XVIII PRELIMINARY GENERAL CATALOGUE OF STARS FOR 19OO 
exist, and several changes have been here independently made. Thus we have 
( l and £ 2 Ceti; in the present work f 1 has been discarded and the exponent taken 
from £ 2 , even though the difference of magnitude is small. There are several other 
instances of the same kind. These subscripts or exponents have sometimes been 
retained in the cases where the two stars may be regarded as constituting a close 
naked-eye double, as Nos. 1045-1046, 6 l and 6 2 Tauri (dist. 6'). 
As a rule the practice of employing the numbers of Flamsteed, Iievelius, Bode, or 
Gould with the name of the constellation as a designation has not been followed in 
working up the second column of the Catalogue. There are numerous cases where 
the Flamsteed numbers have been misapplied; there is no uniformity in assigning 
the exact boundaries of the constellations; and in the use of the letters B, H, and 
F we have a fruitful source of inconsistencies and errors, especially in view of the 
nearly universal practice of omitting the letter “ F ” to indicate that the number is 
Flamsteed’s. The letters “B” for Bode and “H” for Hevelius have often been 
dropped. It was decided to get rid of the critical labor involved in unprofitable 
research upon these names by discarding them altogether. Yet, in a few instances, 
such familiar designations as 70 Ophiuchi, 61 Cygni, and 51 H Cephei, have been 
retained; and in the column of remarks the Flamsteed and Gould numbers with 
constellation names (mainly quoted from the catalogue of the British Association) 
are given as convenient synonyms. The use of the Roman alphabet with constel¬ 
lation names, except for naming variable stars, seems to be open to very serious 
objections. Such letters are sometimes given in the column of remarks, but are 
excluded from the second column. The similarity of such letters as a and a , 1 
and i, k and x, o and 0, v and v, co and w, either in manuscript or print, has 
been the source of much confusion and of what should have been unnecessary 
labor. 
Whatever have been the faults of naming the northern stars, the case is far worse 
for the southern sky. Here it has been decided to cut loose from all traditions and 
to follow the constellations and Greek letters as they were given by Gould in the 
Uranometria Argentina , with modifications as to the employment of letters with 
exponents similar to those adopted for northern stars. Roughly, this practice takes 
effect at about — 23 0 of declination, and near that parallel inconsistencies are neces¬ 
sarily introduced that are not, however, regarded as of any particular moment. 
In the column of remarks the Gould numbers and constellations have usually been 
given for the far southern stars. 
The simplest mode of designation (and in many respects the most natural for a 
catalogue like this) is to give, in abbreviated form, the name of and number in 
some well-known star-catalogue in which the earliest observations of precision upon 
that star are found. Thus, “Br 3208” (Bradley), given as a designation for the 
first star in this Catalogue, is specific and probably more convenient as a means of 
identification than would be “33 Piscium,” by which this star is often designated. 
Lacaille’s zone-observations at the Cape of Good Hope constitute a nearly complete 
survey of the brighter stars of the southern sky. Comparatively few stars brighter 
than 7 m o have been omitted. These numbers have been very extensively quoted in 
star-catalogues. Therefore, although the catalogue of Lacaille’s observations is 
