B i n 



b* held to bo a part of bibliograr!.y, then \\m bibliographer 

 must to- universal linguist, in s" far ut U-a-t as r< 

 the alphabets of all languages. If bibliography. again, is 

 t.. include a knowledge of the arts of printing nii<l bcok- 

 iHiiduiL'. why not also of those of the ranking of paper, 

 parchment, papyrus, and all other substances that have 

 v\vr lxeii UM'd'for printing or writing upon, and of the 

 composition and manufacture of inks and all other pig- 

 ments? In this way bibliography would include no incon- 

 siderable portion bo'th o( chemistry and botany. On the 

 tame principle the bibliographer might be required to have 

 a knowledge of everything appertaining to the arts of cutting 

 letters in wood and stone. 



Although bibliography, in the sense to which it is now 

 eonlined, is a very modern term, the science of the know- 

 ledge of books in regard to their authors, subjects, editions, 

 and history, must have been cultivated from a comparatively 

 early period in the history of literature. Indeed an ac- 

 quaintance with such matters is to a great degree implied 

 in a general knowledge of literature, such as must have 

 been possessed by many persons in every age of civilization 

 and learning. But the study must have been more syste- 

 matically pursued, even in the antient world, by those 

 whose business it was to arrange and take charge of large 

 libraries, of which we know that many, both public and 

 private, existed in Greece, in Egypt, "at least under the 

 Ptolemies, in Italy, and in other countries. The principal 

 booksellers of those days must also have been more or less 

 conversant with what we now call the science of bibliography. 

 Wo believe, however, that no professed treatise upon the 

 subject, or upon any part of it, has cither come down to us 

 from antiquity, or is anywhere mentioned among the now 

 lost productions either of Greek or Roman learning. 



It is only since the invention of printing, and the conse- 

 quent extraordinary multiplication of books, that bibliography 

 has, properly speaking, assumed the form of a science, and 

 been developed in its principles and details in systematic 

 works. 



In Germany, in Italy, in France, and also in our own 

 country, works in all the departments of bibliography have, 

 within the last three centuries, been produced in sueli 

 numbers that the mere enumeration of their titles would 

 make a bulky volume. We can here notice only a very 

 few of the most important, and that chiefly for the purpose 

 of illustrating the different branches into which the subject 

 may be divided . 



The most numerous class of bibliographical works are 

 lists or catalogues of books ; but these are of various descrip- 

 tions. Even bookseller*' catalogues are to be included 

 under this head ; such catalogues are collected and prizec 

 by bibliographers, as in many cases affording evidence both 

 of the prices of books and of the existence of particular 

 editions and copies. Some of them, from the superior rarity 

 of the articles which they include, or from bibliographica 

 notices with which they are interspersed, have a much 

 higher value. The Bibliotheca Anglo-Poetica, for instance 

 published in 1815 by Messrs. Longman and Co., is perhap! 

 the fullest list that exists of the earlier and rarer production! 

 of English poetry, of many of which it also contains in 

 teresting bibliographical descriptions. Under the sam< 

 head may be mentioned such publications as Reed's ' Biblio 

 theca Nova Legum Anglias' (1809), and other catalogues o 

 law-booksellers, in which legal works are classified accord 

 ing to their subjects. Among the most valuable sale cata 

 logucs, however, are some of those of the libraries of indi 

 vidual collectors; such, for example, as that of the late Mr 

 Roscoe (prepared by himself) and published in 1816, anc 

 more recently those of the libraries of Dr. Pnrr (1827) ant 

 of Mr. Heber (1834). Among the older English catalogues 

 of the libraries of private individuals, one of the scarcest is 

 that of the large library of Mr. Thomas Rawlinson, which 

 was dispersed by auction in 1 722. This catalogue was pub 

 bliihed in parts, and is rarely to be found complete. Raw 

 linson is the person satirized under the name of Tom Folio 

 in the 138th number of the 'Taller.' Some of the mos 

 celebrated of the foreign catalogues of this description are 

 those of the libraries of M. Citternay du Fay (8vo. 1 725), o 

 the Comte de Hoym (8vo. 1728), of the Abb6 Charles 

 d'Orleans dc Rothelin (8vo. 1746), and of M. Claude Gros 

 de Bozo (8.VO. 1753), all prepared by the Parisian bookseller 

 Gabriel Martin. There is another catalogue of the library 

 of M. de Bore, printed under his own care at the royal presi 

 in small folio in 1745, wnich it of extreme rarity, only fifty 



15 ! P. 



copies, it is soid, having been thrown off. DC Bure states 

 hat a single copy has t.ir nearly '.MO livres. In 



all these catalogues- > f Martin's ll.e books are arranged in 

 classes according to a scheme of his own contrivance, and 

 an alphalH'ticul catalogue of the names of Hie authors is 

 _'i\en at the end. Perhaps, however, the most c.nnpre- 

 icnsivc and valuable catalogue thus digested that lias ever 

 ieen published is that entitled the' liibliolhera Bunaviana,' 

 r voU. 4to. Ix-ip/ig, 174S-1756, being a catalogue of the 

 ibrary of the Count de Hunan, drawn up by his librarian, 

 Jo. Mich. Franck. The divisions and subdivisions in this 

 catalogue are much more numerous than those in Martin's 

 system. The work bos the highest character for accuracy, 

 so f'.ir as it goes; but unfortunately it has never been com- 

 pleted. 



Some Catalogues Raisonnet (as catalogue* in which the 

 nooks are thus disposed into classes according to their sub- 

 jects are called by the French) have also been printed of 

 public libraries. The greatest work of this description is 

 probably that of the French ' Bibliotheque Royal,' begun 

 in 1739, and finished in ten volumes folio in 1753. This 

 catalogue consists of two parts, one of tin; printed books, 

 and another of the manuscripts. The former was originally 

 superintended by the Abbes Sullier and Boudot, the other 

 by Anieet Mellot. The most complete catalogue of this 

 description in existence is understood to be that of the 

 library of the university of Gottingen, but it has not been 

 printed. (Sec an account of this Catalogue in the Quarterly 

 Journal nf Education, No. IV.) The best specimen of a 

 Catalogue Raisonne that we know of any of the more 

 considerable public collections of this country, is that of 

 the library of the writers to the Signet in Edinburgh, pub- 

 lished in one volume quarto in 1805. The catalogues of 

 the libraries of some mechanics' institutes and other private 

 associations have more recently been published upon a simi- 

 lar plan. It is to be observed that a Catalogue Raisrmne 

 implies something more than a distribution of the books 

 into so many distinct alphabets, severally headed ThcV. 

 History, Voyages and Travels, Novels and Romai 

 Poetry, Medicine, Law, &c., as we find done even in many 

 catalogues of circulating libraries, and booksellers' and auc- 

 tioneers' sale catalogues. In a Catalogue Raisnnnl, pro- 

 perly so called, the alphabetical arrangement of titles is 

 entirely dispensed with, its place being supplied by an 

 index at the end ; and every work is set down in the order 

 pointed out by its subject, the ground over which the 

 author's researches or speculations extend hying at the 

 same time indicated as distinctly and fully as possible, not 

 only by the transcription of the titlc-pnge, but, when neces- 

 sary, by an abstract of the contents. This is especially done 

 in the case of publications that consist of collections of 

 treatises. 



There are printed catalogues of most of the public col- 

 lections of books in this country ; but, with the exceptions 

 just mentioned, they are all, we believe, merely alphabets 

 of titles, and even as such few of them have been very care- 

 fully drawn up. One of the most inaccurate and deficient 

 is that of the printed books in the general library of the 

 British Museum, which was published in 1813-1819, in 

 seven octavo volumes. That of the Royal Library, lately 

 transferred to the same depository (five volumes folio, besides 

 a catalogue of maps, prints, &e., in one volnme, J 820-1829), 

 has been prepared with much greater care. There are also 

 excellent printed catalogues of the Harleian, Cottonian. 

 Lansdownc, Sloan, and Birch Manuscripts, all preserved in 

 this extensive national collection. The only catalogues .if 

 the Burney, the Cole, the Mitchell, the Egerton, and some 

 other collections also there, are still unprinted. Of the 

 Bodleian Library no catalogue has been printed since that 

 which appeared in two volumes folio in 1 738 ; nor any of 

 the library of Sion College since that published in one 

 volume folio in 1724; although the increase since these. 

 dates of both collections must have been very great. We 

 are not aware that there is a printed catalogue of any one 

 of the Cambridge libraries, except ono of that of St. Cathe- 

 rine's Hall, printed in 1771, and another of the Parker 

 Manuscripts in the library of Corpus Christi College, printed 

 in 1777. In Scotland a catalogue of the library of the Uni- 

 versity of Glasgow was published in one volume folio in 

 1 791. It was drawn up under the superintendence of Mr. 

 Arthur, Professor of Moral Philosophy, and is one of the 

 most correct catalogues ever printed. The example of the 

 University of Glasgow has recently been imitated by the 



