, etc. Grossenhain, 1836, 3
Aufl., 1841; 4 aufl., 1847, 8°; 1853, 8°.
Edwards 2 (1859) Table 2, no. xvii.; Petzholdt (1866) 55 (full title and outline);
Gar (1868) 272.
1840. System

of Lehmann and Petersen.

LEHMANN, J. G. C, and Petersen, C. Ansichten und baurisse der neuen gebaude fur
Hamburgs offentliche bildungsanstalten, kurz
besschrieben und in verbindung mit dem
plan fur die kiinftige Aufstellung der Stadtbibliothek herausgegeben. Hamburg, 1840;
also in: Serapeum 8 (1847) Intelligenzbl.
169-73, 177-83, 185-91, 9 (1848); Intelligenzbl. 1-7, 9-12, 17-22, 25-29, 33-40, 41-48,
49-55, 57-63, 65-71, 73-74.
Petzholdt (1866) 55-6 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 272-3; Fumagalli (1890)
i n (F. gives 18 classes .(A-S). A has 48
subdivisions, G 195, etc.)
1841. System of Rossi.
Rossi, Francesco. Cenni sforici e descrittivi
intorno all* I. R. biblioteca di Brera. Milano, 1841, 8°, p. 23-71.

l82
Petzholdt (1866) 56 (full title and outline) ;
Gar .(1868) 273.
1841.

System of Park.

PARK, Roswell. Pantology or a systematic
survey of human knowledge. 1841, 8°; 3
ed. 1843.. 8°.
Shields, Philosophia Ultima 2 (1889) 61
( "bibliographical." )
1842.

System of Merlin.

MERLIN, R. Catalogue de la bibliotheque de
Sylvestre de Sacy. Par., 1842-47, 3 v., 8°,
v. 3, xx-xxiv.
Merlin, R. Classification of works into catalogues. In: Norton's Literary Register,
1854, P. 81-4.
Edwards 2 (1859) p. 801-4, Table 1, no. xi.;
Petzholdt (1866) 57 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 273.
Outline.
I. Philosophy.
II. Theological sciences.
III. Cosmological sciences.
1. Mathematical science.
2. Physical science.
3. Astronomical science.
4. Geological science.
5. Mineralogical science.
6. Phytological science.

183
7. Zoological science.
8. Anthropological science.
Individual man.
Physical.
Moral.
Society.
Social or Political sciences.
Historical sciences.
This extremely interesting classification is
"based upon the logical classification of the
sciences." Merlin advocated classifying by
"the objects" "arranged in the organic scale
of being . . . according to the chronological
order of creation, that is to say arising from
the most simple to the most perfect." Substitute complex for perfect, and here we have
the modern evolutionary conception in its
plainest form applied to books. It is amusing
at this day to note that Edwards, criticising
the system of Merlin, in 1859 calls evolution
"that theory—graceful but unsound—which
had so many charms in its early stages" a
philosophical blunder. "What sort of a science
of palaeontology," he asks, "should we now
possess had all who cultivated it insisted on
working it out under the supremacy of that
theory." It is a matter of extreme interest
to American libraries that at that famous convention of 1853, from which most that is practical in modern library method sprang, the

184
first library plea for an evolutionary system
of classification for books was presented. Wc
have seen "what sort of a science of palaeontology" the application of this theory has produced, and it seems clear that if M. Merlin
had been more successful as a promoter, and
the same theory had been as rigidly applied
to library classification as it was to palaeontology, we should have been much farther
advanced in the matter at the present day.
1843. System of Munich Royal LibraryLAUBMANN, Georg von. Plan und classification s-normativ der K. Hof- und Staatsbibliothek zu Munchen. Nebst einent Anhang iiber die aufstellung u. beschreibung
der biicher. (Ms. sent Fumagalli.)
Fumagalli (1890) 120-2. 12 main classes
(given) with 182 subdivisions. Each class
is arranged in three sizes, then in general
alphabetical Latin abbreviation notation, e&,
"Num, rec." Recent Numismatics. The
Volg. eloq. of Dante, tr. Trissino 1868 is:
"P. o. ital. 8°, 341 gnd."
1844-1848. System of Ilari,
ILARI, Lorenzo. (La) Biblioteca pubblica di
Siena . . . Siena, 1844-48, 7 v. in 8, 4 0 .
Gar .(186S) 273 (title and outline.)

i8s
1847. System of Paulin Paris.
PARIS, Paulin. De la bibliothSque royale.
Par., 1847, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 58-9 (full title arid outline) ; Gar (1868) 274.
1849.

System of the Commercial Lib.,
Hamburg.

HOFFMAN. Die Commerz-Bibliothek in Hamburg. Hamb., 1849, p. 24, 8°.
Edwards 2 (1859) Table 2, no. xvi.
1850.

System of Cardile.

CARDILE, Giuseppe. Studii fondamentali della
scienza bibliografica. Palermo, 1850, 8°.
Gar (1868) 274 (5 lines.)
1850.

System of Narbone.

NARBONE, Alessia. Bibliografia Sicola sistematica, o apparato metodico alia storia letteraria della Sicilia. Palermo, 1850-55, 4 v.;
also in: Rivista di scienze (Palermo) no.
22-4.

Gar (1868) 274-5 (title.)
1852.

System of Schleiermacher.

SCHLEIERMACHER, A. A. E. Bibliographisches

system der gesammten wissenschaftenskunde mit einer anleitung zum ordnen von
biblioteken. Braunschweig, 1847; also 1852,

i86
8°; also in: Petzholdt. Neuer anzeiger
(1853) P. 30-32, 205-208.
Edwards 2 (1859) 806-8, Table 2, no. xviii.;
Petzholdt (1866) 59 (full title and outline) :
Gar (1868) 275; Grasel (1890) 153 (outline); Fumagalli (1890) 113-4 J Brown
(1898) 48 (outline.)
Contains 12,915 classes in 25 main classes.
Fum. gives 25 classes (A-Z).
1853.

System of the Leipziger "Messkatalog"

MESSKATALOG.

Lpz.,

1853, sq. 8°.

Petzholdt (1866) 59-60 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 275 (outline.)
1853.

System of Walckenaer.

WALCKENAER, Baron. Catalogue des livres de
[sa] bibliotheque. Par., 1853, 8°; also in:
Serapeum (1854) Intelligenzbl. 41-44, 4952, 57-60.
Petzholdt (1866) 60-1 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 275.
1853.

System of Wiener.

WIENER, Hermann. Catalogue de la bibliotheque cantonale Vandoise.
Lausanne,
1856, 8°; also in: Serapeum 19 (1858) Intelligenzbl. 89-93, 97-IOI, 105-109, ii3-"7.
Petzholdt (1866) 60-1 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 276.

i87
1854.

System of Palermo.

PALERMO, Francesco. Classazione dei libri a
stampa deir I. e R. Palatina in corrispondenza di un nuovo ordinamento dello scibile
umano. Firenze, 1854, 4°Petzholdt (1866) 61 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 276-7 (full outline);
Fumagalli (1890) 94-5.
22 main classes with minute subdivisions
(392 under History.) Fum. gives the 22
main classes.
1855.

System of Pilz.

[PILZ, Oscar.]
Wissenschaftskunde.
In:
Rottner, Albert. Lehrbuch der contorwissenschaft. Ed. 2. Lpz., 1861, 4 0 , p. 287334Petzholdt (1866) 61 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 277.
1855.

System of Lebas.

Maire (1890) 224-9 (outline) ; Libr'y Jour.
22 (1897) 253. A French classification and
notation (outline.)
System used in the Sorbonne and in the
Superior Normal School of Paris. Its essence is the abbreviation notation, i.e. T =
Theology, TC=Councils, T P ~ Polemic, etc.

i88
1855.

System of the Palermo Communal
Library,
Indice topografico ed alfabetico della biblioteca del Comune di Palermo.
Palermo,
1855, v. 1, p. x., 8°.
Mira 2 (1862) 203-8.
1856, System of Tiele.

[TIELE.] Catalogue van de bibliotheek der
stad Amsterdam. Amst., 1856-58, 4 pt., 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 61-2 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 277 (outline.)
1856. System of Tromel.
TROMEL, Paul Allgemeine bibliographie;
monatliches verzeichniss.
Lpz., 1856, 8°
(still in use in same periodical.)
Petzholdt (1866) 62 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 277 (outline.)
1856. System of Merleker.
MERLEKER, Karl Friedrich. Musologie . . .
Lpz., 1857, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 62-3 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 278.
1857. System of Vincent
VINCENT, Benj. The classified catalogue of
the library of the Royal Institution. Lond.,
1857.
Brown (1898) 49-50 (outline.)

189
1859.

System of Edwards.

EDWARDS, Edward.
Memoirs of libraries.
Lond., 1859, 8°, v. 2, p. 814-831: Outline
-of proposed scheme of classification for a
town library.
Petzholdt (1866) 63-4 (full title and outline) ; Gar (1868) 278-9 (outline); The
Library 9 (1897) 204 (outline); Brown
(1898) 50-54 (outline.)
L, Theology; II., Philosophy; III., History; IV., Politics and Commerce; V., Sciences and arts; VI., Literature and Polygraphy. About five hundred classes given.
Extreme notation "Class V., Div. 1, § c, ii.
(2)*' = Organic Chemistry.
1859.

System of Eyre.

EYRE, Samuel. Book classing systematized.
Lond., 1843, f°.
Edwards 2 (1859) 805-6 (23 classes in 4
given); Petzholdt (1866) 63 (full title and
outlinej ; Gar (1868) 278.
1859.

System of Triibner.

TRUBNER, Nicolas, comp. and ed. Bibliographical guide to Amer. literature . . .
Lond., 1859, 8°.
Petzholdt (1866) 64 (full title and outline); Gar (1868) 279; Brown (1898) 50
(outline.)

190

I86I.

System of Mira.

MIRA, Giuseppe. Manuale teorico-pratico di
bibliografia. Palermo, 1861-62, 2 v., 2-227-9
(Elaborate series of folding tables.)
Gar (1868) 279-80.
1862.
WUTTIG, G.

System of Wuttig.
Universal-bibliographie.

Lpz.,

1862.
Petzholdt (1866) 65 (full title and outline.)
1863. System of Starrabba.
STARRABBA, Raffaele, baron. Progetto di classificazione di una biblioteca.
Palermo,
1863, 8°.
Gar (1866) 280 (rather full outline.)
1863.

System of Seisinger.

SEIZINGER, G. Theorie und praxis der bibliothekwissenschaft . . . Dresden, 1863, 8°,
52-175, and on Notation 175-85Gar (1868) 279.
S. gives 32 main classes with full and detailed subdivisions, and gives under each class
explicit description of what is included. An
unusual and admirable method.
1865.

System of Gar.

GAR, Tommaso. Letture di bibliologia. Torino, 1868, 8°. Table opposite p. 188.

igi

1865.

System of Lesley.

BRUNET, Gustav. In: Chronique du Journal
gen. de l'lmpr. 2 ser. 9 (Paris, 1865.)
Gar (1868) 280-1 (good outline.)
1866. System of Petzholdt.
PETZHOLDT, J. [System of the library at
Dresden.] In: Bibliotheca Bibliographica.
Lpz., 1866, 8°, p. 62 (under System von
Tromel.)
1869.

System of Techener.

TECHENER, Joseph Leon. Repertoire universel de bibliographic Paris, 1869, 8°.
Rouveyre 2 (1882) 50-58 (very detailed.)
1870.

System of the Athens National Library.

STEFFENHAGEN, E. Die neue ordnung und
katalogisirung der Athener Nationalbibliothek, in: Neuer Anzeiger (1868) no. 704;
(1869) no. 762; (1870) no. 821; (1874) no.
451.
Grasel (1890) 386 and 388.
Alphabetical system.
1870.

System of W. T. Harris.

HARRIS, W. T. Catalogue of the St. Louis
Public School Library. St. Louis, 1870, 8°,
p. 3-16.

192

HARRIS, VVm. T. Book classification. In:
Jour. Spec. Philos. 4 (1870) 114-9.
Public Libraries in the U. S. 1 (Wash.,
1876) 660-2 (outline.)
The Library 9 (1897) 205 (outline) ; Crunden, Frederick M. Classiffcation and cataloguing. Library 1 .(1900) 295-8; Brown
(1898) 63-5 (outline.)
1870.

System of Manasia.

MANASIA, Calogero. Classificazione della
biblioteca communale di Caltanisetta. Caltanisetta, 1870.
Fumagalli (1890) 98-9 (gives 6 classes.)
Strict subject arr., no distinction of size.
1871.

System of Battezzati.

BATTEZZATI, Natale. Nuovo sistema di catalogo bibliografico generale [referred to by
Dewey ed. 1876, not seen. System proposed
in the Bibliografia Italiana, nov. 30, 1871, is
substantially that of Brunet]
1871.

System of Forstemann.

FORSTEMANN, E. W.

Mittheilungen aus der

verwaltung der Konigl. Oeffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden in den jahren 1866-1870,
1871-1875, 1876-1880. Dresden, 1871, 1876,
1881.

193
Ebert, F. A. Geschkhte und beschreibung
der Dresdner Bibliothek, p. 89, ff.
Forstemann, Systematische, alphabetische,
chronoligische anordnung, in: Centralblatt
fur Bibliothekswesen, 1 (1884) 293-303.
Fumagalli .(1890) 114-5.
,.283 classes, Notations—the abbreviated
Latin name (classes arranged for the most
part methodically, but some alphabetically and
chronologically.)
1876. System of the Madrid National Library.
Breve noticia de la Biblioteca Nacional.
Madrid, 1876.
Fumagalli (1890) 125-6.
1876. System of Dewey.
DEWEY, Melvil. Decimal classification and
relativ index for libraries, clippings, notes,
etc. Fourth edition, revised and enlarged.
Boston Library Bureau, 1891, p. 593, 8°.
Earlier editions: 1st, 1876; 2d, 1885; 3d,
1888; repr. 1894.
Dewey, Melvil. Abridged decimal classification and relativ index for libraries, clippings, notes, etc. Bost., 11894,] 8°.
U. S. Bureau of Ed. Catalog of the "A. L,
A." Library. Washington, 1893, 8°, p. 39
(outline 100 classes. The most accessible
13

194
illustration of the system, here applied to
5000 select volumes.)
Translations: Italian, by Mondino, Palermo,
1895; by Benedetti, Firenze, 1897; French,
Bruxelles, 1895, (1000 schedules) ; do. 1897
(tables generates abr.) and do. 1899 (of the
nature of a new edition by the Institut int e r n a t ) ; Spanish, by Castillo, Salamanca,
1897; German, by Junker, Wien, 1897. It is
impossible to attempt here anything like a
bibliography of the immense literature of
the Dewey system. References and discussions may be found passim in all the library
periodicals—German, French and Italian as
well as British and American. Following
are only a few out of very many articles.
For other literature consult Kephart in the
World's Congress Papers, and especially the
publications of the Institut international de
bibliographic
Dewey, Melvil- A decimal classification and
subject index. In: U. S. Bureau of Ed.,
Public Libraries of the U. S., etc. (Wash.,
1876) 623-48. Grasel (1890) 154-5, 387;
Fumagalli (1890) 126-128, etc. (gives 10 divisions and full discussion) ; Maire (1896)
218-9 (outline) ; Brown .(1898) 67-71 (outline) ; The Library 7 (1895) 34i; 8 (1896)
335-50 (Jast); 8 (1896) 379-8o; 8 (1896)
482-90 (Lyster) ; 9 (1897) 329-39 (Lystcr) ;

*95
9 (1897) 340-45 (Jast); 9 (1897) 346-9
(Peddle); 10 (1898) 97"9 (outline). Library Journal 3 (1878) 231 (Dewey); 4
(1879) 117-20; 191-4 (Dewey); 4 (1879)
149-52 (Lindsay); 7 (1882) 127-8 (Larned); 10 (1885) 258 (Lane); 11 (1886)
37-43 (Perkins and Schwartz); 11 (1886)
100-104 tDewey) ; 23 (1898) 18-22 (Wire) ;
24 (1899) 154 (Dewey).
Outline.
000 General Works.
010 Bibliography.
020 Library Economy.
030 General Cyclopedias.
040 General Collections.
050 General Periodicals.
060 General Societies.
070 Newspapers.
080 Special Libraries. Polygraphy.
090 Book Rarities.
100. Philosophy.
n o Metaphysics.
120 Special Metaphysical Topics.
130 Mind and Body.
140 Philosophical Systems.
150 Mental Faculties. Psychology.
160. Logic.
170 Ethics.
180 Ancient Philosophers.
190 Modern Philosophers.

ig6
200 Religion.
210 Natural Theology.
220 Bible.
230 Doctrinal Theol. Dogmatics.
240 Devotional and Practical.
250 Homiletic. Pastoral. Parochial.
260 Church. Institutions. Work.
270 Religious History.
280 Christian Churches and Sects.
290 Non-Christian Religions.
300 Sociology.
310 Statistics.
320 Political Science.
330 Political Economy.
340 Law.
350 Administration.
360 Associations and Institutions.
370 Education.
380 Commerce and Communication.
390 Customs. Costumes. Folk-lore.
400 Philology.
410 Comparative.
420 English.
430 German.
440 French.
450 Italian.
460 Spanish.
470 Latin.
480 Greek.
490 Minor Languages.

197
5oo Natural Sciences,
510 Mathematics.
520 Astronomy.
530 Physics.
540 Chemistry.
550 Geology.
560 Paleontology.
570 Biology.
580 Botany.
590 Zoology.
600 Useful Arts.
610 Medicine.
620 Engineering.
630 Agriculture.
640 Domestic Economy.
650 Communication and Commerce
660 Chemical Technology.
670 Manufactures.
680 Mechanic Trades.
690 Building.
700 Fine Arts.
710 Landscape Gardening.
720 Agriculture.
730 Sculpture.
740 Drawing. Design. Decoration.
750 Painting.
760 Engraving.
770 Photography.
780 Music.
790 Amusements.

198
800 Literature.
810 American.
820 English.
830 German.
840 French.
850 Italian.
860 Spanish.
870 Latin.
880 Greek.
890 Minor Languages.
900 History.
910 Geography and Description.
920 Biography.
930 Ancient History.
940 Modern. Europe.
950 Asia.
960 Africa.
970 North America.
980 South America.
990 Oceanica and Polar Regions.
The system contains in its various summaries 10, 100, 1000 and, roughly speaking,
10,000 divisions. In the notation, however,
the main subject stops with the use of three
figures, the decimal point is then introduced
and further divisions are of irregular minuteness of subdivision, and are regarded as beginning a new series of classes.
This system begun in 1873, first published
in 1876, published in fourth edition in 1891

199
and reprinted, and now perhaps shortly to be
published again in new edition, has probably
had more vogue than any other bibliographical system ever published save possibly that
of Brunet. Taken as a whole and regarding
the substantially unchanging form and notation, among the multitude of derived systems
with minor variations, it is undoubtedly true
that no system ever invented has been applied
to as many libraries .(probably at the present
day several thousand) as this. In many libraries considerable changes have been made,
but in the majority it remains practically unchanged. It is now being adopted very generally on the continent of Europe by booksellers even as well as libraries, and is of late,
through its adoption by the Brussels Institut,
having a very zealous propaganda by its converts, especially in France and Italy. Many
of the most noteworthy partial classifications
of the present day are avowedly founded on
and are enlargements of this system. The system itself is supposed to be in some way aa
adaptation of Bacon, but the relation is hardly
to be discovered and it really should be
counted as independent. The reasons for its
deserved popularity are to be found: ( i ) in
an intelligent and consistent application of the
decimal notation (not new with Dewey, but
first by him vigorously and consistently ap-

200

plied) ; (2) in the grasp of mnemonic possibilities of this situation; (3) in the practical,
intelligent and often up to date management
of the remoter subdivisions of the, in some
places, somewhat artificial, larger sub-classes;
(4) in the fully printed schedules with their
"relativ index/' which more than anything
else is the cause of the practicality of this
system and its wide adoption. In other words,
its popularity has been due to intelligent practical usefulness.
Random Examples of the Dewey Notation.
974.4 Ad 1 Adams, C. F. Massachusetts.
624 Ad 1 Adams, Henry. Structural ironwork.
295A3 Avesta. Zend-Avesta; tr. Dar-#
mesteter. 1898.
372.2 H19 Hauschmann. Kindergarten system.
1879. System of Schwartz.
SCHWARTZ, J. A mnemonic system of classification; Lib. J. 4 (1879) i-7.
Schwartz, J. A new classification and notation. In: Lib. J. 7 (1882) 148-66.
Library Journal 4 (1879) 92 (Schwartz) 7
(1882); 251 (Bliss) ; 272 (Schwartz) ; 10
(1885) 25-7, 77-8, 149-50, 174-5, 371-5

201

(Schwartz); 257 (Lane); 11 (1886) 8-9
(Cutter and Lane) ; 9 (Schwartz); Grasel
(1890) 387; Fumagalli (1890) 131-2; Brown
(1898) 65-6 (outline.)
Kephert, Horace.
Classification.
In
.(World's Library Congress Papers) U. S.
Education Rep., 1892-3, p. 874.
This gives a new and presumably final form
of Schwartz System, as follows: 0, Fiction; 1,
Biography; 2, History and geography; 3, Political and Social. science; 4, Philosophy and
theology; 5, Natural science; 6, Useful and
fine arts; 7, Language and literature; 8, Foreign literatiire (in other languages than Eng' lish); 9, Polygraphy.
1879. System of Cutter.
CUTTER, C. A. Expansive classification. Boston, C. A. Cutter, 1891-3, 160 p., 8°. (Six
expansions. The seventh, very minute, is
published in part and is very near completion.)
Cutter, C. A. Classification on the shelves
with some account of the new scheme prepared for the Boston Athenaeum. Lib. J. 4
(1879) 234-43.
U. S. Bureau of Ed. Catalog of the "A. L.
A." Library. Washington, 1893, 8°, p. 147
(outline of about n o classes. The best
illustration of the system as it is applied
here, complete to 5000 volumes.)

202

Cutter, C. A. The Expansive Classification.
In: Trans. Internat. Library Congress.
Lond. (Lond., 1898) 84-8.
Cutter's Expansive Classification. The Library 10 (1898) 98, 286 (outline.)
Cutter, Charles A. Suitability of the Expansive Classification to college and refence libraries. In: Lib. Journal 24 .(1899)
41-49.
As in the case of the Dewey system, the literature of the Cutter system is already formidable and is increasing. Following are a
few references:
Lib. Jour. 10 (1885) 55-6; 14 (1889) 242-4
(Bliss); 17 (1892) 228 (Kephart); 23
(1898) 18-22 (Wire); 24 (1896) c. 154-6;
Fumagalli (1890) 129-31; The Library q
(1897) ^05-6; Brown (1898) 73-7 (Outline.) Compare also literature in Kephart's
World's Congress paper.
Outline of Fifth Expansion (revised to 1901).
A General works, covering several classes.
Includes: Ad Dictionaries, Ae Encyclopaedias, Ai Indexes.
Am Museums (General), An Notes and
Queries, Ap Periodicals (General), Aq
Quotations, Allusions, etc., Ar Reference
books, As Societies (General.)
B Philosophy; Br Religion.

203

Includes: Ba-Bf National philosophies
and systems of philosophy; Bg Metaphysics, Ontology, Bh Logic, Bi Psychology,
Bm Moral philosophy, Br Religion; general works on religion and the Supernatural, Bs Natural theology, Bt Religions, BJI
Superstitions,Folk-lore, Bz Local religions.
C Christianity and Judaism.
Includes: Ca Judaism, Cb Bible, Cc
Christianity.
D Ecclesiastical history.
Includes: Dd Church history of countries, Dg Catholic Church, Dj Reformation,
Dk Protestants.
E Biography.
F History.
Includes: Universal, Ancient, Medieval,
Modern; Single countries (local list), Fc
Chronology, Fd Philosophy of history, Fe
History of civilization and culture, Ff Antiquities, manners and customs, Fi Inscriptions, Fn Numismatics, Fs Chivalry, Ft
Knightly orders, Fv Heraldry, Fw. Peerages, Nobility.
G Geography and Travels.
Includes: Ge Mathematical geography,
Gs Surveys, of all sorts, Gz Maps.
H Social sciences.
Includes: Hb Statistics, He Economics,
Political economy.

204

I Demotics, Sociology.
Includes: lb Crime, Criminal classes, Ig
Charity, the Poor, Ih Providence, Ik Education.
J Civics, Government, Political science.
Includes: Jx Law of nature and of nations, Jy International law.
K Legislation, etc.
Includes: Ka Law, Kw Woman, Kx
Children, Kz Societies .not otherwise provided for.
L Sciences and Arts together.
Includes: La Sciences (Natural), Lb
Mathematics, Lh Physics or Natural philosophy, Lo Chemistry, Lr Astronomy.
M Natural history.
Includes: Mb Microscopy, Mc Geology,
Md Mineralogy and Lithology, Me Crystallography, Mg Physiography, physical
geography, Mp Palaeontology, Mu Biology.
N Botany.
0 Zoology.
Pw Anthropology and Ethnology.
Includes: Pwa Geological man, Px Ethnology (primitive and historic man), Py
Ethnography (races of men).
Q Medicine.
R Useful Arts; Technology.
Includes: Ra Exhibitions, Rb Patents,
Re Metric arts, Weights and measures,

205

Rd Mining, Re Metallurgy, Rf Agriculture, Rj Animal culture, Rq Chemical technology, Rt Electric arts, Ry Domestic
economy, Rz Food and cookery.
S Constructive arts (Engineering and Building).
S Engineering.
Includes: Sg Building, Sj Sanitary engineering, SI Hydraulic engineering, St
Arts of transportation and communication,
Su Roads, Highways, Streets, Sv Railroads.
T Manufactures and Handicrafts.
U Art of war.
Includes: Un Nautical arts, Uu Ships,
Shipbuilding, etc., Uv Lighthouses, Uw
Life-saving service, Ux Shipwrecks, Uy
Fire extinction, Fires.
V Recreative arts, Sports, Games, Festivals.
Includes: Vr Jugglery, Ventriloquism,
Natural magic, Vs Gymnastics, Physical
education, Vt Theatre, Vv Music.
W Art.
Includes: We Landscape gardening, Wf
Architecture, Wj Sculpture, Wk Carving
and Turning, Wl Arts of design, graphic
arts, Wm Drawing, Wp Painting, Wq Engraving, Wr Photography, Ws Decorative
arts, Ornament, Wt Mosaic, Wu Needlework and textile decoration, Wv Costume

206

and its adjuncts, Ww Furniture, Wx Jewelry, Silver and Gold-smithing, Wy Metal
work, Wz Bric-a-brac.
X Philology.
Includes: Xd Language in general, Xy
English language.
Y English and American literature.
Includes: Yf Fiction, Yj Juvenile literature, Yd Literature in general.
Z Book arts.
Includes: Za Authorship, Rhetoric, Zd
Writing, Zh Printing, Zk Binding, Zl Publishing and Bookselling, Zn Private libraries, Zp Public libraries, Zu Bibliography,
Zw Subject bibliography, Zx Selection and
methods of reading, Zy Literary history,
Zz National bibliography.
Although not published very fully until
1891, some account of the system was published as early as 1879, and the fifth expansion
was finished in 1882.
In 1891-3 it was published fully in six expansions, and the seventh, v/hich will contain
about 10,000 subdivisions, is now nearing
completion. It is distinguished as being the
most logical and modern in its nomenclature
of the recent systems. It applies a consistent
alphabetical notation in a manner which is an
advance on all such attempts previously made.
It is coming into use in a good many Ameri-

207

can libraries, and when the final expansion is
finished and provided with an index will undoubtedly be more used still. The painstak
ing intelligence of subdivision and the full description of exact meaning of what is intended to be included under the subdivision
are of the highest order, both of scholarship
and method. The author's unsparing industry and unwearied enthusiasm for his scientific aim and the welfare of libraries have
produced a really scientific .(though of course
not perfect or final) work cf high value, the
appreciation of which on the part of others
is all the more cordial because of the modesty
and unaffected altruism of its author.
The proper understanding of the substantial.
excellences of this system really requires a
presentation of Cutter's admirable "Local
list," now used with many other systems as
well, and the "Cutter author number," now
used with most systems, but the limits of th*
method chosen for this appendix forbid.
Random Examples of the Cutter Notation*
F844.Adi Adams, C. F. Massachusetts.
SE.Adi Adams, Henry. Structural ironwork.
BZEP.A3 Avesta. Zend-Avesta; tr. Darmesteter. 1898.
IU.H19 Hauschmann. Kindergarten system.

208

1880.

System of Allibone.

ALLIBONE, S. Aug. A critical dictionary of
English literature and British and American authors. Philadelphia, 1880, 3 v., 8°.
Maire (1896) 217 (gives outline of names
in index.)
This, as quoted by Maire, is not properly
a system — or rather it is merely the alphabetical subject system. Allibone does, however, in introd. adopt from Putnam's
World's progress the classification "Imagination, Fact, Speculative and Scientific."
1880.

System of Lor em.

LORENZ. Catalogue general de la librairie
frangaise. Tableau systematique ou resume des rubriques de la table des matieres.
v. 8 (Paris, 1880) 673-84.
Maire (1896) 210-11 (outline.)
1881.

System of Perkins.

PERKINS, Fred. C. San Francisco Cataloguing for public libraries. A manual of the
system used in the San Francisco Free Publie Library. San Francisco, 1884, p. 40.
Perkins, Fred. B. A rational classification
of literature for shelving and cataloguing
books in a library. Revised edition. San
Francisco, 1882. S7+4 P. 8°.

209

Dewey, Melvil. Mr. Perkins* classification.
Lib. Jour. 7 (1882) 60-2.
Fumagalli (1890) 135 (5572, in 69, in 8
classes. 8 given by F.) ; Brown (1898) 77-9
(outline.)
For other references see Kephart, p. 895.
1881. System of the Italian Chamber of
Deputies.
La biblioteca della Camera dei Deputati nel
dicembre deiranno 1881.
Notizie pubblicate per cura della commissione della Biblioteca. Roma, 1881.
Fumagalli (1890) 99 ("A few large classes.")
1882. System of the Berlin Royal Library.
Uebersicht der systematischen ordnung der
Koniglichen Bibliothek zu Berlin, Juli, 1882.
Fumagalli (1890) 111-2.
177 main classes.
T882. System of Smith.
SMITH, Lloyd P. The classification of books.
In: Lib. J. 7 (1882) 172-174.
Smith, Lloyd P. On the classification of
books. A paper read before the American
Library Association, May, 1882. Bost,
1882, 70 p. 8°.
Fumagalli (1890) 134-5; Brown .(1898) 7980 (outline.)
14

210

A, Religion; E, Jurisprudence; I, Sciences
and Arts; O, Belles-Lettres; U, History; Y,
Bibliography and the history of literature.
1883.

System of Edmands.

EDMANDS, John. New system of ctassificatiou,
etc. Phila., 1883, 29 p. 8°.
Lib. Jour. 4 (1879) 38-40, 42-4, 56. Brown
(1898) 82.
1883.

System of Steffenhagen.

STEFFENHAGEN, Emil. Ueber normalhohen
fur buchergeschosse. Eine bibliothektechnische erorterung, mit einem anhange, enthaltend den aufstellungsplan der Kieler
Universitats-Bibliothek. Kiel, 1885.
Steffenhagen, E. Ordnungsprincipien der
Universitats-Bibliothek Kiel.
Fiir den
dienstlichen gebrauch zusammengestellt.
Als manuskript gedruckt. Burg, 1885.
Steffenhagen, E. Die neue aufstellung der
Universitats-Bibliothek zu Kiel. Eine denkschrift zur orientirung.
Als manuskript
vervielfaltigt. Kiel, 1883.
Steffenhagen, E. Standorts-Tabelle iiber
die neue aufstellung der Universitats-Bibliothek zu Kiel. Kiel, 1884.
Fumagalli (1890) 119-120.
"Scrupulously systematic." 25 main classes
given by Fumagalli, 124 sub-classes. Threeform series.

211

1883.

System of the Austro-Hungarian
Libraries.

GRASSAUER, Ferdinand.
Handb. f. oesterr
. . . Bibliotheken. Wien, 1883, p. 133, 196.
Fumagalli (1890) 123-4.
Rules call for two main principles: .(a) logical by subjects, (b) with the object of "having the library preserve a pleasing exterior
appearance."
1883.

System of the Public Libraries of
France.

ROBERT, Ulysse. Recueil de lois, decrets, ordonances, arretes, circlaires, etc., concernant les bibliotheques publiques, communales, universitaires, scolaires et populaires.
Paris, 1883, p. 121.
Fumagalli (1890) 102-3.
Three sizes, accessions order, folios and
over 1-9999, quartos, etc., 10000-29,999, octavos and under 30,000 sq.
1884.

System of the Mazarin Library.

RAPPORT de M. Alfred Franklin, administ r a t e s de la bibliotheque Mazarine, etc.,
in: Bulletin des Bibl. (1884) 25.
Fumagalli (1890) 101-2 (Classification by
subjects long given up. Now strictly (1) by
three sizes; (2) order of accession in each.)

212

1884.

Paris Arsenal Library.

RAPPORT de M. Edouard Thierry, conservateur-administrateur de la bibliotheque de
1'Arsenal, etc., in: Bulletin des Bibl. (1884)
172.
Fumagalli (1890) 102. Originally classed,
overcrowded, then by order of accession.
1885.

System of the St. Genevieve Library.

RAPPORT de M. Lavoix, administrateur de la
bibliotheque Sainte-Genevieve, etc., in:
Bulletin des Bibl. (1885) 136.
Fumagalli (1890) 102 (outline. 28 classes
much the same as those of Bib. Nat. Since
1875 arranged in each class in the order of
accession.) Maire (1896) 230-31.
1885.

System of the Heidelberg Univ. Lib.

ZANGEMEISTER, Karl. System des Real-Katalogs der Universitats-Bibliothek Heidelberg.
Heidelberg, 1885.
Fumagalli (1890) 118-19 (outline.)
System with 17 main classes (given by
Fumagalli). Dates from 1825 but minutely
subdivided (history, e.g. 227 subdivisions)
by Z.
1885.

System of Brownbill.

BROWNBILL, John. Science and art: a theory
of library classification. In: Lib. Chron. 3
(1886) 133-136.

213

I., Theology; II., Moral sciences (incl.
Language, Philosophy, Sociology, History) ;
III., Physical sciences; IV., Literature; V.,
Painting; VI., Music; cf. outline, p. 136.
1885.

System of Ogle.

OGLE, J. J. Outline of a new scheme of classification applicable to books. In: Lib.
Chron. 2 (1885) 161-166.
A, Word knowledge; B, Religious knowledge ; C, Social knowledge; D, Mind knowledge; E, Art knowledge (Literary); F, Art
knowledge (Non-Literary) ; G, Nature knowledge (Non-Biological) ; H, Nature knowledge
(Biological); J, Industrial knowledge; K,
General knowledge.
1886. System of the Cologne Public Library.
KEYSSER (Adolph.) Die Stadtbibliothek in
Koln. Ihre organization und verwaltung,
Beitrage zu ihrer geschichte. Koln, 1886.
(Veroffentlichungen der Stadtbibliothek in
Koln, 1 Heft.)
Fumagalli (1890) 112 (gives 14 classes
(A-O). There are 311 sub-classes. Under
each subdivision strict accessions order without regard to size.)
1886. System of the Sion College Library.
MILMAN, W. H. Order of the classification
of Sion College Library, London. Lond.,

214

R. Clay & Sons, 1886, 54 p.; also in: Lib.
Chron. 3 .(1886) 183 (outline.)
Dewey Classification at Sion College. The
Library 8 (1896) 350-375 (outline.)
Brown (1898) 71-3 (outline.)
The system is a nominal Dewey much adjusted.
1886. System of the Frankfurt City Library.
SYSTEMATISCHE eintheilung der Stadtbibliothek zur Frankfurt am Main, 1886.
Fumagalli (1890) 115-6 (250 main classes
in 14 main classes (given by Fum.) Abbreviation notation.)
1888.

System of the "Bibliotheque Cardinal."

CATALOGUE methodique et raisonne.
1888, 8°.
Maire (1896) 248 (outline.)
1888.

Paris,

System of Bodleian Library.

T H E BODLEIAN LIBRARY in 1882-7. A report

from the Librarian (Edward B. Nicholson)
published by permission of the Curators
Oxford, Dec, 1888.
Fumagalli .(1890) 108-10.
1888.

System of Luigi Frati (Bibl. Municipale, Bologna).

FRATI, Luigi. Opere della bibliografia bolognese che si conservano nella biblioteca rntt-

215

nicipale di Bologna classificate. Bologna,
1888, v. 2.
Fumagalli (1890) 97-8.
The published vol. contains class 6 of the
Bologna Municipal Library. It has 59 subclasses, which are in turn greatly subdivided.
The remaining 5 main classes, (1) Sacra,
(2) Storica, (3) Letteraria, (4) Scientifica,
(5) Artistica, have 227 subdivisions. The
notation seems to refer to' a fixed location,
and is made up of first an Arabic numeral,
then a letter, then a Roman numeral, and
finally another Arabic numeral (thus, 2 a iv.
3).
1888. System of Hartwig.
[HARTWIG, Otto.] Schema des realkatalogo
der Koniglichen Universitatsbibliotek zu
Halle a. S. Leipzig, 1888, p. 350, 8°.
(Beihefte zum Centralblatt fiir Bibliothekswesen III.)
Fumagalli (1890) 116-17; Grasel (1890)
153 (outline) ; Brown .(1898) 57-9 (outline.)
A, Book sciences and General works; B,
Universal Philology and Oriental languages;
C, Classical Philology; D, Modern Philology;
E, Fine Arts; F, Philosophy; G, Pedagogy;
H, Culture history and universal Science of
Religion; I, Theology; K, Jurisprudence; L,
Political science; M, Auxiliary historical

2l6
sciences; N, History; O, Geography; P, General works of Natural Science and Mathematical sciences; Q, Physics and Meteorology; R, Chemistry; S, Natural sciences; T,
Agriculture, Forestry, Technology; U, Medicine.
This Hartwig or Halle system is noteworthy
for the excellent logic of its subdivisions,
although, as a universal system, the minute
subdivision of law is disproportionate. The
notation is very intricate, and one would think
almost impracticable for libraries.
1889. System of Fletcher.
FLETCHER, W. I. Public libraries in America. Bost., 1894, 12 0 ; Library classification,
Bost., 1894, 32 p. 8°.
Fletcher, W. I. Library classification theory and practice III. In: Lib. J. 14 (1889)
113-16 (full outline.)
The Library 6 (1894) 157 (Rev. of "Library Classification," 1894, outline.) The Library 9 (1897) 206 (outline.) Library Journal 14 (1889) 244-5 (Bliss); Brown (1898)
80-82 (outline.)
Fiction; Juvenile; 1-13.
English and
American literature; 15-75. History; 81-2.
Biography; 85-120. Voyages and Travels;
125-172. Science; 179-240. Useful arts; 245277. Fine arts; 279-350. Political and So-

217
cial; 352-416. Philosophy 2nd Religion; 421456. Language and literature; 461-8. Refer.
ence books.
This is of medium expansion, and is intended to be very simple and untechnical. It
is not intended to come in competition with
the more thorough and scientific systems.
1889. System of the Strassburg University
Library,
Fumagalli (1890) 122 (Direct communication.)
12 main classes (given by Fumagalli),
about 600 subdivisions. Example of notation "Eb, xlii., Italienisch" -f form and no.
1889. System for the Public Libraries of
France. .(2)
Bulletin des bibliotheques (1889) 113-183.
Fumagalli (1890) 104-6.
22 classes, A-V, each divided into four
sizes; each series either (1) by the order of
Brunet, or (2) alphabetically, or (3) in the
case of history, chronologically. Fum. thinks
this author is rather doctrinaire than practical,
but gives the brief outline.
1890. System of Delisle.
DELISLE, Leopold. Instructions elementaires
et techniques pour la mise et le maintien en

2l8
ordre des livres d'une bibliothfcque. Lille,
1890, 8°, p. 7, sq.
Maire (1896) 220-3 (outline.)
1890.

System of Grassauer {Vienna University Library).

Fumagalli (1890) 123 (Direct information.)
99 main classes.
1890.

System of the Imperial Library of
St. Petersburg.

Fumagalli (1890) 125. (18 main classes.
"In the individual classes the books are arranged with sole regard to the size of the
volumes.")
1890. System of the Swedish Public Libraries.
SVERIGES offentliga bibliotek Stockholm. Upsala. Lund. Goteborg. Aocessions-Katalog
no. 4 par Dahlgren. Stockholm, 1890, 8°.
Maire (1896) 220 (outline.)
1890.

System of Bonazzi.

BONAZZI, G. Schema di catalogo systematico
per le biblioteche. Parma, 1890, n o p. 8°.
Bliss, R. Bonazzi's scheme for a classed
catalogue, Lib. J. 16 (1891) 5-8; 19 (1894)
c 69 (outline) ; Brown (1808) 59 (outline.)

2ig

Outline.
A, General works; B, Ethnic religions, mythology, etc.; C, Christian religion; D, Jurisprudence; E, Sociology; F, Philology; G.
Literature; H, Philosophy; I, Science, phys
ical and mathematical; K, Chemistry; L,
Natural science; M, Medicine; N, Surgery;
O, Pharmacy; P, Veterinary science; Q,
Agriculture; R, Industry and manufactures;
S, Fine arts; T, Music; U, Recreative arts,
sport, theatre; V, Geography; W, Voyages
and travels; X, Archaeology; Y, Biography;
Z, History.
1891. System of Sonnenschein.
SONNENSCHEIN. The best books. 2d ed.
Lend., 1891, 4 0 ; also A reader's guide.
Suppl. to the Best books. Lond., 1895, 4°.
Maire (1896) 218 (outline) ; Brown (1898)
54-7 (outline). A, Theology; B, Mythology and Folklore; C, Philosophy; D, Society; E, Geography, Ethnology, Travel and
Topography; F, History; G, Archaeology;
H, Science and Medicine; I, Arts and
Trades; K, Literature and Philology.
Eleven main classes, 122 sub-classes and
1221 divisions, each of which is usually split
up into from two to a dozen or more subjects variously arranged. It is the best example of modern bibliographical (as distinguished from bibliothecal) classification.

220

1891.

System of G. W. Harris.

HARRIS, G. W. The classification of the Cornell University Library. Lib. Jour. 16
(1891) 138-9.
Lib. Jour. 19 (1894) c 69 (Nelson. Outline) ; Kephart. Classification (1895) 872
(outline.)
1891. System of Teubmr.
TEUBNER. Verlags-Katalog, 1824-91, 8°.
Maire (1896) 216-7 (outline.)
1892.

System of Ottino.

OTTINO, Giuseppi. Manuale di bibliografia.
Milano, 1892, 160, p. 138-9.
1894.

System of Rowell.

ROWELL, J. C. Classification of books in the
library. Berkeley, Cal., 1894, 49 P- 8°.
(Univ. of Cal. Lib. bulletin no. 12.)
Kephart. Classification (1895) 880 (outline) ; Cutter, C. A., in: Lib. J. 20 (1895)
214-5.
Outline.
A
B
C
1-15
16-51

Bibliography.
Dictionaries.
Periodicals.
Philosophy.
Religion.

221

52 Biography.
54 Geography.
54-255 Geography and history,
256-287 Politics; administration.
289-296 Law.
300 Social science.
3I5-332 Economics.
333 Science.
337-356 Mathematics.
357-371 Astronomy.
372 Physics; mechanics.
401 Civil engineering.
425 Natural history.
431 Geology.
440 Paleontology.
442 Botany.
461 Zoology.
480 Medicine.
506 Industrial arts.
507 Agriculture.
523 Chemistry.
536 Chemical technology.
554 Mining.
580 Manufactures.
590 Building arts.
600 Architecture.
610 Domestic economy.
613 Recreation.
617 Business.
623 Art of war.

222

640 Esthetics.
Fine arts.
999 Languages and literature.
One of the best combinations of the scientific and practical in medium expansion among
modern systems. The notation is, however.
the rather discredited integral system.
1894.

System of Quinn-Brown.

QUINN, J. H., & Brown, J. B. Classification
of books for libraries in which readers are
allowed access to the shelves. The Library
7 (1895) 75-82.
Wire, Geo. E., in: Lib. J. 23 .(1898) c 19
(outline) ; Brown (1898) 59-61 (outline.)
1895.

System of the Vienna Royal Library.

WIEN, K. K. Hofbibliothek. Instructionen
fur die Katalogs Arbeiten. 1 Heft. 1895.
Wire, Geo. K, in: Lib. J. 23 (1898) c 19
("6 p. and full subject index.")
1896. System of the French Institute,
Bibliotheque de lTnstitut.
Maire (1896) 229-30 (outline.)
1896. System of French Lycees.
Bibliothdques des Lyc§es (Proposed.)
Maire (1896) 246-8 (outline.)

223

1896. System of the Paris Museum of Natural History.
Bibliotheque du Museum d'histoire Naturelle.
Maire (1896) 231-3 (outline.)
1896. System of the Paris Free Libraries
Bibliotheques popuiaires de Paris .(Proposed
system.)
Maire (1896) 245-6 (outline.)
1896. System of the Parts City Library.
Bibliotheque de la ville de Paris (Musee Casnavalet.)
Maire (1896) 235-44 (outline.)
1896. System of the Paris Municipal Library.
Bibliotheque administrative de la ville de
Paris (Hotel de Ville.)
Maire (1896) 233-4 (outline.)
1898. System of Brown.
BROWN, James D. Manual of Library classification and shelf arrangement. Lond,
1898, 120, p. 97-160.
Brown's adjustable classification, 1896,
641. (Reprint from Manual.)
Wire, G. E. Review of (Brown's) Manual
of Classification. In: Lib. J. 24 (1899) 121
(outline.)

224

A, Science; B, Useful arts; C, Fine arts
and Recreative arts; D, Social science; E,
Philosophy and Religion; F, History and
Geography; G, Biography and Correspondence; H, Language and literature; J, Poetry and the Drama; K, Prose fiction; L,
Misc.
This system is quite different from and not
to be confused with the Quinn-Brown system
of 1894. It is of the medium expansion and
practical order, and belongs say between the
systems of Rowell and Fletcher rather than
with Dewey and Cutter. It is said to have
some vogue m England. The book as a whole
is the best short monograph on library classification.
1898. System of Dieserud.
DIESERUD, J.
Suggestions towards an improved decimal classification. In: Lib. J. 23
(1898) 607-9 (outline.)
1901. System of the Princeton University
Library,
Location of books in the Library of Princeton University. Princeton, N. J., 1901, 120.
. Outline.
0000-0999. G N R L WORKS.
EEA
0000 Miscellaneous.
0100 Book sciences general. Writing.

225
0200

Printing.

0300
0400
0500
0600

Publishing and New book trade.
Old book trade. Auction trade.
Library science.
History of libraries: Ancient and
miediaeval, American, European.
0700 History of libraries: Asiatic, African,
Australian, etc. Reading. Valuation and criticism.
Best books.
Universal bibliographies.
0800 Public documents.
0900 General periodicals. Proceedings. Newspapers.
Collections.
Essays.
Sources and history of learning.
Encyclopedias. Quotations and ana.
1000-1999.

HISTORICAL SCIENCES.

1000 General geography, history, genealogy
and biography. American history.
1100 American history, local, AlabamaNew York.
1200 American history, local, New York
—Wyoming. American heraldry,
genealogy and biography. Canada
and Newfoundland.
1300 Latin America: Mexico, Central America, West Indies, South America.
Atlantic Ocean and islands.
1400 Europe, general. British Islands.
1500 Western and Central Europe.
15

226

i6oo

Northern and Eastern Europe. Mediterranean.
1700 Asia.
1800 Africa. Indian Ocean.
1900 Australasia. Melanesia. Pacific Ocean.
Polar regions.
2000-2999.

LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE.

2000 General. Artificial, primitive and independent languages.
2100 Dravidian, Malayo-Polynesian and Hamitic languages.
2200 General Orientalia. Semitic languages.
2300 Indo-European languages.
2400 New Indian. Avestan. Persian. Armenian.
2500 Classical languages; general. Greek
authors, general, and Achilles Tatius
to Aristoteles.
2600 Greek authors: Aristoxenus—Longus.
2700 Greek authors: Lucianus — Zosimus.
Modern Greek and Albanian literature.
2800 Latin authors, general, and Accius—
Pervigilium Veneris.
2900 Latin authors: Petronius—Vitruvius.
Modern Latin writers. Literary history. Mythology. History. Geography.
Chronology.
Metrology.
Antiquities. Biography.

227
3000-3999-

MODERN LANGUAGES AND LITERATURE

3000
3100
3200
3300
3400
3500
3600

General. Slavonic. Celtic.
Romance.
French.
Teutonic.
German.
An^lo-Saxon. English, general.
English, single authors: A'Becket—
Cross.
3700 Cross—James.
3800 James—Price.
3900 Prime—Zangwill.
4000-4999. ARTS.

4000
4100
4200
4300
4400
4500
4600
4700
4800
4900

Oratory.
Theater.
Games, sports and pastimes.
Music, general, and History of Music in
America—Germany.
History of Music: Holland — Polar.
Musical texts.
Graphic arts.
National art history. Prehistoric art.
Ancient art.
Greek and Roman, Christian, Byzantine, Mediaeval and Romanesque art.
Gothic, Mohammedan, XIV-XVIII
century art.
Modern art.

228
5000-5999-

THEOLOGY.

5000 General. Comparative, Primitive, Chinese, Indo-European, Egyptian, Jewish and Mohammedan religions.
Natural theology and philosophical
religions.
5100 Biblical philology, general. Texts and
translations.
5200 Commentaries and literature of special books.
5300 Biblical geography, history, biography,
theology, philosophy, science and antiquities.
5400 Church history, general. Missions, general.
5500 National church history and biography.
5600 Denominational history.
5700 Systematic theology, general.
Apologetics.
Polemics. Irenics. Dogmatics.
5800 Christian ethics. Experiential theology. Devotional theology. Ascetics.
5900 Practical theology. Polity. Law. Ministerial theology. Liturgies. Homiletics.
Catechetics.
Polemics.
Evangelistics.
6000-6999.

PHILOSOPHY AND EDUCATION.

6000 Philosophy, general and metaphysical,
ancient, modern—British.

229

6100
6200

6300
6400
6500
6600

6700
6800
6900

British—Belgian.
Scandinavian—. Reality. Knowledge
(including Epistemology and Logic.)
Esthetics.
Ethics.
Psychology.
Education, general.
History of education: ancient, mediaeval,
modern, American; Alabama—New
York.
New York—Atlantic islands.
European.
Asiatic, African, etc.
7000-7999. SOCIOLOGY.

7000 Sociology, general. Relationships. Associations. Customs and classes.
Crime, charities and correction.
7100 Economics, general.
Production and
consumption. Land and improvements. Labor. Capital.
7200 Population.
Property.
Exchange.
Credit and banking. Circulation
and transportation (commerce).
7300 Distribution, general. Rent. Labor
and wages. Capital. Insurance.
7400 Public finance. Socialism.
7500 Politics.
7600 Jurisprudence, general. Roman law.
American, general.

230

7700
7800
7900

Local law, America: Alabama—North
Carolina.
North Dakota—Wyoming. Other local to Great Britain.
France—Polar regions.
80OO-89O9.

NATURAL SCIENCES.

8ootf General: museums. Scientific travels,
general.
8100 Mathematics.
8200 Physics.
8300 Chemistry.
8400 Astronomy.
8500 Physical Geography. Meteorology. Mineralogy. Geology. Palaeontology.
8600 Biology, general. Evolution. General
fauna and flora.
8700 Botany.
8800 Zoology.
8900 Anthropology. Hygiene. Medicine.
9000-9999.

TECHNOLOGY.

9000 General. Exhibitions. History. Patencs and inventions. Applied mathematics and physics. Metrology.
Navigation. Geodesy and surveying.
9100 Building, general. Materials. Buildings. Tunnels. Bridges, roads and
railroads. Ships, etc. Hydraulic
engineering. Sanitary engineering.

231
9200 Mechanical (power) engineering, general. Tools. Production. Transmission. Forms: gravity, human,
animal, water, air, heat and explosives, electricity.
9300 Mining and metallurgy.
9400 Agriculture.
9500 Horticulture. Arboriculture (forestry.)
9600 Animal culture (breeding) and Pisciculture (including fisheries).
9700 Manufactures.
9800 Chemical trades and industries.
9900 Social arts, general. Domestic, social,
commercial, public (military and
naval).
This Princeton University Library system
is worth giving here to illustrate the difference between the practical and the theoretical.
This may be done by comparing it with the
final outline under the theoretical systems,
which is its philosophical basis. The notation is decimal with a four figure base, the
author having started with the observation that
many of the modern systems include some
10,000 or more subdivisions. It observes the
mnemonic features to a greater or less extent, but not as far as might perhaps have
profitably been done. It was constructed
rather as a system for a special library than
as a general system, but is perhaps not wholly

232

without usefulness for libraries of similar
character.
Random Examples of the Princeton Notation.
1150.114 Adams, C. F. Massachusetts.
9134.114 Adams, Henry. Structural ironwork.
2429.2898 Avesta. Zend-Avesta; tr. Darmesteter. 1898.
6547.438 Hauschmann. Kindergarten system.
VI.

SYSTEMS OF CURRENT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL
PERIODICALS.

These systems, representing as they do the
most familiar classification usage of the present time, cannot well be neglected by the student of classification. Conditions of space
forbid giving the outlines in detail here, but
they are most of them readily accessible, and
quite a number of outlines are given in
Maire. Some of those oftenest met are the
following:
BIBLIOGRAFIA ITALIAN A.

See Bolletino delle

pubb. ital.
BIBLIOGRAPHIE DE BELGIQUE. Journal officiel

de la Librairie. Bruxelles, Table systematique.
Maire (1896) 210 (outline.)
BIBLIOGRAPHIE DE LA FRANCE.

Journal g€n€-

233

ral de rimprimerie et de la librairie. Paris.
[Not the same as the system of 1812.]
Rouveyre (1882) 59-63 (detailed outline) ;
Maire (1896) 211-12 (outline.)
BOLLETINO DELLE PUBLICAZIONE ITALIANE. [ E a c h

number is classified. See also the annual
summary for 1901. Feb. 2, p. vi. The
Bolletino is in general identical with the
"Bibliografia italiana."]
T H E BOOKSELLER.
A newspaper of British
and foreign Literature. Lond.
Maire (1896) 213 (outline Alphabetical
subjects.)
BOOKSELLER,

NEWSDEALER

AND STATIONER.

New York. [Annual summary. For 1900,
Feb. 1, 1901, p. 583-]
BORSENBLATT, F. DEN DEUTSCHEN BUCHHANDEL

. . . Leipzig.
Maire (1896) 212 (outline.)
BROCKHAUS' ALLGEMEINE BIBLIOGRAPHIE MON-

ATL. VERZ.

Leipzig.

HINRICHS, J. C. Verzeichness. Leipzig.
[The weekly nos. and half-yearly v. table
represent substantially the same system.]
Maire (1896) 212 (outline.)
NEDERLANDSCHE BIBLIOGRAPHIE.

The Hague.

POLYBIBLION. Revue bibliographique universelle. Paris.
Maire (1896) 209.
T H E PUBLISHERS' CIRCULAR.

London.

[An-

234
nual summary. For 1900, Jan. 5, 1901, p.
10.]
T H E PUBLISHERS' WEEKLY.

New York. [An-

nual summary. For 1900, Jan. 26, 1901, p.
79-89.]
REINWALD, C.

BULLETIN MENSUEL DE LA LI-

BRAIRE FRANCAISE.

Paris.

REVUE BIBLIOGRAPHIQUE BELGE.

VII.

Bruxelles.

PARTIAL SYSTEMS OF CLASSIFICATION.

It would be vain to attempt to give any
comprehensive survey of the enormous number of partial classifications, but this account
would be incomplete if attention were not
called to the fact of the existence of these and
to the great advantage that they may be in the
preparation of a general system. A lage number of the best modern partial classifications
are enlargements of some section of the
Dewey classification. This is true of Vermorel's minute and well indexed classification
of agriculture, the system of the Bibliographia
Medica, of the Zoological classification of the
Zurich Index and many others. To this class
also is to be credited the new schedules for
science, with the decimal notation, which have
been prepared for the Royal Society, Baldwin's admirable system in the Journal of
Psychology, etc. If we may regard the sub-

235
portions of the Cutter seventh expansion as
partial systems, then we must qualify the
above by adding that these considerable fragments are among the very best. And indeed
there are numberless others which have no
particular reference to any current system.
VIII.

SYSTEMS OF ALPHABETICAL CLASSIFICATION.

The strict alphabetical classification by subjects demands a word in conclusion. While
by no means a new idea, it is in its comprehensive application to books a distinctly modern
development. The alphabetical arrangement
by authors has been of course the common
bibliographical arrangement for a long time,
although even this is far from being as old as
the chronological or logical classification. The
alphabetical by subjects has existed too for
a long time in every index and in many dictionaries of authors and places. In its general application to books it belongs to the
latter half of the 19th century, and the most
distinctive use of it in these latter days is
in the so-called dictionary catalog, now the
favorite form in libraries and very generally
used in booksellers' catalogs and works of
general bibliography. This form, which runs
authors and subjects into one alphabet, has
some of its best known examples in the cata-

236

logs of the Boston Athenaeum, the Brooklyn
and Peabody libraries.
Other familiar examples are the American
Catalogue (subject portion), the various indexes to periodicals and essays such as the
A. L. A. Index, Poole, Jones' Index to Legal
Periodicals, The Review of Reviews Index,
jordell in France, Dietrich in Germany, etc.,
etc. It is the general form of the periodical
index, although the Zurich index and the
proposed general index to scientific periodicals
of the Royal Society are intended to be classed
logically, and in general most of the special
branch indexes are so classified. Every dictionary encyclopaedia is practically such an
outline of alphabetical classification, but almost the only system of schedules intended
purely for this purpose is the A. L. A. "List
of subject headings." This is, in the strictest
sense of the term, an example of a system
of alphabetical classification by subjects, the
most popular and most unscientific of systems, the joy of the general reader, the despair of the specialist, an invaluable system as
supplement or index to the system of logical
classification, a futile and embarrassing system when the object is exhaustive research
and this is the exclusive classification.

INDEX.
NOTE.—References in small caps are exclusively
whole section references to the various systems.
ACHARD, SYSTEM OF, 173.

Aesthetics, 41.
AiM'fi-MARTIN, SYSTEM OF, 179.

A. L. A. Index, 236.
A. L. A. List of subject headings, 236.
ALBERT, SYSTEM OF, 139.
ALCUIJN, SYSTEM OF, n o .
ALDERSBACH MONASTIC LIBRARY, SYSTEM OF, 157.

Alexandrian library, 154, 155.
ALLIBONE, SYSTEM OF, 208.

Alphabetical book classification, 60.
Alphabetical subject book classification, 6x.
ALSTED, SYSTEM OF, 119.
AMEILHON, SYSTEM OF, 170.

American catalogue, 236.
AMPERE}, SYSTEM OF, 136.
ANONYMOUS-FLINT, SYSTEM OF, 120.

Anthropology, 30, 31, 40.
ARAOZ, SYSTEM OF, 159.
ARIAS MONTANUS, SYSTEM OF, 160.

Aristotle, 154.
ARISTOTLE, SYSTEM OF, 102.
ARNOLD, SYSTEM OF, 138.
ARNOTT, SYSTEM OF, 134-5-

Art, definition of, 3, 13, 26-7.
Art ideas, classification of, 41.
Assyrian libraries, 153.
Astronomy, 40.
A T H E N S NATIONAL LIBRARY, SYSTEM OF, 191.

Atoms, 33.
AUGUSTIN, SYSTEM OF, 108.
AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN LIBRARIES, SYSTEM OF, 211.

Babylonian libraries, 153.
BACON, FRANCIS, SYSTEM OF, 117-8.
BACON, ROGER, SYSTEM OF, 113-4-

238
BAILLET, SYSTEM OF, 163.
BAIN, SYSTEM OF, 143-4.

Baldwin, J. M., Psychological classification, 234.
BARBIER, SYSTEM OF, 172-3.
BATTEZZATI, SYSTEM OF, 192.
BECCEI/LI, SYSTEM OF, 166-7.
BEDE, SYSTEM OF, I I O .
BENTHAM, SYSTEM OF, 129-30.
BERCHORIUS, SYSTEM OF, 114.
BERG, VON, SYSTEM OF, 125.
BERLIN ROYAL LIBRARY, SYSTEM OF, 209.

Bibliographia medica, 234.
Bibliographical periodicals, 232 sq.
Bibliographical systems, 93.
Bibliographic de Belgique, 232.
Bibliographic de la France, 232.
BIBLIOGRAPHIE DE LA FRANCE, SYSTEM OF, 175.
BLBLIOTHEQUE CARDINAL, SYSTEM OF, 2 1 4 .
BIBLIOTHE:QUE NATIONALS, PARIS, SYSTEM OF, 171-2.
BLELEFIELD, SYSTEM OF, 1 2 3 .

Binding-classification of books, 62.
Biology, 30, 31, 40.
BLIEDENER, SYSTEM OF, 180.
BODLEIAN LIBRARY, SYSTEM OF, 214.

Bolletino delle pub. ital., 233.
BONAVENTURE, S T . , SYSTEM OF, 112-3.
BONAZZI, SYSTEM OF, 218-9.

Bonazzi, system of, 87.
Book classification, 46 sq., 5 1 ; the acme of library science, 88; an aid to research, 56; an art, 46, 49;
close vs. broad, 77 sq.; criteria of, 86 sq.; econom
Y of, 5 3 7 ; educational value of, 57-8; kinds of,
60 sq.; objects and importance of, 53; on the
shelves, 83 sq.; order of application of principles,
65-7; and theoretical, 67 sq.
Books as fossil ideas, 26, .47.
Bookseller, 233.
Bookseller, newsdealer and stationer, 233.
Borsenblatt, 233.
Boston Athenaeum Library catalogue, 236.
BOUILLEAUD, SYSTEM OF, 162-3.
BOURDEAU, SYSTEM OF, 146.

Breadth-classification of books, 64.
BRITISH MUSEUM, SYSTEM OF, 179.

239
Broad classification, 77 sq.
Brockhaus' Allgemeine Bibliog., 233.
Brooklyn Library catalogue, 236.
BROWN, SYSTEM OF, 223-4.
BROWNBILL, SYSTEM OF, 212-3.
BRUNET, SYSTEM OF, 174-5.
BUESCH, SYSTEM OF, 123.
BUHI.E, SYSTEM OF, 125.

Buildings, library, and classification, 74 sq.
BURDACH, SYSTEM OF, 128.
BUTENSCHOEN, SYSTEM OF, 1 2 7 .
CAILIMACHUS, SYSTEM OF, 155.
CAMPANELLA. SYSTEM OF, 119.
CAMUS, SYSTEM OF, 169-70.
CANTONI, SYSTEM OF, 144.
CAPELLA, SYSTEM OF, 108.

Card classification, 51, 83.
CARDILE, SYSTEM OF, 185.
CASIRI, SYSTEM OF, 167.
CASSIODORUS, SYSTEM OF, 108-9.
CAVE, SYSTEM OF, 148.

Cells, 37.
CELS, SYSTEM OF, 168.
CHAMBERS, SYSTEM OF, 122.

Character and likeness, 14.
Chemistry, 40.
Christology, 43.
Christ, the historic, 37.
Chronological classification of books, 61, 64.
Church, the, 37-8.
Classification, alphabetical, 11, 235; an hypothetical,
29; and the library building, 74 sq.; artificial, 9;
bibliographic, 9 3 ; bibliothetic, 9 3 ; chronological,
10; classification of, 93; dynamic, 11; encyclopaedic,
93; evolutionary, 11; genetic, 10; geometrical, 10;
historical, 10; kinds of, 8 sq., 60 sq.; laws or
principles of, 11; literature of, 94 sq.; logical, 9;
mathematical, 11; nature of, 1; "order" vs., 18;
partial, 9, 234; pedagogic, 93; philosophical, 93;
practical, 46, 51, 153 sq.; systems of, 91-236; theoretical, 51, 100 sq. See also Book-classification
and Card-classification.
Classifying, 85.
CLEANTHES, SYSTEM OF, 105.

240
CLEMENS, SYSTEM OF, 159-60.

Close classification, 77 sq.
COCCHI, SYSTEM OF, 166.
COLERIDGE, SYSTEM OF, 130-31.
COLOGNE PUBLIC LIBRARY, SYSTEM OF, 213.

Color classification of books, 62.
COMENIUS, SYSTEM OF, 120.
COMTE, SYSTEM OF, 133-4.

Conservatism in classifying, 70-2.
Conservatism and intellectual petrifaction, 47.
CONTI, SYSTEM OF, 145.
CORLEO, SYSTEM OF, 146.

Cosmic history^ 33.
Cosmology, 30, 31, 43.
COSTE, SYSTEM OF, 170.
COUKNOT, SYSTEM OF, 140.
CRUCEMANNUS, SYSTEM OF, 167.
CUTTER, SYSTEM OF, 201-7.

Cutter, system of (E. C. or expansive classification),
88, 235.
D'ALEMBERT, SYSTEM OF, 122-3.
DANTE, SYSTEM OF, 114.
DAUNOU, SYSTEM OF, 170.

D. C. = Dewey (or Decimal) classification.
D E BURE, SYSTEM OF, 168.

Decimal classification.
cation.

See Dewey decimal classifi-

DELISLE, SYSTEM OF, 217-8.
DEMIDOFF, V., SYSTEM OF, 173.
DENIS, SYSTEM OF, 168.
DESCARTES, SYSTEM OF, 119-20.
DESTUTT DE TRACY, SYSTEM OF, 129.
DEWEY, SYSTEM OF, 193-200.

Dewey Decimal Classification
Classification), 71, 76, 88.
Dictionary catalogue, 235.

(D. C. or Decimal

DIESERUD, SYSTEM OF, 224.
Di GIOVANNI, SYSTEM OF, 141.
DOVE, SYSTEM OF, 139.

Earth, the, 36.
E. C. = Expansive (or Cutter) Classification.
Ecclesiology, 43.
Economy of book classification, 53-7.
EDMANDS, SYSTEM OF, 210.

241
Education, 42.
EDWARDS, SYSTEM OF, 189.

Epistemology, 41.
ERDMANN, SYSTEM OF, 145-6.

ERSCH, SYSTEM OF.

See Schiitz-Hufelund and Ersch,

ESCHENBURG, SYSTEM OF, 125.
ESTIENNE, SYSTEM OF, 158.

Ether, 34.
Ethics, 41.
Evolution, law of, 15.
Evolutionary order, 72-4.
Expansive classification. See Cutter, system of.
EYRE, SYSTEM OF, 189.
FABRI, SYSTEM OF, 161.
FERRARESE, SYSTEM OF, 135.
FERRARIO, SYSTEM OF, 171.
FICHET, SYSTEM OF, 120.

Financial-value classification of books, 64.
FISKE, SYSTEM OF, 145.
FLETCHER, SYSTEM OF, 216-7.
FOERSTERMANN, SYSTEM OF, 192-3.
FONTANINI, SYSTEM OF, 165.

Form-classification of books, 63.
FORMEY, SYSTEM OF, 166.
FORTIA D' URBAN, SYSTEM OF, 176.

Fragility of books in classification, 64.
FRANCKE, SYSTEM OF, 167.
FRANKFORT CITY LIBRARY, SYSTEM OF, 214.
FRATI, SYSTEM OF, 214-5.
FRENCH INSTITUTE, SYSTEM OF, 222.
FRENCH LYC£ES, SYSTEM OF, 222.
FRIEDRICH, SYSTEM OF, 178.
FRISIUS, SYSTEM OF, I6X.
FROBESIUS, SYSTEM OF, 166.
GAR.. SYSTEM OF, 190.
GARNIER, SYSTEM OF, 162.

Genesis, law of, 13.
Geographical book classification, 6x.
GESNER, SYSTEM OF, 115-6.
GIOBERTI, SYSTEM OF, 137.
GIRARD, SYSTEM OF, 122.
GIRAULT, SYSTEM OF, 174.
GLANVILLE, SYSTEM OF, 114.
GOBLOT, SYSTEM OF, 150.

16

242
CrRASSAUER

(VIENNA

UNIVERSITY

LIBRARY),

SYSTEM

OF, 218.
GRUBER,

S Y S T E M OF, 132.

H a l l e s y s t e m , 87.
HAMBURG

COMMERCIAL LIBRARY,

HAMILTON,

SYSTEM

OF, 185.

S Y S T E M OF, 136.

HARMS,

S Y S T E M O F , 143.

HARRIS,

G. W . , S Y S T E M OF, 220.

H A R R I S , W . T . , S Y S T E M OF, 191-2.
HARTWIG,
HASSE,

S Y S T E M OF, 215-6.

S Y S T E M O F , 130.

H e b r e w c a n o n , 153.
HEFTER,
HEGEL,

S Y S T E M OF, 127.
S Y S T E M O F , 132.

HEIDELBERG U N I V E R S I T Y
HELFFERICH,

LIBRARY,

S Y S T E M OF, 2 1 2 .

S Y S T E M O F , 140.

H I L L , S Y S T E M OF, 140.
Hinrichs' Verzeichniss,
History,

l a w of,

233.

15.

H O B B E S , S Y S T F M OF, 120.
Homology,

13.

H O R N E , F I R S T SYSTEM O F , 175.
HORNE,

S E C O N D SYSTEM

HOTTINGER,

OF, 176-7.

S Y S T E M OF, 161.

H R A B A N U S M A U R U S , S Y S T E M OF, I I O - I I .
H U G O DE S. VICTORE,

SYSTEM

OF, 111-12.

Hylology, 30, 31.
Ideas,

ortfer

of,

27-9;

idea-cells,

26 s q . ; a n d outer t h i n g s ,
Identity more than

37;

as

things,

3,

19-22.

likeness,

6.

I L A R I , S Y S T E M OF, 184.
IMPERIAL

LIBRARY

OF S T .

PETERSBURG,

SYSTEM OF,

218.
Interest-classification
Ions

of books, 6 3 .

( o r c o r p u s c l e s ) , 33-4.

ISIDORE OF S E V I L L E ,
ITALIAN

CHAMBER

S Y S T E M OF, 109.

OF D E P U T I E S ,

JACOB, S Y S T E M OF, 161.
J A E S C H E , S Y S T E M OF, 130.
JANNELLI,

S Y S T E M OF, 132.

Jones' index,

236.

K A N T , S Y S T E M O F , 124.
KIRCHNER,
KLUEGEL,

S Y S T E M O F , 137-8.
S Y S T E M O F , 124.

SYSTEM OF, 209.

243
Knowledge, 41.
K n o w l e d g e a n d likeness, 13-14.
KRAUS,
KRUG,

S Y S T E M OF, 128.
SYSTEM

LABANCA,

OF, 125-6.

SYSTEM

OF, 145.

L A C R O I X D U M A I N E , S Y S T E M OF, 158-9.
LATRE, S Y S T E M OF, 171.
LATINI,

SYSTEM

OF, 113.

Law, definition of, 11.
LEBAS,

SYSTEM

LEGIPONTIUS,

OF, 187.

SYSTEM

OF, 167.

L E H M A N N U N D P E T E R S E N , S Y S T E M OF, 181.
LEIBNITZ,

SYSTEM

LEIPZIGER

"MESSKATALOG,"

LESLEY,
LEVOT,

OF, 165.
SYSTEM

OF, 186.

S Y S T E M OF, 191.
SYSTEM

OF, 179-80.

Likeness, 5 ; l a w of, 12-15, 6 5 , 8 6 .
L I N D S A Y , S Y S T E M OF, 138.

Linguistic classification o f books, 6 4 .
Literary-vahie classification o f books, 6 3 .
Literature o f classification, 9 4 sq.
LOCKE,

SYSTEM

OF, 121.

L O E W E , S Y S T E M OF, 137.

Logical book classification, 6 0 .
LOMEIER,
LONDON,

S Y S T E M OF, 162.
S Y S T E M OF, 161.

LONDON INSTITUTION,
LONGO,

SYSTEM

LORENZ,

S Y S T E M 'OF, 2 0 8 .

LUBBOCK,

SYSTEM

MABUNUS,

OF, 136-7.

SYSTEM

MADRID NATIONAI
MAFFEI,

S Y S T E M OF, 178.

OF, 1 3 3 .

SYSTEM

MANASIA,

OF, 161.
LIBRARY,

SYSTEM

OF, 193.

OF, 115,

S Y S T E M OF, 192.

MANUTIUS,

SYSTFM

OF, 157.

MARCHANO,

SYSTEM

OF, 164.

MARTIN,

GABP..,

SYSTEM

MASSOL,

S Y S T E M OF, 172.

OF, 164.

Mathematics, 39.
MAUNSELL,
MAZAWN

SYSTEM

OF, 159.

L I B R A R Y , S Y S T E M OF, 2 1 1 .

M E D I A E V A L LIBRARIES,

SYSTEM

MEINECKE,

SYSTEM

O F , 124.

MERLEKER,

SYSTEM

OF, 188.

OF, 156.

244
M E R L I N , S Y S T E M O F , 182-4.
MEUSEL,

SYSTEM

O F , 126.

Microcosm, 28.
MTDDLETON,
MIRA,

S Y S T E M O F , 165-6.

S Y S T E M O F , 190.

Molecules, 3 5 .
M O N T L I N O T , D E , S Y S T E M OF, 123.
MORHOF,

S Y S T E M OF, 163.

MORTILLARO,

S Y S T E M OF, 177.

Motion, 3 9 .
MUNICH

ROYAL LIBRARY,

MUQUARDT,

SYSTEM

S Y S T E M OF, 184.

O F , 180.

NAMUR,

F I R S T SYSTEM O F , 178.

NAMUR,

S E C O N D SYSTEM O F , 180.

NARBONE,

S Y S T E M O F , 185.

Natural book classification, 6 0 .
N a t u r e a n d e n v i r o n m e n t , 3 , 5, 12.
N A U D E , S Y S T E M OF, 160.
N A V I L L E , S Y S T E M O F , 150-1.

N e d e r l a n d s c h e bibliographic, 2 3 3 .
N I Z O L I O , S Y S T E M O F , 116.

N o t a t i o n , nature o f a, 8 0 sq.
OGLE,

SYSTEM

OF, 2 1 3 .

O K E N , S Y S T E M O F , 127.
O L E N I N , S Y S T E M OF, 173.

Order o f t h e sciences stated, 4 3 - 4 ; graphic
ment, 4 4 .
Order v s . Classification, 18.
O r t h o d o x y i n book classification, 6 3 .

state-

O R T L O F F , S Y S T E M O F , 128.
O T T , S Y S T E M O F , 163.
OTTINO, SYSTEM OF, 220.
P A L E R M O , S Y S T E M O F , 187.
PALERMO

COMMUNAL

PAMPHILIS,
PARENT,

LIBRARY,

S Y S T E M OF, 171.

PARIS ARSENAL LIBRARY,
PARIS C I T Y LIBRARY,
PARIS

S Y S T E M O F , 188.

S Y S T E M O F , 135.

FREE

LIBRARIES,

PARIS MUNICIPAL

SYSTEM OF, 212.

SYSTEM

OF, 223.

SYSTEM

LIBRARY,

OF, 223.

SYSTEM

OF, 2 2 3 .

P A R I S M U S E U M OF N A T U R A L H I S T O R Y , S Y S T E M OF, 223.
PARIS, P A U L I N ,
PARK,

SYSTEM

O F , 185.

S Y S T E M O F , 182.

Peabody I n s t i t u t e catalogue, 2 3 6 .

245
PEARSON, SYSTEM OF, 151-2.
PECCENINI, SYSTEM OF, 141.
PEIGNOT, SYSTEM OF, 172.
PERKINS, SYSTEM OF, 208-9.

Personality, human, 37.
PETZHOLDT, SYSTEM OF, 191.
PEYPETTI, SYSTEM OF, 144-5*
P H I L O , .SYSTEM OF, 106.

Physics, 39.
P I L E , SYSTEM OF, 187.
PIPITONE, SYSTEM OF, 177.

Planetary systems, 36.
PLATO, SYSTEM OF, I O I .
P L I N Y , SYSTEM OF, 106.
POLIZIANO, SYSTEM OF, 114-15-

Polybiblion, 233.
Poole's Index, 236.
PORPHYRY, SYSTEM OF, 106-7.
PREDARI, SYSTEM OF, 141.
PREUSKER, SYSTEM OF, 180-81.
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY, SYSTEM OF, 224-32.

Protoplasm, 37.
PROUDHON, SYSTEM OF, 138.
PSELLUS, SYSTEM OF, H I .
PUBLIC LIBRARIES OF FRANCE, FIRST SYSTEM FOR, 211.
PUBLIC LIBRARIES OF FRANCE, SECOND SYSTEM FOR,
217.

Publishers' Circular, 233.
Publishers' Weekly, 234.
QUINN-BROWN, SYSTEM OF, 222.
QUIKTILIAN, SYSTEM OF, 106.
RAMSAY, SYSTEM OF, 139.
REGNAULT-WARIN, AND OTHERS, SYSTEM OF, 126.
REIMARUS. SYSTEM OF, 123.

Reinwald's Bulletin Mensuel, 234.
REISCH, SYSTEM OF, 115.
RENOUVIER, SYSTEM OF, 141.

Research, economy in, 55*57Resemblance less than likeness, 7.
REUSS, SYSTEM or, 177-

Review of Reviews Index, 236.
Revue bibliographique Beige, 234.
RHODE, SYSTEM OF, 159.
RIBOT, SYSTEM OF, i44«

246
R I C H A R D S O N , S Y S T E M O F , 152.
R I C H T E R , S Y S T E M O F , 139.
R O S M I N I , S Y S T E M OF, 135-36.
R O S S I , S Y S T E M O F , 181-.2.
ROSTGAARD, S Y S T E M OF, 164.
R O T H , S Y S T E M O F , 125.
R o w e l l , s y s t e m of,

87.

R O W E L L , S Y S T E M OF,
Royal Society, 234,

220-22.

236.

R U E D I G E R , S Y S T E M OF, 132.
ST.

EMMERAM

AT RATISBON,

MONASTIC LIBRARY OF,

S Y S T E M OF, 157.
ST.

GENEVIEVE LIBRARY,

S T . REQUIER,

SYSTEM

OF, 2 1 2 .

M O N A S T I C LIBRARY OF, S Y S T E M OF, 156.

S a m e n e s s m o r e t h a n l i k e n e s s , 6.
S A V I G N Y , D E , S Y S T E M O F , 116-7.
S C H E L L I N G , S Y S T E M OF, 127.
SCHLEIERMACHER,

S Y S T E M O F , 185-6.

S C H M I D , C. C. E . , S Y S T E M OF, 129.
S C H M I D , C. H . , S Y S T E M OF, 123-4.
S C H M I T Z , S Y S T E M O F , 141.
SCHOLASTIC SYSTEM,
SCHOPENHAUER,

112.

S Y S T E M OF, 133.

S C H R E T T I N G E R , S Y S T E M OF, 1 7 6 .
SCHUETZ-HUFELAND UND E R S C H , SYSTEM O*, 169.
SCHWARTZ, SYSTEM OF, 200-1.
Sciences,
17;

order

of,

17

sq.;

the order of things,

SEIZINGER,

divisions

18.

S Y S T E M O F , 190.

S H I E L D S , S Y S T E M OF, 146.
Similarity less than likeness,
SIMON,

7.

S Y S T E M OF, 128.

S I O N COLLEGE, S Y S T E M OF, 213-4.
Size

classification

of

books, 61.

S M I T H , LLOYD P . , S Y S T E M OF, 209-10.
Societies,

37.

Society and likeness,
Sociology,

14.

40.

SONNENSCHEIN,

S Y S T E M OF, 2 1 9 .

S P E N C E R , S Y S T E M OF, 142-3.
S P E U S I P P U S , S Y S T E M OF, 104.
STADLER, S Y S T E M OF, 148-50.
S T A N L E Y , S Y S T E M O F , 146.
STARRABBA,

S Y S T E M O F , 190.

and

unity

of,

247
STEFFENHAGEN,

S Y S T E M OF,

S T E W A R T , S Y S T E M OF,

210.

129.

STRASSBURG U N I V E R S I T Y

LIBRARY,

Subdivisions, principles o f , - 7 6 ;
tion in, 77 sq.
S U L Z E R , S Y S T E M OF,
SWEDISH

PUBLIC

OF,

217.

122.

LIBRARY,

SYON MONASTERY,

SYSTEM

degree and propor-

SYSTEM

SYSTEM
OF,

OF,

218.

157-8.

T A B L E A U COMPAR.6 DES PRODUCTIONS BIBLIOGRAPHIQUES,
SYSTEM

OF,

177.

TASCHKOEPRISADE, S Y S T E M OF,
TECHENER,

SYSTEM

OF,

116.

191.

T e m p l e libraries, 153.
TEUBNER,

SYSTEM

OF,

220.

T h e o l o g y , 30, 31, 4 3 .
T h e o l o g y as a science, 31.
Theoretical classification vs. book classification,
sq.; 89.
T h i c k n e s s of books in classification, 64.
T H I E B A U T , S Y S T E M OF,
THIENEMANN,

^126.

S Y S T E M OF,

178.

T h i n g , a, definition of, 2.
THOMPSON,

S Y S T E M OF,

147.

T h o t h literature, 153.
THUN,

S Y S T E M OF,

176.

TIELE,

S Y S T E M OF,

188.

T i m e , idea of, 39.
T O E P F E R , S Y S T E M OF,
TRFFLER,

128.

S Y S T E M OF,

TROEMEL,

158.

S Y S T E M OF,

188.

T R U E B N E R , S Y S T E M OF,

U n i t y of
Universe,
Universe
Universe,

VALDARINJ,
VALLA,

S Y S T E M OF,

SYSTEM

VANEGAS,
VARRO,

OF,

SYSTEM

SYSTEM

144.

115.

OF,

S Y S T E M OF,

VENTURA,

189.

things organic, 22.
h i s t o r y of, 33.
i n c l u d e s past t h i n g s , 24.
mechanical, 2 5 ; organic, 22.

115.

105.
OF,

135.

Vermorel, system of, 234.
VICO,

S Y S T E M OF,

VIENNA

121.

ROYAL LIBRARY,

V I N C E N T OF B E A U V A I S ,

SYSTEM

OF,

S Y S T E M OF,

222.
113.

67

248
VINCENT. B E N J . , SYSTEM OF,
VOIGT, SYSTEM OF, 138.

188.

Vortex atoms, 33.
WALCKENAER, SYSTEM OF,

186.

Weight-classification of books, 64.
WEIZEL, SYSTEM OF, 121.
W H E W E L L , SYSTEM OF, 137.
W I E N E R , SYSTEM OF, 186.
WILSON, SYSTEM OF, 140.
WOLFENBUETTEL, SYSTEM OF, 167.
W O L F F , SYSTEM OF, 121.
W U N D T , SYSTEM OF, 147.
WUTTIG, SYSTEM OF, 190.
XENOCRATES, SYSTEM OF, 105.
ZARA, SYSTEM OF, 119.
ZELLER, SYSTEM OF, 143.
ZENO, SYSTEM OF, 103.

Zoology, 40.
Zurich index, 234, 236.

This preservation copy
was created, printed and bound
at Bridgeport National Bindery, Inc.,
in compliance with U.S. copyright law.
Hie paper used meets the requirements
ofANSI/NISOZ39.48-1992
(Permanence of Paper).
R S D C
2004

(00)