Sources of Coeor Names. 
11 
pared it has been found that no two are exactly alike, the 
difference often being very great. For example: Of five 
samples of “vandyke brown” only two are approximate¬ 
ly similar, each of the other three being widely different, 
not only from one another but from the other two, one 
being a blackish brown, another reddish brown, the 
third a yellowish orange-brown. Of eleven samples of 
“olive” no two are closely similar, the color ranging 
from a shade of dull (grayish) blue-green to orange- 
brown, dark brownish gray, and light yellowish olive ; 
and the same or nearly the same degree of variation is 
seen in absolutely every color examined, showing very 
clearly the utter worthlessness of color names unless 
fixed or standardized. 
In order to obtain as many color names as possible 
for standardization it has been necessary to draw from 
all available sources. Several thousand samples of 
named colors have therefore been collected, and for con¬ 
venience of reference and comparison gummed to card 
catalogue cards, with the name, source, and other data 
thereon. These include the colors from many standard 
works, among them Werner’s “Nomenclature of Colours” 
(Syme’s edition, 1821), Hay’s “Nomenclature of Col¬ 
ours” (1846), Ridgway’s “Nomenclature of Colors” 
(1886), Saccardo’s “Chromataxia” (1891), Mathews’ 
“Chart of Correct Colors of Flowers” (American Flor¬ 
ist, 1891), Willson and Calkins’ “Familiar Colors,” 
Oberthur and Dauthenay’s “Repertoire des Couleurs” 
(1905), Leidel’s “Hints on Tints” (1893), “Tefevre’s 
Matieres Colorantes Artificiales” (1896), the Standard 
Dictionary chart of “typical colors,” the educational 
colored papers of Milton Bradley and Prang, and many 
others; and besides these practically all of the artists’ oil, 
water, and dry colors, manufactured by Winsor and New¬ 
ton, F. Schoenfeld and Co., Charles Roberson and Co., 
