College and Research Libraries


adequate indication of the scope of the 

bibliography." It w o u l d be easy to give 

scores of examples showing that he often 

stops short of giving as much information 

as w o u l d be helpful. 

Scope.—Besterman emphasizes the claim 

that his w o r k "aims at completeness-

and i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y . " Y e t w e find that he 

w o r k e d almost entirely in the British 

M u s e u m and w i t h the services of the N a -

tional C e n t r a l L i b r a r y ; and a glance at 

his pages reveals that they are very heavily 

weighted in f a v o r of G r e a t Britain. 

" G r e a t B r i t a i n " as a topic takes 62 

columns, " A m e r i c a , " 17, " F r a n c e , " 14, 

" G e r m a n y , " 7, and " I t a l y " 6. If he had 

gone in for indexes to government docu-

ments of the other countries as he did for 

his o w n country, the proportions w o u l d 

have been different. B u t not having 

visited the Preussische Staatsbibliothek in 

Berlin, the K o n g e l i g e Bibliotek in Copen-

hagen, the K o n i n k l i j k e Bibliotheek in T h e 

H a g u e , the Biblioteca Apostolica V a t i c a n a , 

the L i b r a r y of Congress, etc., he could not 

be familiar w i t h their h o l d i n g s — b u t then 

w h y make such a claim of "interna-

tionality ?" 

Arrangement.—The Introduction de-

livers a diatribe against the classified 

arrangement for a bibliography, w i t h some 

good points and some w e a k ones. T h e 

main advantage to the alphabetical topical 

scheme used here is the avoidance of 

subjects in the index. B u t the topical 

plan involves ambiguities aplenty, an 

important one of w h i c h is the failure to 

associate kindred subjects. Some of the 

space saved is lost again w h e n certain 

titles have to be repeated in a number of 

places. 

Miscellaneous comments.—The w o r k is 

handsomely done and has ordinary virtues 

not listed here. H o w e v e r , a f e w stray 

reflections: T h e place of publication of 

an English w o r k published in L o n d o n is 

omitted, and of a French w o r k published 

in Paris. T h i s is explained in the Intro-

d u c t i o n ; but it w o u l d not have added 

much trouble to have printed these small 

words w h e r e needed. O n l y one place is 

g i v e n : " L i p s i a e , " for "Lipsiae et H a m -

b u r g i . " Publishers are not mentioned as 

a rule. T h e pagination methods are con-

fusing. Accents on G r e e k w o r d s are 

omitted. F u l l names and dates of authors 

are not attempted. N u m e r o u s typo-

graphical ( ? ) errors are evident. T o save 

space, comments are omitted. Instead, the 

number of titles in each bibliography is 

indicated in square brackets. T h i s has a 

value, but ( e . g . ) to give the information 

that a certain w o r k has " [ 3 0 0 . ] " entries 

doesn't help much w h e n it happens that 

that particular bibliography is practically 

worthless. T h e student w o u l d prefer that 

the space given to detailed collations for 

volumes of some l o n g serial sets had been 

used for critical comments throughout. 

A r e abridgements of specifications for 

boxes, brushing and sweeping, casks, 

cement, chains, clocks, etc., really biblio-

graphical material ? Abbreviations are 

not explained; some are self-evident. 

A n exhaustive list of omissions w o u l d 

involve re-doing the job for Besterman. 

T h e reviewer made a list of scores of 

to-be-expected but not-found bibliogra-

phies dealing w i t h religious subjects; but 

perhaps enough has been said to prove that 

this World Bibliography of Bibliographies 

lacks completeness as w e l l as depend-

a b i l i t y . — J o h n Barrow, Berea College, 

Berea, Ky. 

A Faculty Survey of the University of 

Pennsylvania Libraries. Bibliographical 

P l a n n i n g Committee of Philadelphia. 

64 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



University of Pennsylvania Press, Phila-

delphia, 1940. 202p. $3. 

T H I S survey w a s undertaken at the 
suggestion of the Bibliographical P l a n n i n g 

Committee of the Philadelphia M e t r o -

politan A r e a , a joint committee of the 

University of Pennsylvania and the U n i o n 

L i b r a r y C a t a l o g of the A r e a . I t differs 

from most surveys of the same sort, in the 

words of its Introduction, because " i t w a s 

made, not by the distributors of books, 

but by the users of books; not by librarians, 

but by scholars. It represents an appraisal 

of the library collections of the university 

by the experts in the several fields of 

knowledge represented on the university 

faculties." 

Because of this viewpoint, of the w a y 

the material is a r r a n g e d — b y departments 

of instruction, and of the compactness of 

phraseology and the excellent biblio-

graphical judgment shown by most of the 

contributors, this volume w i l l be not 

merely of interest but of very real practical 

use as a check list to other college and 

university libraries. 

In general each department lists, boiled 

down to one or t w o pages, w h a t it has, 

and w h a t it thinks it needs, in the source 

materials, the secondary materials, 

periodicals, documents, and collateral ma-

terials in its field. B u t no cut-and-dried 

f o r m u l a is f o l l o w e d . Each man plunges 

into his topic w i t h o u t delay, and tells a 

story stripped of unnecessary verbiage and 

unneeded bibliographical impedimenta. 

A more detailed review of a single 

section, Professor Leach's " M i d d l e E n g -

lish," w i l l perhaps show more clearly the 

scope and purpose of the w o r k . H e first 

notes that the library's materials have been 

checked against the standard bibliography 

of the field, W e l l s ' Manual of the 

Writings in Middle English, and also 

against Loomis' new Introduction to 

Medieval Literature Chiefly in England. 

H e then states that the library possesses 

most of the important periodicals in the 

field, and specifically lists ten of them, 

Speculum, Medium Aevu?n, Novi Studi 

Medievali, etc. H e notes the possession 

of all the standard bibliographies (listing 

six) and of all the printed catalogs of 

medieval manuscripts. H e remarks that 

medieval paleography and printing are less 

well-represented, but lists eleven w o r k s 

w h i c h the library has, also citing its in-

cunabula in this field and remarking on 

the possession of complete sets of the 

Facsimile T e x t Society, the Biblio-

graphical Society, etc. In medieval folk-

lore, he says, the library is rich, such 

basic sets as Folk-Lore Fellows Com-

munications, F r a z e r ' s Golden Bough, and 

T h o m p s o n ' s Motif-Index to Folk-Litera-

ture being cited. O f dissertations he says 

the library has a f u l l representation, but 

that it lacks G e r m a n ones in this field 

between 1880 and 1900. O f texts and 

critical works the library has: E a r l y 

English T e x t Society ( 3 3 0 v o l s . ) , C a m -

den Society, Percy Society, Surtees 

Society, etc., complete, and much of the 

Roxburghe, M a i t l a n d , and Bannatyne 

C l u b publications. A l s o such scholarly 

texts and monographs as Bonner Beitrage, 

Palaestra, A c t a Sanctorum, etc., and the 

Columbia, Y a l e , and H a r v a r d Studies in 

English. 

W i t h eighty-one faculty members con-

tributing, there naturally w o u l d result a 

more than usually finely subdivided de-

partmentalization. T h u s " H i s t o r y " is di-

vided into eight categories, " L a n g u a g e s 

and L i t e r a t u r e " into t w e n t y - t w o . " M i d d l e 

E n g l i s h " and " E l i z a b e t h a n and Jacobean 

L i t e r a t u r e , " for instance, receiving in-

dependent attention. T h a t is w h y the 

DECEMBER., 1940 65 



treatment, though condensed, is not trivial 

or sketchy. 

A l t h o u g h prices are not generally noted, 

they are occasionally in the case of long 

and expensive sets. Bibliographies are 

listed in some cases; and in almost every 

case there is a final paragraph appraising 

the strengths or weaknesses of the library 

in the field being discussed.—Fremont 

Rider, Olin Library, Wesleyan Univer-

sity, Middletown, Conn. 

Report of a Survey of the University of 

Florida Library for the U n i v e r s i t y of 

Florida, F e b r u a r y - M a y , 1940, by a 

committee of L o u i s R . W i l s o n , C h a i r -

man, A . F . K u h l m a n , and G u y R . L y l e , 

on behalf of the A m e r i c a n L i b r a r y A s -

sociation. A m e r i c a n L i b r a r y Associa-

tion, 1940. 120p. $2. ( M i m e o -

graphed) 

T H E FLORIDA U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y sur-
vey is one of three surveys of university 

libraries prepared and published recently 

under the auspices of the A m e r i c a n L i -

brary Association. A forerunner of these 

was Raney's The University Libraries, 

V o l u m e V I I of the U n i v e r s i t y of C h i c a g o 

Survey ( 1 9 3 3 ) . O n e of the authors of 

the present volume, A . F . K u h l m a n , con-

tributed various chapters to the C h i c a g o 

survey. T h e other t w o authors, D e a n 

L o u i s R . W i l s o n and G u y R . L y l e w e r e 

associated w i t h Branscomb and D u n b a r in 

one of the other A m e r i c a n L i b r a r y A s -

sociation surveys, A Survey of the Uni-

versity of Georgia Library ( 1 9 3 8 ) . 1 T h e 

F l o r i d a survey is thus the w o r k of a com-

mittee of men w h o have already helped 

to set the pattern in this important new 

trend in university library administration. 

In its o w n words, 
1 T h e t h i r d A . L . A . s u r v e y is A Survey of the 

Indiana University Library by C o n e y - H e n k l e - P u r d y 
(1940). 

T h e committee has undertaken ( 1 ) to set 
the Library in the perspective of the history 
of the university, state, and region; (2) to 
discover ways and means of enabling it to 
improve its organization and administration 
as a part of the general administration of the 
university; (3) to formulate a plan of li-
brary development designed to promote the 
effectiveness of the university's general pro-
gram of instruction, research, and exten-
sion; and (4) to indicate means by which 
the library resources of the university may 
be more effectively related and integrated 
with the libraries of Florida, of the South-
east, and the nation. 

S t a r t i n g w i t h introductory chapters on the 

" H i s t o r y and B a c k g r o u n d " and the 

"Essentials of a L i b r a r y P r o g r a m in a 

State U n i v e r s i t y , " the survey takes up in 

order the government of the library, its 

integration on the campus, in Florida, and 

in the Southeast, financial support, use, 

administration and organization, holdings, 

personnel, and physical plant. C o n c l u -

sions and recommendations are presented 

in each section of the survey, and these are 

summarized in a final chapter of " R e c o m -

mendations." 

T h e committee f o l l o w e d the plan of 

stating general principles, describing the 

situation, and making recommendations in 

each section of the report. Standards w e r e 

indicated occasionally by the opinion of 

the committee alone, but more often by 

the familiar comparative method, w i t h 

data on other institutions and references 

to publications in point. In v i e w of the 

Florida U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y ' s many needs, 

the survey includes extensive detailed 

recommendations and requires some pains-

taking effort to read and digest. T o 

facilitate practical use, it w o u l d help if 

conclusions and recommendations w e r e 

sorted out and clearly labeled in each 

section, and if some of the t a b l e s — o f a 

total of t w e n t y - n i n e — w e r e eliminated or 

66 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES