50 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 116. 



merals are still retained for the sections of the 

 statutes. 



Akin to the retention of antiquated forms of 

 letters is the retention of antiquated orthography. 

 Editors of works of the sixteenth and seventeenth 

 ceatories sometimes retain the spellingof the i^eriod, 

 of which Evelyn's Diary is an example ; but this 

 practice is unpleasant to the modern reader, and 

 sometimes, particularly in proper names, per- 

 plexes and misleads him. The modern editions of 

 the classical writers of that period, such as Shak- 

 speare. Bacon, Milton, Clarendon, &c., are very 

 properly reduced to the modern standard of or- 

 thography, as is done by Italian editors with the 

 works of Dante, Boccaccio, &c. The attempt to 

 introduce the native orthography of foreign proper 

 names naturalised in English, is likewise unsuc- 

 cessful, and merely offends the eye of the reader, 

 without giving any real information. Mr. Lane and 

 other Orientalists will never succeed in banishing 

 such forms as vizier, caliph, cadi, &c. ; nor will 

 even Mr. Grote's authority alter the spelling of 

 the well-known G-reek names. Names of ancient 

 persons and places which are enshrined in the verses 

 of Milton and other great poets, cannot be altered. 



The old unmeaning practice of printing every 

 noun substantive with a capital letter (still retained 

 in German) has been abandoned by every English 

 printer, except the printer of parliamentary papers 

 for the House of Lords. Proper names used to 

 be printed in italics ; and generally, the use of 

 italics was much greater than at present. In 

 modern reprints, these ancient flowers of typo- 

 graphy ought to be removed. The convenient 

 edition of Hobbes' Works, for which we are in- 

 debted to Sir W. Molesworth, would be more 

 agreeable to read if the italics were less abundant. 



The use of the folio and quarto size is now 

 generally restricted to such books as could scarcely 

 be printed in octavo, as dictionaries and similar 

 books of reference. The parliamentary blue book, 

 which long resisted the progress of octavo civiliz- 

 ation, is now beginning to shrink into a more 

 manageable size. With regard to separate vo- 

 lumes, the most convenient practice is to consider 

 them as a mere printer's division, which may vary 

 in different editions ; and to number them con- 

 secutively, without reference to their contents. 

 The Germans have a very inconvenient practice 

 of dividing a volume into parts, each of which is a 

 volume in the ordinary meaning of the word ; so 

 that a work consisting of nine volumes, for ex- 

 ample, may be divided into four volumes, one of 

 which consists of three parts, and the other three 

 of two parts each. Tlie result is, that every refer- 

 ence must specify both tlie volume and the part : 

 thus. Band 11. Abtheilung III. S. 108. Fre- 

 quently, too, this mode of numbering misleads the 

 bookbinder, who (unless properly cautioned) num- 

 bers the volumes in the ordinary manner. 



Volumes, as I have remarked, are merely a 

 printer's division. Every literary composition 

 ought, however, to have an organic division of its 

 own. The early Greeks seem indeed to have 

 composed both their poems and prose works as one 

 continuous discourse. The rhapsodies of Homer 

 and the muses of Herodotus were subsequent 

 divisions introduced by editors and grammarians. 

 But literary experience pointed out the commo- 

 diousness of such breaks in a long work ; and the 

 books of the j32neid and of the History of Livy 

 were the divisions of the authors themselves. 

 Since the invention of printing, the books of the 

 prose works of the classical writers have been 

 subdivided into chapters ; while for the books of 

 poems, as well as for the dramas, the verses have 

 been numbered. The books of the Old and New 

 Testament have likewise been portioned into 

 chapters, and into a late typographical division of 

 verses. 



In making a division of his work, an author 

 ought to number its parts consecutively, without 

 reference to volumes. The novels of Waltet: 

 Scott are divided into chapters, the numbering of 

 which is dependent on the volume ; so that It is 

 impossible to quote them without referring to the 

 edition, or to find a reference to them In any 

 other edition than that cited. For the same 

 reason, an author ought not to quote his own book 

 in the text by a reference to volumes. 



The division most convenient for purposes of 

 reference is that which renders a quotation simple 

 to note, and easy to verify. Divisions which ran 

 through an entire work (such as the chapters of 

 Gibbon's History) are easy to quote, and the 

 quotation can be easily verified when the chapter 

 Is not long. The numbering of paragraphs in one 

 series through an entire work, as in the French 

 codes, in Cobbett's writings, and in the state 

 papers of the Indian government, is the simplest 

 and most effectual division for purposes of refer- 

 ence. The Digest can now be referred to by 

 book, title, and paragraph ; nevertheless the Ger- 

 mans (who, notwithstanding their vast experience 

 in the work of quoting, seem to have a predilection 

 for cumbrous and antiquated methods) still adhere 

 to the old circuitous mode of (potation, against 

 which Gibbon long ago raised his voice {Decl. and 

 Fall, c. 44. n. 1.). 



Some works have been divided by their authors 

 Into chapters, but the chapters have been left 

 unnumbered. NIebulir's Roman History is In this 

 state. , . 



The iiternal division of a work by its author is 

 not, however, merely for purposes of reference. 

 It may likewise be a logical division ; it may fol- 

 low the distribution of the subject, and assist the 

 reader by visibly separating its several parts. 

 This process, however, may be carried so far as to 

 defeat its purpose (viz. perspicuity of arrange- 



