Printed British Catalogue

Scrooge wrote:

 > Can anyone think of a good reason why one would be better off having a
 > printed version of the British Museum General Catalogue rather than using
 > the one online? Does the printed version have more information? Cons: I
 > wouldn't use it that much, it wouldn't wouldn't be up to date so I would
 > probably check the online cataloue anyway, and it would take up quite a
bit
 > of shelf space. Pros: It would fit my collection (books about books), I
 > prefer holding books so that I can browse the entries, a set has come up
 > fairly cheap and I think it would look nice on the shelves.

Hmm. I'm not sure what you're referring to here. The catalogue of
acquisitions to 1975 runs to several hundred weighty tomes, so it would take
up a *heck* of a lot of shelf space.

As for what constitutes cheap, there seem to be some pretty disparate prices
floating around on ABE. Keip GmbH has a pretty comprehensive-looking set at
under $2000 (though transportation from Germany would set you back a pretty
penny!), and DELON-BIBLIO of France has the miniprint 37-volume set for just
over $2000. However, Antiquarian Bookstore (Portsmouth, New Hampshire) is
asking $9,500 for what seems to be the same miniprint set.

One dealer is offering the Clowes 51-volume edition (up to 1951) for $1500
and an earlier version of the miniprint edition at $900. They also have the
1884 catalogue of books to 1640 ($480), which - were I in the market for
this kind of thing - would probably be my choice on the grounds that it
covers my area of interest and is the bibliographical precursor to the Short
Title Catalogue. But I would never buy from that particular dealer!

As for completeness, the online catalogue does not, I think, cover
everything that was in the old printed catalogue, but the (looks furtively
over shoulder) *librarians* where I work yanked the printed catalogue off
the shelves (I don't know what they did with it!), so I can't say for sure
what kinds of discrepancies there are. Until they did yank it, though, I
frequently found that consulting the printed catalogue would yield fruits
not obtainable online. The website still carries the disclaimer:

"As online catalogue records are not available for every item in the British
Library collection this does not necessarily mean the Library does not hold
the item(s) you are looking for."


--
John
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://rarebooksinjapan.com" target="_blank">http://rarebooksinjapan.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Printed British Catalogue 

<snip>
 > Hmm. I'm not sure what you're referring to here. The catalogue of
 > acquisitions to 1975 runs to several hundred weighty tomes, so it would take
 > up a *heck* of a lot of shelf space.

It's the 27-vol microprint edition (to 1955) with 8 vols of supplements taking
it up to 1970, at a not-entirely-random guess.

<snip>
 > As for completeness, the online catalogue does not, I think, cover
 > everything that was in the old printed catalogue, but the (looks furtively
 > over shoulder) *librarians* where I work yanked the printed catalogue off
 > the shelves (I don't know what they did with it!), so I can't say for sure
 > what kinds of discrepancies there are. Until they did yank it, though, I
 > frequently found that consulting the printed catalogue would yield fruits
 > not obtainable online. The website still carries the disclaimer:
 >
 > "As online catalogue records are not available for every item in the British
 > Library collection this does not necessarily mean the Library does not hold
 > the item(s) you are looking for."
 >
I think that, the disclaimer notwithstanding, the BL now says that everything
catalogued is online; after all, access to the catalogue within the library's
now almost exclusively through terminals, and there's no reason to use a
different database for the web version compared with the internal one. The
interface is a bit different (there's more you can do on a terminal in the
library than via the web) but the data looks the same. The disclaimer used to
show up regularly (ie when a search turned up no hits, even if I knew the
library had some items which should have been found by it), but now it's, in my
experience anyway, very rare to see it. Robin Alston claims that a few of the
titles listed in his Bibliography of the English Language as being in the BL
aren't actually in the online catalogue, but I forget what the story behind that
is.

A couple of things the online catalogue doesn't have, but which the printed one
was (I think) renowned for are cross-references (eg for pseudonymous authors)
and subject-headings; OTOH the online version's up-to-date and in many cases
provides more details about the book than the printed version. The BL
catalogue's less helpful in the latter respect than other online catalogues,
especially WorldCat and RLIN, but the quantity of information provided for a
given book did seem to improve a couple of years back; I guess they carried out
some kind of major cataloguing exercise.

Sandy<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Printed British Catalogue 

Sandy wrote:

 > It's the 27-vol microprint edition (to 1955) with 8 vols of supplements
taking
 > it up to 1970

OK, well that's exactly the same as the set being offered for $900 by "the
bastard from Leeds", as another member of this newsgroup so aptly dubbed
him!

 > A couple of things the online catalogue doesn't have, but which the
printed one
 > was (I think) renowned for are cross-references (eg for pseudonymous
authors)
 > and subject-headings; OTOH the online version's up-to-date and in many
cases
 > provides more details about the book than the printed version. The BL
 > catalogue's less helpful in the latter respect than other online
catalogues,
 > especially WorldCat

Yes, along with removing the BLC from the shelves, the library here made it
possible to check WorldCat (though a librarian), and purely from a
bibliographical point of view that is probably the most complete and
authoritative source.

My take on this is that I personally wouldn't go for this set, even if I was
collecting books about books, the reasons being that (a) it is a catalogue
which has been superceded and hence is not the best tool for the job it does
and (b) it is not - to my mind, at least - particularly significant in the
*history* of bilbiography. It hasn't lost its value in the way an old
encyclopedia would, but, as I see it, it's moving in that direction. I would
go more for the specialised British Museum catalogues (the catalogues of
manuscripts, or of 15th century books) and the 1884 catalogue of books to
1640. Such catalogues are still probably the best bibliographical tools
available in the particular fields they cover (fulfilling criterion "a",
above) or, where they are not (as in the case of the 1884 catalogue, which
is useful if one wants to know what the library's holdings were *at that
time* but, for other purposes, has been largely superceded by the STC), they
are important in the history of bibliography (fulfilling criterion "b"). But
that's a personal perspective, and another collector might well look at it
differently.


--
John
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://rarebooksinjapan.com" target="_blank">http://rarebooksinjapan.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Printed British Catalogue 

"Scrooge" <knappr DeleteThis @winco.net> wrote in message news:bdr01c$9ngn$1@news3.infoave.net...
: Can anyone think of a good reason why one would be better off having a
: printed version of the British Museum General Catalogue rather than using
: the one online? Does the printed version have more information? Cons: I
: wouldn't use it that much, it wouldn't wouldn't be up to date so I would
: probably check the online cataloue anyway, and it would take up quite a bit
: of shelf space. Pros: It would fit my collection (books about books), I
: prefer holding books so that I can browse the entries, a set has come up
: fairly cheap and I think it would look nice on the shelves.
:
: Any comments?
:
: Thanks,
: Rich
:
:

Hi, I'm a little new here, but would you have the link to the British catalogue you are speaking of? Thanks

E
 >> Stay informed about: Printed British Catalogue 

"John R. Yamamoto- Wilson" <john.RemoveThis@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:bdra28$1055iu$1@ID-169501.news.dfncis.de...
 > Scrooge wrote:
 >
  > > Can anyone think of a good reason why one would be better off having a
  > > printed version of the British Museum General Catalogue rather than
using
  > > the one online? Does the printed version have more information? Cons: I
  > > wouldn't use it that much, it wouldn't wouldn't be up to date so I would
  > > probably check the online cataloue anyway, and it would take up quite a
 > bit
  > > of shelf space. Pros: It would fit my collection (books about books), I
  > > prefer holding books so that I can browse the entries, a set has come up
  > > fairly cheap and I think it would look nice on the shelves.
 >
 > Hmm. I'm not sure what you're referring to here. The catalogue of
 > acquisitions to 1975 runs to several hundred weighty tomes, so it would
take
 > up a *heck* of a lot of shelf space.
 >
 > As for what constitutes cheap, there seem to be some pretty disparate
prices
 > floating around on ABE. Keip GmbH has a pretty comprehensive-looking set
at
 > under $2000 (though transportation from Germany would set you back a
pretty
 > penny!), and DELON-BIBLIO of France has the miniprint 37-volume set for
just
 > over $2000. However, Antiquarian Bookstore (Portsmouth, New Hampshire) is
 > asking $9,500 for what seems to be the same miniprint set.
 >
 > One dealer is offering the Clowes 51-volume edition (up to 1951) for $1500
 > and an earlier version of the miniprint edition at $900. They also have
the
 > 1884 catalogue of books to 1640 ($480), which - were I in the market for
 > this kind of thing - would probably be my choice on the grounds that it
 > covers my area of interest and is the bibliographical precursor to the
Short
 > Title Catalogue. But I would never buy from that particular dealer!
 >
 > As for completeness, the online catalogue does not, I think, cover
 > everything that was in the old printed catalogue, but the (looks furtively
 > over shoulder) *librarians* where I work yanked the printed catalogue off
 > the shelves (I don't know what they did with it!), so I can't say for sure
 > what kinds of discrepancies there are. Until they did yank it, though, I
 > frequently found that consulting the printed catalogue would yield fruits
 > not obtainable online. The website still carries the disclaimer:
 >
 > "As online catalogue records are not available for every item in the
British
 > Library collection this does not necessarily mean the Library does not
hold
 > the item(s) you are looking for."
 >
 >
 > --
 > John
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://rarebooksinjapan.com</font" target="_blank">http://rarebooksinjapan.com</font</a>>
 >

Well I got it. <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://tinyurl.com/fvxb" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/fvxb</a> Now I'll have to sell some books to
make room for it.
I'll be paying more in shipping than for the books, but at that price, who
am I to complain.

Rich<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Printed British Catalogue 

"John R. Yamamoto- Wilson" <john.DeleteThis@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:bdt717$10o1rg$1@ID-169501.news.dfncis.de...
 > Sandy wrote:
 >
  > > It's the 27-vol microprint edition (to 1955) with 8 vols of supplements
 > taking
  > > it up to 1970
 >
 > OK, well that's exactly the same as the set being offered for $900 by "the
 > bastard from Leeds", as another member of this newsgroup so aptly dubbed
 > him!
 >

Our fellow-rcber (I assume) got this one for a mere $40 plus shipping ($69.25!);
see <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1113&item=3532015497" target="_blank">http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1113&item=3532015497</a>

  > > A couple of things the online catalogue doesn't have, but which the
 > printed one
  > > was (I think) renowned for are cross-references (eg for pseudonymous
 > authors)
  > > and subject-headings; OTOH the online version's up-to-date and in many
 > cases
  > > provides more details about the book than the printed version. The BL
  > > catalogue's less helpful in the latter respect than other online
 > catalogues,
  > > especially WorldCat
 >
 > Yes, along with removing the BLC from the shelves, the library here made it
 > possible to check WorldCat (though a librarian), and purely from a
 > bibliographical point of view that is probably the most complete and
 > authoritative source.

Actually, I think RLIN has many more records than WorldCat: 120 v 50 million,
someone estimated to me not so long ago (can't vouch for those figures myself).
He was looking for records of a book of which 6 copies are known to survive, and
WorldCat found 1 but RLIN found 5 (the sixth being in a private collection).
Most people I think find WC very US-centric (if what you want is the libraries
holding copies, rather than just information about the book). OTOH I believe
RLIN only covers the 161 institutions which are members of RLG (list at
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.rlg.org/memlist.html" target="_blank">http://www.rlg.org/memlist.html</a>).

 >I would
 > go more for the specialised British Museum catalogues (the catalogues of
 > manuscripts, or of 15th century books) and the 1884 catalogue of books to
 > 1640. Such catalogues are still probably the best bibliographical tools
 > available in the particular fields they cover (fulfilling criterion "a",
 > above) or, where they are not (as in the case of the 1884 catalogue, which
 > is useful if one wants to know what the library's holdings were *at that
 > time* but, for other purposes, has been largely superceded by the STC), they
 > are important in the history of bibliography (fulfilling criterion "b"). But
 > that's a personal perspective, and another collector might well look at it
 > differently.
 >
I have the 15th century books catalogues and they're invaluable -
well-illustrated and fascinating reading. Each volume has a lengthy introduction
describing the history of printing in the region covered by the volume, in
addition to the entries for each printer in the region. There are two volumes
not yet published, one on English incunabula (edited by Lotte Hellinga and due
out next year, I think) and one on Hebrew incunabula (editor and likely
publication date unknown to me), and presumably an additional volume covering
acquisitions since the earlier volumes were completed. As the first volume was
originally published in 1908, it'd be nice if the last one appeared before 2008,
although how likely that is I dunno. They're still doing a lot better than the
Gesamtkatalog, which started in the 1920s and has recently reached authors whose
names begin with the letter I (although to be fair not much happened between
1939 and 1968).

Sandy<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Printed British Catalogue 

Elizabeth wrote:

 > would you have the link to the British catalogue you are speaking of?

The British Library catalogue is here:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://blpc.bl.uk/" target="_blank">http://blpc.bl.uk/</a>

Also useful are...

The Library of Congress catalogue:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://catalog.loc.gov/" target="_blank">http://catalog.loc.gov/</a>
COPAC:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://catalog.loc.gov/" target="_blank">http://catalog.loc.gov/</a>
Karlsruhe catalogue:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/hylib/en/kvk.html" target="_blank">http://www.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/hylib/en/kvk.html</a>
Links to European catalogues:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.lib.virginia.edu/wess/eurocats.html" target="_blank">http://www.lib.virginia.edu/wess/eurocats.html</a>


--
John
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://rarebooksinjapan.com" target="_blank">http://rarebooksinjapan.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Printed British Catalogue 

   > > > It's the 27-vol microprint edition (to 1955) with 8 vols of
supplements
   > > > taking it up to 1970
  > >
  > > OK, well that's exactly the same as the set being offered for $900 by
"the
  > > bastard from Leeds", as another member of this newsgroup so aptly dubbed
  > > him!
  > >
 >
 > Our fellow-rcber (I assume) got this one for a mere $40 plus shipping
($69.25!);
 > see
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1113&item=3532015497" target="_blank">http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1113&item=3532015497</a>

Nice going! Ex-lib, but I don't think that matters so much, since they will
obviously have been for reference, not for borrowing, and the spine
classification mark looks as if it can probably be removed fairly easily.

--
John
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://rarebooksinjapan.com" target="_blank">http://rarebooksinjapan.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Printed British Catalogue