University of Virginia Library

Descriptive Bibliography and the Victorian Periodical
by
Maura Ives [*]

It is not customary for descriptive bibliographies to present periodical publications in the same format, or with the same level of detail, that is used for books. The practice of indexing periodical publications is so well established that one would question a bibliography that neglected to present such a record; and yet, while all seem to agree that it is important to establish the history of an author's periodical contributions, few seem to have asked whether it might not also be important to investigate those publications as thoroughly as we investigate books. G. Thomas Tanselle brings up the matter in "The Arrangement of Descriptive Bibliographies,"[1] pointing out that bibliographers rarely explain "why they simply list, rather than describe, contributions to periodicals" (25), and suggesting that bibliographers might "write separate descriptive bibliographies of individual periodicals" (26). But although a few scholars have undertaken serious bibliographical study of periodicals (such as Donald Bond's work on the Spectator and William B. Todd's work on the Gentleman's Magazine, the Examiner and the World),[2] they are exceptions to the rule.

The drawbacks of this practice for Victorian writers became apparent to me during my work on a critical edition of George Meredith's short fiction. Although Meredith, like many Victorian authors, frequently published in periodicals, bibliographical studies of Meredith[3] and other Victorian writers routinely present periodical publications in enumerative

lists, and sometimes (as often happens in the case of serialized fiction) in a note appended to a description of the book publication. Those few periodical numbers[4] that are described (mostly in bibliographies completed early in the century) usually have special significance; most often they were edited by the author, were found to include material that was not published elsewhere, or were judged to be "booklike" (special issues or annuals).[5]

The purpose of this essay, then, is to consider why and how one might create bibliographical descriptions of Victorian periodicals, and in the process, to offer a general reassessment of the distinctions between these publications and nineteenth-century books. I conclude with some suggestions for the identification and bibliographical description of nineteenth-century periodicals which, I hope, will also be useful for the description of serial publications of other eras.

Periodicals have long been regarded as bibliographical troublemakers. John Winterich's "The Expansion of an Author Collection," one of the essays included in John Carter's 1934 volume New Paths in Book Collecting, provides an early example of the usual objections:

Of course Winterich was not discouraged by the bookseller's complaints (to which I will return later on), but to this day, even the advocates of periodicals are well aware that periodicals present distinct challenges. Take, for instance, the "Preface" to John North's 1989 Waterloo Directory of Scottish Newspapers and Periodicals, 1800 — 1900: Now of course the difficulties of working with Victorian periodicals are exacerbated when one is trying to track down a few thousand different titles, but even the study of a single number of a popular periodical can be complicated by difficulties in locating copies, by extreme diversity in presentation (at the least, issue in wrappers and in bound volume), and by the destruction of valuable information that results from poor and at times negligent handling of fragile material. But we should not forget that these "nightmares" also represent a golden opportunity for research, since even the best-known Victorian periodicals have yet to be studied bibliographically.

Thanks to the efforts of the Research Society for Victorian Periodicals, founded in 1969, much of the scholarly groundwork for advanced bibliographical research on Victorian periodicals is already in place. The resources for what librarians refer to as the "bibliographic control" of British periodicals have flourished; American periodicals are not nearly as well charted, but the establishment of a Research Society for American Periodicals in 1990, followed by the debut of American Periodicals: A Journal of History, Criticism and Bibliography in 1991, bodes well. The large scale indexing of nineteenth-century (mostly British) periodicals began as early as 1888, with the first volume of Poole's Index to Periodical Literature (1888 — 1908), followed by the Nineteenth Century Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature, 1890 — 1899: With Supplementary Indexing, 1900 — 1922 (1944) and the Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals, 1824 — 1900 (1966 — 89).[6] While there is still a tremendous

amount of indexing to be done,[7] the even more basic work of enumerating Victorian periodicals is well under way; major accomplishments in this area include the Union List of Victorian Serials (1985) and the ongoing Waterloo series of directories to nineteenth-century periodicals in Great Britain and Ireland (the series includes the Waterloo Directory of Victorian Periodicals, 1824 — 1900 [1976], The Waterloo Directory of Irish Newspapers and Periodicals, 1800 — 1900 [1986], the aforementioned Waterloo Directory of Scottish Newspapers and Periodicals, 1800 — 1900, and the recently released first series of the Waterloo Directory of English Newspapers and Periodicals 1800 — 1900 [1995], which lists nearly 30,000 titles). The Waterloo Directory of English Newspapers and Periodicals is especially useful because it includes references to secondary sources and locations for some titles.

In his 1978 essay "The Bibliographical Control of Periodicals," Scott Bennett took the progress that had been made in the "indexing and . . . inventorying" of Victorian periodicals as an indication that "the next bibliographic horizon for periodicals will involve analytical bibliography and textual criticsm" (50).[8] In 1980, a Manual for the Bibliographical Description of Serials Preliminary Draft was compiled by the late John Palmer and several members of the Research Society for Victorian Periodicals, including Bennett and John North. In a second essay, "Prolegomenon to Serials Bibliography: A Report to the Society,"[9] Bennett explains that the Manual was conceived as a first step towards producing "a bibliography of key Victorian serials" (9), and was intended to provide "detailed advice to bibliographers on what data to collect and how to record it," a goal that would demand the creation of "new models of bibliographical description that do justice to the timeliness of periodicals and to the special relations periodical communication establishes between readers and writers" (8).

Unfortunately, the Manual did not progress beyond the draft stage; however, its influence can be seen in the later volumes of the Waterloo series, in which one observes a gradual move from treating periodicals as repositories of verbal texts to acknowledging the importance of the periodical itself as a physical object. There is a striking contrast between the earlier Wellesley Index, which entirely omits any description of the

periodicals it features, and the Waterloo Directory of English Newspapers and Periodicals, which includes images of the title-pages of over 3000 periodicals and provides some bibliographically relevant information (such as the periodical's dimensions and types of illustrations).

The draft of the Manual also offers the perfect point of departure for the descriptive bibliography of Victorian serials. Citing the absence of bibliographical study of periodicals by R. B. McKerrow, Fredson Bowers, and Philip Gaskell, the Manual quotes from Bowers's "Foreword" to Principles of Bibliographical Description (1949):

The Manual follows this quotation with the claim that "Provided that for 'book' we read 'serial publication' there can be no better statement of the intentions of this manual" (6). Except, of course, that the Manual was not intended as a guide for descriptive bibliographers but for library catalogers, and as such is primarily concerned with describing the content of the periodical rather than describing its physical elements.[10] The only mandatory physical details included in the Manual's recommendations for description are a measurement of a type page (but no further description of leaves, cover, or binding); a notification of whether the periodical is printed on anything other than "untinted paper"; a notification of any "peculiarity of printing from the letterpress type," including ink in colors other than black and printing methods other than letterpress (such as stereotype or lithography); and notification of the presence of illustrations. In providing these (albeit limited) criteria the Manual opens the door for discussion of how periodicals might be handled in a descriptive bibliography.

Victorian Periodicals and Books: Similarities and Differences

Certainly one reason to foster bibliographical study of periodicals is, simply put, that periodicals are more like books than is generally thought, and thus lend themselves to bibliographical analysis in the same ways and for many of the same reasons as books. But descriptive bibliography of Victorian periodicals must rest on a clear understanding of the ways in which periodicals are likely to differ (or not to differ) from books. Overemphasis on ultimately unimportant distinctions has contributed greatly to the relative neglect of periodicals. As John Winterich discovered, periodicals have often been characterized as unlike books, specifically as more ephemeral than books, more collaborative or group-oriented, and less bibliographically complex. Since these assumptions are so firmly entrenched, I will take up each of them in some detail. The main point, however, is this: while to some extent, the first two assumptions (of ephemerality and group-orientation) are correct, they are irrelevant to the question of whether periodicals are appropriate subjects of bibliographical analysis and description. As for the assumption that periodicals are less bibliographically complex than books, it is clear that the opposite is true: periodicals are often more complex, and for that reason demand more rigorous examination than has previously been attempted.

Perhaps the most common misconception about periodicals is that they are invariably ephemeral. The first sentences of Margaret Beetham's essay "Towards a Theory of the Periodical as a Publishing Genre"[11] exemplify this way of thinking:

The concept of the ephemeral periodical can be challenged in several ways, depending on the particular kind of ephemerality one has in mind. It is hardly possible to defend the notion of the contents of any periodical becoming "obsolete"; the historical value of periodicals is unquestionable, and there are any number of scholarly uses to which even the most insignificant-seeming article or advertisement might someday be put.

As for the physical manifestations of periodical "obsolescence," it is important to remember the wide variation that has existed, and still exists, among serial publications. It is true that publishers and readers understand at least some periodicals to be throwaway publications; evidence for this may be provided by the cheap, even shoddy materials from which some serials are manufactured, though inexpensive materials might only indicate that an item was produced by a small press on a limited budget. If in general periodicals tend not to be as sturdy as hardcover books (especially Victorian periodicals, given the acidity of nineteenth-century papers[12]), this aspect can be exaggerated, and leaves out any consideration of periodicals printed on higher-quality paper or encased in bindings other than paper wrappers. Further, while it seems obvious that some periodicals were intended for a longer reading life than others, we are forced to generalize about this point in the absence of hard data. One of the important ways that descriptive bibliography could contribute to our understanding of periodicals would be by recording those visual and physical markers that might indicate the relation between a publication's physical characteristics and the fate intended for it by its publishers. Is it always true, as the Manual for Bibliographical Description suggests, that "Double columns, paper wrappers, price one penny suggests a publication intended to be cast aside" while "Octavo in size, two hundred and fifty pages per number, and selling at six shillings almost certainly designates a quarterly, destined to be bound for the shelves of a gentleman's club or his private library" (5)?

For our purposes, the most important point is that what makes a piece of print suitable for bibliographical analysis is not the literary merit of its contents or its intended or actual physical life span, but the value of the bibliographical information that might be gained from examining it. The fragility of many Victorian periodicals is only relevant in underscoring the need to describe them, in whatever detail their condition permits, before they are gone forever.

It is also commonly held that serials, unlike books, are by nature collaborative; as Brian Aveney explains,

Not all periodicals are "the products of many hands"; many are strongly influenced by their editors, who might also be the primary contributors. But for the sake of argument, we will grant that many periodicals contain the work of multiple writers, who represent a variety of topics and genres. Most descriptive bibliographers share G. T. Tanselle's understanding of bibliography as essentially biographical,[14] which makes it that much harder to understand why so many proceed as if the history of an author's life as a writer is demonstrated only through his or her published books, virtually ignoring the bibliographical details of periodical publications in which a given author is but one of many contributors. A focus on a single author in no way rules out periodical contributions, which have the advantage of providing special insight into the contemporary context of a writer's work. The relevant considerations are time, space, and the bibliographer's particular interests; and with these in mind, one might still discover circumstances that warrant the expansion of author bibliographies to include single numbers of periodicals to which the author contributed; one might even consider descriptive bibliographies devoted exclusively to an author's periodical contributions (an especially attractive project for authors who published serialized fiction). Nor does the popularity of author bibliographies prevent bibliographers from constructing other kinds of bibliographies, among which could be a descriptive bibliography of a periodical run. Such bibliographical studies might be especially useful in the exploration of the concept of the social text. As Jerome McGann reminds us (most notably in A Critique of Modern Textual Criticism [1983]), literary and other texts always "enter general society through the mediation of complex publishing and academic institutions" (121). Descriptive bibliography offers a way of exploring and documenting the visual and physical results of such mediations, one of the most important of which for Victorian writers was the periodical.[15]

The final and most damaging assumption about periodicals, that of their relative bibliographical simplicity, is easy to unseat. Scott Bennett complained about this misconception in 1978:

Despite information to the contrary, bibliographers and textual critics still seem to believe that the printing history of most periodicals is uncomplicated when compared to that of most books. We do not habitually think of editions of periodicals: whereas books may be reprinted over a number of years, we assume that periodicals are printed only once, in a limited number of identical copies.

In actuality periodicals, like books, can exist in multiple editions, and single editions can contain multiple impressions. William B. Todd's study of the Gentleman's Magazine from 1731 through 1754 demonstrates this point for eighteenth-century periodicals. While similar studies have yet to be completed for periodicals of the nineteenth century, there is no reason to think that they will be any less complex. In the "Introduction" to her study of the Household Words office book,[17] Anne Lohrli mentions that "The printed text of Household Words numbers was reproduced on stereotyped plates, copies in addition to those originally issued being printed from the plates as demand warranted" (45). In other words, each number of Household Words may have gone through several impressions, and Lohrli reports several variations within numbers that might provide evidence of a series of printings.[18] Reports of reprintings of Victorian periodicals are actually quite frequent, and further demonstrate the potential for textual as well as other kinds of variation. Victorian printing trade journals carried reports of numbers

hurriedly reprinted to meet unexpected demand, as when the Printing Times and Lithographer reported that Harper's Magazine had "endeavoured to reprint back numbers promptly, but the demand has again and again outrun their expectations" (ns 8 [April 15, 1882]: 83); and in an April 1882 number of Harper's Weekly, a "special notice" informed readers that "several numbers and volumes of the Magazine are out of stock" and would be shipped "as soon after July 1, 1882, as they can be printed" (26, no. 1319 [April 1, 1882]: 207).

Corrections of errors can, in periodicals as well as books, result in variant states. The matter of copyright could cause particular problems for illustrated periodicals, as the Printing Times and Lithographer reported in March 1882:

Of special significance is the tendency for periodicals to correct typographical and other errors in subsequent numbers, or in an errata slip included in the bound volume. The Printing Times and Lithographer made note of one such correction: "The Christian World of the 11th inst. says: — 'Our printers, by the change of one letter, represented us last week stating that the Bishop of Ripon had discarded "garters and apron"; the word should, of course, have been "gaiters"'" ("Printer's Errors," ns 10 (October 15, 1884): 227.

The aggregation in volumes of periodical numbers can result in distinct issues and even editions. The Manual for Bibliographical Description of Periodicals designates three patterns of aggregation: "active aggregation, as when a publisher reissues parts in volume form to sell to a new market; semi-active aggregation, as when a publisher issues a title-page and index to subscribers to enable them to convert parts into permanent volumes; and passive aggregation, when the publisher indicates only by the sequence of volume and/or page numbering that one volume has ended and another begun" (67). The category of "active aggregation" should include reprinting as well as reissuing, and to the category of "semi-active aggregation" I would add the practice of selling cloth cases

to readers who would then take the collected volume to a local bindery. Advertisements often indicate the variety of forms in which a periodical was offered for sale; for example, Macmillan's Magazine (volume XLIII, November 1880 to April 1881, bound in publisher's case), advertises "volumes I. to XLIII., comprising numbers 1 — 258. Handsomely bound in cloth, price 7s 6d. each"; readers could also buy reading cases for monthly numbers or cases for binding volumes themselves.

A new edition can result from a change in the size of a periodical, which might require resetting of earlier numbers so that the volume can be bound. Two such cases were mentioned in The Printing Times in 1873:

And important lessons for bibliographers and textual critics as well, who always need to be aware of the difference that can exist between a number as originally published and the number as it appears in a bound volume.

The international publication of nineteenth-century periodicals almost guaranteed significant physical and textual variation. The contents of a periodical published in more than one country frequently change, both to accommodate copyright restrictions and to serve the interests of a different readership. The British version of Harper's Magazine is a case in point. As the Printing Times and Lithographer reported in 1880,

Some idea of the kinds of changes that might be expected when a British periodical begins United States publication might be gained from comparing the British Strand with its American version, which began publication in January 1891. Frederick Faxon reported a number of differences between the two versions, starting with a change in the date of the American edition.[19] To make up for the time lost in transit from Britain, the wrapper on some American editions was dated a month later (that is, the British October 1891 Strand was dated November for American sales, a practice which continued through 1894). The British Strand for December 1895 (No. 60) followed the British tradition of offering a lengthy and considerably more expensive Christmas number; the American Strand for December 1895 (No. 60) was shortened by nearly 80 pages so that the price would not have to be raised. Other differences in the contents of the two magazines included the omission from the American edition of A. Conan Doyle's Rodney Stone, which was published serially in the British edition for 1896.

Leaving aside irrelevant and inaccurate distinctions made between books and periodicals, there remains one valid and crucial difference between the two forms of publication: books sometimes (but not always) exist in a series, but periodicals always exist in a series (or projected series). That is to say, the bibliographically relevant characteristics of the periodical always derive from the ways in which the periodical differs as a publishing genre from books and other printed materials, and the most important factor in differentiating the two genres is the degree of seriality that they display. It is possible for books to be classified as serials; multivolume reference works, monograph series, and other such publications would fit into this category. But books in series generally present no real challenges to current bibliographical protocol, the reason being the much lesser degree to which certain characteristics of the serial are usually manifested in them.

Instead of thinking in terms of distinct categories of "book" and "periodical," it is better to think in terms of the whole range of printed materials, within which we find some publications that are issued as individual works, and others that are issued in relation to a series of other printed materials that extends over time. This way of thinking best accommodates the tendency of actual printed texts to blur, or even ignore completely, any rigid categories we might attempt to create for them. As the Manual for Bibliographical Description of Serials explains, "seriality . . . consists in the combination of a number of attributes, not all of which will necessarily be present in every type of serial"; for this reason, the Manual's definition of seriality attempts to "say what the serial is rather than what is excluded" (16). I would argue that the bibliographer does not even really need to "say what the serial is" (which is why I am not offering my own definition); rather, we need only to establish the degree to which an item maintains — bibliographically speaking — an

individualized or a corporate identity, and to take the independence or corporateness of the item into account in the process of analysis and description.

Since one of the primary ways in which a serial publication manifests its corporate identity is through temporal markers, most definitions of the periodical place emphasis on its relationship to time. Thus the American National Standard for Periodicals: Format and Arrangement, Z39.1 — 1977 [20] defines a periodical as

The emphasis on continuity, consecutive issue, and frequency of issue also occurs in the definition given in the Manual for the Bibliographical Description of Serials: The effect of the periodical's relationship to time on the process of bibliographical analysis and description is obvious: the bibliographer must seek and record evidence of a periodical's adherence — or intended adherence — to a set timetable of publication. Such evidence would include statements of the volume, number, and date of publication by which each number of the periodical is identified (usually found in several places including the wrapper), as well as explanations of the periodical's timetable of aggregation (that is, an explanation of when volumes begin and end, how many numbers normally are included in each volume, and so on). Of course, volume/number/date statements, as well as statements about aggregation, are no more to be trusted on their own merits than are dates on the title-pages of books; with periodicals, however, dates should be viewed with greater suspicion, since the reader's demand for "timeliness" can tempt the publisher to alter or omit a number's (or a reprint's) actual publication date.

What underlies the periodical's adherence to a predictable timetable of publication ("regular" intervals) is the need to establish consistency, that is, to indicate that separately published items are in fact connected to each other. Equally important in the effort to signify the periodical's corporate identity is consistency in the periodical's "title, format, and general character" (Manual for the Bibliographic Description of Serials [20]). The maintenance of a consistent and easily identifiable format (including wrapper design, size, arrangement of contents, page layout) enables readers to recognize individual numbers as part of the periodical series. Arguably the most effective means of establishing continuity is through a highly stylized wrapper, featuring distinctive typography and illustration that can be repeated from number to number. Wrappers tend to serve multiple purposes, including linking the periodical to the series, announcing the number's particular contents and place in the series, and providing space for advertisements and other text. What this means for the bibliographer is that periodical wrappers, unlike most book bindings, must be compared to the wrappers of other periodicals preceding and following the publication of the number in question, so that the typical design of the series, and variations from it, can be identified. Also, the need to account for the various functions that a particular wrapper design serves will significantly determine how the description is structured.

Bibliographical Description of Periodicals: Notes on Procedure

Before launching fully into a discussion of procedures for bibliographical analysis and description of periodicals, some explanations are in order. First, I offer a very general set of observations, geared primarily towards the description of a single number of a periodical, on the assumption that other bibliographers will modify them according to the particular characteristics of the materials they wish to describe. I advocate the description of numbers for several practical reasons, the primary one being that some analysis and description of numbers is basic to any periodical-based project, no matter how large (i.e., description of an entire run of a given periodical) or small (analysis of typography, illustrations, or other parts of a run or number).

It is to be hoped that large projects such as descriptive bibliographies of entire runs of major periodicals will be made feasible and more flexible

through the use of technology such as CD-ROM and hypermedia. The CD-ROM version of the Waterloo Directory of English Newspapers and Periodicals, 1800 — 1900 allows users to view digitized images of title pages of some periodicals. One can easily imagine the benefits to be gained from presenting a descriptive bibliography in a similar format, and the even greater benefit of linking bibliographic descriptions to each other and to images (which could include not only title pages of the items described, but illustrations, wrappers, or even entire periodicals or books).[21] Bibliographies of complete periodical runs offer the advantages of presenting each number both as an individual publication and as part of the larger series, and of avoiding the duplication of effort that could result from including full descriptions of periodical numbers in author bibliographies. Indeed, one of the most compelling arguments for creating descriptive bibliographies of literary periodicals is that by so doing, a bibliographer could provide insight into the writing lives of a large number of authors. Bibliographies of periodicals would also be particularly useful to editors of texts that were first published in periodicals.

But while literary and biographical considerations may be foremost in the minds of many readers, the act of establishing the bibliographical histories of individual periodical numbers carries a larger significance. The simple fact that a periodical number might have a life of its own is generally ignored, and since any investigation of a number necessarily involves placing it in the context of the rest of the series, studies of even a single number shed light both on that individual publication and on the other members of the series. Therefore, while it is enjoyable to contemplate the possibility of large-scale work on periodicals, it is also important to realize that any bibliographical work on periodicals, however limited in scope, is welcome and needed.

Along these lines, it is important to consider whether author bibliographies might attempt to render periodicals in greater detail. Since the bibliographer's task always includes determining the kind and amount of information to include in a description, it is reasonable to ask that the process of compiling an author bibliography should include

a careful consideration of how the author's periodical contributions should be represented.[22] Of course, if reliable descriptive bibliographies of the relevant periodicals existed, no one would expect an author bibliography to do more than make note of the fact; at present, however, one hardly expects author bibliographies to make up for the absence of periodical bibliographies. It is all too easy to imagine situations in which full treatment of an author's periodical contributions would leave no room for descriptions of any other materials. But if an author served as the editor of a periodical, or as a primary contributor to one or more periodical numbers that are not likely to be covered in other author bibliographies or in a periodical bibliography, an expanded treatment within the author bibliography may be justified. A range of possibilities exists between the brief citation that is usually presented, and the full description that almost never appears. For example, a bibliographer may wish to establish the context for an author's contribution to a certain periodical number; one way to accomplish this goal would be to present a full list of contents, but the goal might also be met by mentioning the items that precede and follow the author's contribution, or by noting some other contents that are especially relevant. This point is that each author presents a unique publishing history, and that the bibliographer's decisions about the treatment of periodicals must reflect the particular circumstances of the author's career as well as the bibliographer's own interests and goals.

My comments are based on trial descriptions of a number of single numbers and bound volumes of Victorian periodicals; most of my work was done in the Newberry Library.[23] Unfortunately, I have rarely been

able to secure multiple copies of any number or bound volume. I have, however, been able to work with a variety of periodicals and thus to identify the main ways in which the collection and presentation of bibliographical data for periodicals differs from that of books. What I offer, then, is a general discussion of the special considerations that come into play in the process of analyzing and describing a periodical number, followed by a partial description of one number of The Broadway.

It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the elements of bibliographical description as developed in Bowers's Principles and in the work of other scholars such as G. T. Tanselle (whose "A Sample Bibliographical Description With Commentary" is especially useful both as a model of bibliographical practice and a guide to previous scholarship). Because Victorian periodicals are in many ways similar to Victorian books, the procedures articulated by Bowers, Tanselle and others often do not require modifications when applied to periodicals; it is to be understood, then, that one proceeds as one would with a book except in the matters discussed below.

General Considerations

One important way in which the description of a periodical will differ from that of a book is that it will have to recognize, both conceptually and structurally, that periodicals have a kind of dual existence that most books do not have. Whereas a book is almost always a self-contained publishing unit, a periodical exists both as a self-contained unit (the individual number) and as part of a larger unit (the entire run of the series, described by Scott Bennett as "a single entity that happens to be spread over time"[24]).

This problem is not an entirely unfamiliar one, because books published in parts or as volumes in collected editions or in series also have this kind of dual existence. However, descriptions of such books tend to place their emphasis on the larger context, giving a full description of one "representative" volume in the set or series, and briefly indicating the ways in which individual volumes differ — a practice that tends to distort the history of the individual volumes by forcing them into a framework that emphasizes similarity and glosses over differences.

The limitations of this approach make it as unsuitable for periodicals as it is for books in series. A description of a periodical will misrepresent its subject if it fails to give full consideration to both the periodical's individual and its corporate nature. Since the individual existence of

the periodical number is the aspect that has been most often overlooked, it is especially important that the separate issues, impressions, and editions of individual numbers be carefully delineated, just as they would be in a bibliographical description of a book. In most cases it will be necessary and logical to organize the description according to the smallest publishing unit — the daily, weekly, monthly or quarterly number — tracing the subsequent history of the unit in its larger amalgamations, such as the bound volume.

Even so, there are several reasons why the bibliographer's range of study must extend beyond the single number, even if (especially if) only one number is being described. Periodical numbers do not exist by themselves, but as part of a larger series of publications, and so the number's relation to that larger body must be indicated in the description. Also, as the foregoing discussion has indicated, important information about individual numbers is likely to appear in subsequent numbers, in errata slips, and in tables of contents and indexes.

The need to account for the periodical's dual citizenship will require the bibliographer to present more information than is customary in book descriptions. The body of the description will also be likely to contain more information than is usually the case. Periodicals, by their very nature, simply tend to present a great many bibliographical details; this is especially true of periodicals that contain numerous small articles per page or are copiously illustrated. Anyone contemplating bibliographical work on periodicals will have to come to terms, perhaps in new ways, with the old problem of how much detail can and should be included in a description.

Introductory Notes

The contents of the notes will vary depending upon the scope of the bibliographer's efforts. In most cases, whether the bibliographer is describing all the numbers of a particular periodical or a single number, the note will discuss the general features of the periodical run and indicate the relationship of the number(s) to the established practices of the periodical series. The note will provide information such as:

• 1) frequency of publication (quarterly, monthly, weekly?) and time-table of aggregation into volumes
• 2) existence of supplements, annual indexes, or other additions to the regular printing schedule of the periodical run
• 3) typical number of pages and collation formula
• 4) typical organization of contents
• 5) frequency and kinds of illustrations

---

79




• 6) form(s) of distribution, price
• 7) editor(s)

In cases where only an individual number is described, the note will be oriented towards the individual features of the number, but will still contain sufficient information about the periodical run to place the number in its larger context.

Among the important external sources of information for the publication history of periodicals are prospectuses, announcements in newspapers and periodicals, and reviews. These materials can be especially useful in determining the status of periodicals that exist in only one or two numbers, or in other ways are difficult to identify as serial publications. References in Victorian printing journals point to additional methods of publicizing periodicals, including the distribution of placards, show cards,[25] and tables of contents. Some insight into the importance and the distribution of promotional materials can be gathered from comments in the Printing Times and Lithographer:

Another reference in the Printing Times and Lithographer suggests the extremes to which Victorian publishers would go to promote a new periodical: These references indicate the value of scanning trade journals for information about a periodical's promotional materials and methods, as well as the importance of including such information in the introduction.

Determination of Edition, Impression, Issue and State

As I have already indicated, the terms "edition," "impression," "issue," and "state" apply to numbers of periodicals just as they apply to books. Care should of course be taken to avoid any possible confusion that might arise from using the term "issue" to refer to numbers of periodicals.

It is reasonable to assume that many nineteenth-century periodicals will exist in several forms, each of which represents a distinct publishing unit. A complication arises, however, when one attempts to determine the bibliographical status of the same setting of type as it appears in an individual number of the periodical, and as it appears, along with other numbers, in a volume manufactured and sold by the publisher. A number presented in different wrappers (as is the case when the same sheets are distributed in Britain and the United States) is easily recognizable as comprising different issues of the same printed matter. But when the periodical number appears along with several other numbers in a cloth case, some additional considerations apply. The numbers that make up a bound volume may each have their own printing history; a bound volume may thus represent an additional issue of one number, and a new edition of another, so that there is no one way to categorize the volume as a whole.[26] The treatment of volumes will thus vary depending upon whether the bibliographer's interest is in a single number (in which case one would not have to be overly concerned with the status of other parts of the bound volume in which the number appears), in several or all of the periodical's numbers, or in the collection of numbers that resulted from active aggregation. When one is concerned with a single number that was presented by the publisher both in wrappers and in a bound volume, the latter version could be designated "issue in volume" as long as the text of the number in both circumstances (wrappers and bound) derives from the same setting and impression of type. If, however, one's focus is not limited to individual numbers but extends to the volume publication itself, the term "volume issue" could be used to designate the new publication of a group of numbers, the various histories of which can still form part of the volume's description. Thus the terms used by the bibliographer will vary, depending on whether the history of numbers (including their history as component parts of volumes) or

the history of volumes (with more or less emphasis on the prior history of individual numbers) is of primary concern.

A similar situation exists regarding the application of "edition" and "impression" to bound volumes. If the bibliographer's unit of study is the individual number, it seems reasonable that the determination of edition/impression would be made solely on the basis of the history of that number; therefore, a volume might contain the first edition, second impression of the December number, the second edition of the January number, etc. The volume itself then is not represented as a new edition, but as a collection of smaller units, each of which has its own bibliographical status. Of course, if the volume as a whole has been reset, there is no question as to its status as a new edition of all numbers.

The treatment of the volume always presupposes that the bibliographer will distinguish between bound volumes issued by the publisher as a publishing unit (active aggregation), and bound volumes collected and bound by other parties (semi-active and passive aggregation). The first instance results in a new publication, for which the bibliographer can establish the ideal copy produced by the publisher and printer. There can be no reconstruction of ideal copy in the second instance because the volume is the result of changes made after the original printing and sale by agents other than the printer and publisher. If the publisher made cloth cases available to subscribers the fact should be noted, and the cases described as a matter of interest in the general history of the periodical, but in no circumstance would the bound volumes be included in the bibliographical history of the periodical, though they may of course be studied and described for other purposes. Volume title-pages and indexes issued separately (as distinguished from those included in a publisher's binding) are also not part of ideal copy, and do not form part of the description proper.

Title-Page Transcription, Title-Page Substitutes, and Contents

Some periodicals include a page that is virtually identical to the title-pages found in books, and whenever such a page is present it should be treated just as one would treat the title-page in a book.[27] Bound volumes may include a volume title-page along with the title-pages of the individual numbers. Printing information on the volume title-page should be checked against information on the wrappers of the bound numbers or elsewhere in the volume to determine whether the title-page and the numbers were produced by different printers (this may help establish the pattern of aggregation).

For many periodicals, there is no title-page: the title, date, and other publishing information is either given at the top of the first page of text, or else the wrapper is essentially the title-page (as is sometimes the case with books; see Bowers, Principles, 415). It is also common for publishing information to be provided in several locations in the periodical, since the wrapper is subject to damage or removal. Even if a title-page is present, it may not contain certain publishing information specific to periodicals, such as statements indicating frequency of issue, location of the number in the series (volume/number/date statement), postal classification, and information about forms of distribution, such as subscription; this information will appear somewhere in the periodical (most likely in the masthead[28] or on the wrapper), and must be recorded.

In the absence of a title-page, the bibliographer might want to follow the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) list of serial "title-page substitutes" which are (in order of preference): "the cover, caption, masthead, editorial pages, colophon, [and] other pages" (249).[29] In most cases, even when a title-page is present, the bibliographical description will feature a set of transcriptions including the masthead and head-title (if present), as well as descriptions of associated type ornaments and other decorative printed material.

Regardless of the presence of the title-page, masthead, or head-title, the number's wrapper should be closely examined; the front cover and spine should be transcribed, and other parts described in accordance with the bibliography's level of detail and the nature of the information that the wrapper contains. Because the wrapper can serve multiple purposes it may be described in more than one section of the bibliography. A periodical wrapper can include integral parts of the text of the periodical, such as tables of contents and even short essays, as well as

other matter such as advertisements. It may be difficult to establish whether the contents of the wrapper were determined by the publishers as part of the periodical's publishing unit (in which case it is analogous to a publisher's binding) and the extent to which it is an independent product of the printer (in which case it is analogous to advertisements not part of the sheets of a printed book). Given this ambiguity, in some cases the wrapper may be handled in the section on binding, while in cases where the wrapper clearly functions as a title-page substitute or extension or contains other information integral to the contents of the periodical, it is best either to handle the wrapper as part of the periodical's contents or to place it in a separate section of the description. As a rule of thumb, if it is clear that the sheets and the wrapper were printed separately (as might be indicated by differences in paper), the most logical way to handle them in a description will be to keep the contents of the sheets of the periodical and the wrapper separate, even if the wrapper contains part of the text of the periodical. Some cases might warrant the division of the contents section of the description into two parts (wrapper and sheets); otherwise, only the contents of the sheets are handled in the contents section.

Contents

The contents section will sometimes include a listing of the contents of the periodical's advertisement section. Often one or more gatherings of advertisements are printed and bound with the number or bound volumes, and headed with the title of the periodical and the word "advertiser"; such gatherings may precede or follow the text. The distinction between the advertisements and the rest of the periodical's contents was sometimes deliberately blurred, provoking complaints such as the following in the Printing Times:

In books, advertisements, even if they are part of the sheets, are rarely positioned or labeled as if they are continuous with the rest of the text; in periodicals, however, a special effort is sometimes made to link the advertisements with the rest of the periodical's contents. Because of this, it is important to look for evidence (such as differences in paper stock) that might indicate whether the advertiser is part of the sheets of the periodical.

The contents section of the description is likely to pose practical problems when a periodical contains numerous separate articles, advertisements, and illustrations on each page. The level of detail necessary in a transcription of contents will depend on several factors. If the periodical has been indexed, short titles of indexed articles are sufficient; if not, the transcription will be much more useful to potential readers if full titles and authors' names are included. One way to do this is to quote the full title; if the article is signed, a lower-case "s" and the author's name as given in the periodical appear in parentheses; if the author's name is given on a subsequent page, that page number is given. Thus

indicates that the essay "English Projectiles" begins on page 8 and is signed with the name "W. Bridges Adams" on page 10.

In cases where space will not permit any but the most abbreviated listing of contents, the bibliographer can provide the title of the first item on the page (that is, the item that appears in the upper left corner), the last item (that which appears in the lower right corner), and the total number of items per page (specifying whether advertisements are included in the total), as in the following example:

Certain features of the periodical's contents, such as editorial statements, advertisements for the periodical, announcements of special supplements, etc. should always be specifically identified in the contents and transcribed: If a separate listing of illustrations is not provided, and when illustrations are too numerous to be individually identified, the number of illustrations per page can be counted and given in parentheses after each page number.

As in the case of illustrations (discussed below), typographical features of the contents may be of separate interest to readers of the description, and for that reason may be presented either in a note following the listing of contents or in the section on typography. Typographical patterns, such as a larger font used for titles and bylines, or the characteristic placement of a rule or ornament between features, can be listed and measurements given.

Paper

It is important that paper measurements be provided, according to the model Tanselle recommends in "The Bibliographical Description of Paper," SB 24 (1971): 27 — 67. Since the paper used in periodicals of the machine-press era may differ significantly from that used in books, periodicals are likely to provide new insights for researchers who are interested in paper. In general, nineteenth-century paper is not particularly durable, thanks to the introduction of powerful rotary pulp beating machines, the use of chlorine bleach and alum-rosin sizing, and the substitution of wood pulp for rags.[31] Many periodicals (especially those with large circulations) also use thinner, lightweight paper to reduce mailing costs.

Since the discoloration produced by high acidity may make it difficult to determine paper color accurately, the bibliographer may want to comment on the condition of the paper in the copies examined.[32]

Typography

Typography is especially significant in bibliographical analysis and description of periodicals for two reasons: first, because periodicals served as showcases for new types, especially display types; and second, because typography often plays an important part in establishing the visual style of a periodical, much more so than is usually the case in books.

The development of ornamental type is one of the major events of nineteenth-century printing technology. The demand for display types was great, and the profit derived from them led to the relative neglect of plainer types.[33] Books (with the exception of cheaper paper-backs) tended not to make use of ornamental type; periodicals, on the other hand, made the most of this and other technological novelties. Wrappers, title-pages, and headings are likely places for decorative type. Many ornamental type faces can be identified in Nicolete Gray's Nineteenth Century Ornamented Typefaces (2nd ed., 1976), an essential reference for the bibliographer of Victorian periodicals. Plain type also underwent design modifications for use in newspapers and magazines. Perhaps the most famous example of innovation in magazine type is the new typeface designed by Theodore De Vinne and Linn Boyd Benton for the Century magazine; a version of this typeface is still in use (Lawson 283 — 284).

Typographical patterns such as text in columns, the use of rules or frames, and the designation of particular fonts for titles, bylines, or captions should be noted.

The headline and direction-line are especially important, since these will often include the date as well as the volume and issue numbers. Headlines and direction lines are often removed in bound volumes issued by the publisher; running titles in bound volumes should also be carefully checked for variation.

Illustrations and Plates

Illustrations were a selling point of certain periodicals, and should always be an important element of the description. Changes in illustrations or their accompanying captions can be an important source of bibliographical information, and both the content and means of production of illustrations have considerable historical and cultural relevance. Since scholars may have a special interest in illustrations apart from the other contents of the periodical, it may make sense to present them in a separate listing. In this way, detailed information about the processes used for illustration can be made easy to find, with the added benefit of not making the list of contents unnecessarily long.

Given the close relationship between the periodical press and the development of illustration in the nineteenth century, I would argue for mentioning all illustrations in the periodical and describing at least some of them, if not all, including advertisements. It is difficult to decide whether illustrated advertisements should be separated from illustrations listed in the contents or otherwise featured as part of "text." A

researcher interested in periodicals per se might find such a distinction to be artificial and counterproductive; on the other hand, the goals of the bibliography might make it logical to draw distinctions or emphasize some illustrations more than others, especially if one considers that the readers of a bibliography may be interested in the work of a particular illustrator, or in the ways in which a particular author's works were illustrated.

The same considerations apply to plates.[34] The placement of plates in periodicals should be carefully noted, especially in bound volumes, where variations in the positions of plates can help to establish active or passive aggregation. The actual position of plates should always be compared to positions designated on the plates themselves or elsewhere in the number or volume.

Binding

While it is clear that the bibliographer should offer a detailed description of the original wrappers, publisher's cloth bindings, and cases offered for sale by the publisher, it is less apparent whether these all belong in a section on binding. If the wrapper has been transcribed elsewhere in the account, only a description of the paper (thickness, pattern, and color) is placed here.

Cloth cases belong in the binding section only if they form part of the ideal copy of the number or volume. Thus cloth cases sold separately by the publisher, not being an aspect of ideal copy, should be noted at the end of the description, along with indexes, title-pages, and other such matter distributed separately from the number or bound volume.[35]

It can be difficult to determine the status of a bound volume in publisher's cloth. Some light is shed on this topic in John Carter's description of "Binding from Parts" in Binding Variants in English Publishing 1820 — 1900 (1932). Carter describes the practice of subscribers taking sets of books issued in parts to booksellers, who would "either return them to the publisher, who would have the job done by his regular binder, or else have the case sent down and the actual binding done by a local

binder" (74). Carter suggests that the involvement of local binders results in variation in the "colour and quality" of endpapers and in the trimming of edges (74); thus bibliographers who observe significant variation in these and other matters of binding (such as variations in the margin, which Carter mentions as a feature of bound-up volumes of books originally issued in parts [77]) among copies of a volume might have reason to doubt that the binding was handled by the publisher, whereas "endpapers printed with the publisher's advertisements indicate that the copy was bound by the publisher's binder . . ." (81). Further complications arise if both a volume issued by the publisher and volumes constructed by other parties exist:

The collection of external evidence such as advertisements for bound volumes, along with the examination of multiple copies (checking for stab holes, remnants of wrappers glued to sheets, or other evidence of previous binding), is necessary to sort out such instances.

Miscellaneous Materials

In addition to the separate issue of volume title-pages, lists of contents, and indexes, periodicals are likely to spawn numerous promotional materials, special supplements, calendars, and other miscellaneous materials. Volume title-pages and other materials closely identified with the number(s) presented in the description are of obvious interest, and should be treated in some detail; materials that are less closely connected with the number(s) under consideration can simply be mentioned, with sources of further information provided.

Copies Examined

Bibliographers of periodicals should be especially scrupulous in recording the number and location of copies examined. Since periodicals are often unavailable for interlibrary loan (the majority do not circulate at all), and since in many cases it may be extremely difficult for the bibliographer to see all forms of the periodical (especially the number in wrappers), some descriptions may have to be constructed from a small

number of copies. Readers who find that their number differs from ideal copy constructed by the bibliographer will certainly wish to know whether five or fifty copies were examined, and whether any of those copies are nearby for comparison.

Appendix: A Sample Description

The following sample description of The Broadway 1, no. 6 (February 1868), presents some of the situations and concerns that are likely to arise in dealing with periodicals, while underscoring the many similarities that exist between periodicals and books.

This account of The Broadway is not intended as a full description, but as an illustration of many of the matters previously discussed, including the problem of having to work with a limited number of copies.[36] In this case, all copies examined are bound volumes resulting from semi-active aggregation, so the sample also shows how one might proceed when the number in wrappers has not been located.

The sample description emphasizes the importance of placing the individual number in context. This takes place primarily in the introductory notes, which present an overview of the periodical's first volume with special reference to the position of Number 6 in the volume's history and to the special features of this number. The prose commentary supplied in the sample could be shortened or even replaced with a brief listing of crucial elements if space were limited. In any case, the introductory note for this number would contain considerably less information about the general history of the periodical if several numbers were being described, and in those circumstances some elements of the description proper, such as the publisher's case and related materials described in the "Miscellaneous" section, would be presented elsewhere and not repeated in individual descriptions. Also, if the contents of The Broadway were indexed in Wellesley or elsewhere, it might not be necessary to provide full titles and author's signatures in the description's contents section.

The organization of the sample description reflects the particular features of this number of The Broadway. For example, the wrapper is presented in the section on binding because the information it records is already mentioned in the introductory notes and in the title-page transcription. Since the number includes a relatively small number of illustrations, they are indicated both in the contents proper and in a separate, more detailed subsection.

The section on typography illustrates the tendency of periodicals to shift type sizes both for reasons of space (which probably accounts for the presentation of "Mrs. Holmes Grey" in double columns) and to use typography to distinguish among various sorts of headings and signatures. But here and elsewhere many elements appear essentially as they might in a description of a book, thus demonstrating that bibliographical description of periodicals is both feasible and appropriate.

The Broadway, 1, no. 6 (February 1868)

introductory notes.[37] Overview. The monthly magazine The Broadway began publication in August 1867, under the editorship of Edmund Routledge, the son of the magazine's publisher George Routledge (and a partner in his father's firm). The

periodical's plan was to appeal to British and American audiences through its contents and the inclusion of contributors from both countries. However, as Clarence Gohdes has observed, its orientation remained primarily British; The Broadway was "merely a London journal which devoted more than the average amount of space to American topics and which included a few contributions by such authors as the Cary sisters, Evert Duyckinck, and R. H. Stoddard."[38] The Broadway's editorial policy was modified in an announcement that appeared in Number 12 (August 1868), the last number of the magazine's first volume: "'The Broadway' will cease to be specially an 'Anglo-American' or an 'Americo-Anglican' magazine. We are convinced that there is a still Broader way in Literature and Art than that which spreads itself under the shadow of St. Paul's in London, or stretches from the Battery to Harlem Bridge in New York" (quoted in Gohdes, 61). While the magazine's wrapper provides a British and a New York publisher's address (and Gohdes also mentions that United States sales were conducted through Routledge's New York office [61]), the Routledge archives[39] do not indicate whether an American issue was produced. The British numbers were priced at sixpence.

Number 6 is notable for its inclusion of William Rossetti's poem "Mrs. Holmes Grey." Edmund Routledge was eager to enlist Rossetti as a contributor, writing to him twice in October of 1867. Neither The Broadway nor its editor made a good impression on Rossetti, who complained in a letter to Swinburne: "That most grovelling of publications the Broadway wrote to me some fortnight ago, asking me to contribute. I declined, instancing their prospectus as of itself enough to warn off any human writer" (October 29, 1867).[40] However, Routledge's assurance that "the character of the Magazine is being altered, and that various mighty writers ranging in calibre between Algernon Swinburne and Tom Taylor or Gerald Massey, are being invited" (Selected Letters, 181 — 182) seems to have persuaded Rossetti to send "Mrs. Holmes Grey" to Routledge in November. Having secured the poem, Routledge then tried (without success) to obtain an illustration by Dante Rossetti to accompany it. Ultimately A. B. Houghton was chosen to depict the scene at the coffin (plate 2 below).[41] Rossetti's diary entry for January 28, 1868, reports that the February number was "out" on that date (Rossetti Papers, 296).

Routledge's pursuit of contributions from the Rossetti brothers shows him to have been a hardworking and ambitious editor. He may have been too ambitious, for The Broadway's first volume began to show signs of cost-cutting as early as Number 5, when the wrapper, formerly printed in red and black ink, was printed in black only. Additional economically inspired changes took place after the publication of Number 6. First, the numbers became shorter: Numbers 1 — 6 contain 40 leaves (not including the title page), but subsequent numbers contain only 30 (Nos. 7 — 11) or 32 leaves [No. 12]). Next, the quantity of plates was reduced from two per number (Nos. 1 — 9) to one plate in Numbers 10 and 11, and none in 12. These cost-cutting measures coincide with reductions in the total copies printed. While 90,000 copies of the first number are recorded in Routledge's Publications Books, the entry for Number 6, dated January 31, 1868, indicates that only 30,000 copies were printed, on 150 reams of double-demy paper.[42] The print run continued to decrease to 18,000 copies of Number 11 and rose only slightly to 20,000 for Number 12.[43]

Printing and publication history. Neither the copies examined nor the Routledge archives give any evidence of more than one edition or issue of Number 6, or of active aggregation of the volume. The wrapper of 1.1 (Newberry copy) contains the

phrase "Third Edition, making 90,000," but while Routledge's publication books confirm that 90,000 copies were printed, they do not indicate how many impressions were made of that or of any other number.

Semi-active aggregation is indicated by an advertisement for publisher's case in Number 12 (August), at a price of 1s. 6d.; apparently the "Title Page, Contents, Etc." which are listed on the title-page of Number 12 were provided with that number.

All numbers examined are part of bound volumes. Of these, the Newberry copy contains a single-leaf title-page (with advertisements on verso) for each number; the title-page leaves are not included in the pagination. The title-pages may have been part of a preliminary gathering, as indicated by the page number 16 and the running title "The Broadway Advertiser" which appear on the verso of the leaf in Number 6. The Waterloo entry mentions "16 — 20 pp" of advertisements per number, but does not indicate which numbers were examined.

Both the National Union Catalogue Pre-1956 Imprints (77:127) and Supplement (702:508) record a possible volume issue published in 1868 under the title Novels, tales and poetry. The entries refer to this publication as a "reprint" of The Broadway volume 1, and the number of pages matches the number of pages in the bound volumes I have examined. I have not been able to examine these copies and cannot confirm that they include Number 6.

Collation. 80: π1 26 — 308 [&$1 signed], 41 leaves, pp. 15 16 401 — 480; page numbers in upper outer corner, flush with text margin, except centered on first page of articles (401, 429, 437, 445, 449, 460, 466, 473, 480).

The first leaf seems to have been part of a preliminary gathering of advertisements. Since the final gathering of Number 5 is signed 25, the signature of the gathering that contained π1 cannot be inferred.

contents.[44] 15 title; 16 three ads "Housekeeper's Books" (5 titles), "Newton Wilson & Co's New Hand Sewing Machines"; "Blair's Gout and Rheumatic Pills"; 401 text headed 'Brakespeare; [black letter] | OR, | THE FORTUNES OF A FREE LANCE. | BY THE AUTHOR OF "GUY LIVINGSTONE," ETC., ETC. | [rule 32 mm] | CHAPTER XXIV. | THE BATTLE.' & text; on 406 'CHAPTER XXV. | RALPH AND LANYON WITNESS A TRIAL FOR SORCERY.'; on 415 'CHAPTER XXVI. | RALPH PAYS A MIDNIGHT VISIT TO HAWKWOOD.'; 417 text headed 'CHAPTER XXVII. | SACRILEGE.'; on 423 'CHAPTER XXVIII. | LES TARDSVENUS.'; 429 text headed 'Public Statues in London. [black letter] | BY FRANCIS TURNER PALGRAVE, | Late Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. | PART I.'; 437 text headed 'Emigrants in America. [black letter] | BY ROBERT TOMES,' & illus; 445 text headed 'Provincial Dramatic Critics Criticised.' [black letter] (s 'B.' 448); 449 text headed 'Mrs. Holmes Grey. [black letter] | BY WILLIAM M. ROSSETTI.'; 460 text headed 'International Prejudices. [black letter] | BY HENRY SEDLEY, | Editor of the "New York Round Table."'; 466 text headed 'Second Thoughts. [black letter] | BY F. C. BURNAND. | [rule, 10 mm] | CHAPTER XV. | STORY OF THE GOOD-HEARTED FELLOW, CONTINUED.'; on 468 illus & text; 470 'CHAPTER XVI. | THE STORY OF A GOOD FELLOW CONTINUED.'; 473 text headed 'New York Theatres. [black letter] | BY MOLYNEUX ST. JOHN. | PART I.' & illus; 480 'A Valentine.' [black letter] & 3 stanzas (s 'E.R.')

illustrations. On 437: engraving [87 x 118] of Castle Garden building, foreground: trees at left and right and small group of figures in center; background: sea. On 468: engraving [32 x 87] to depict illegible writing (as mentioned in text). On 473: engraving [61 x 91] of buildings on left and right of street, foreground: street; caption 'WALLACK'S THEATRE.'

plates. 1. Facing 419. [182 x 114; no plate mark] Two figures on horseback, veiled female on left, male holding dagger on right; right background: two men in armor, fighting. Letterpress caption: '6 Page 419. | THEN FROM UNDER THE DARK ROBE CAME A BRIGHT FLASH; AND, WITH ONE SMOTHERED | SHRIEK, THE GIRL SANK SIDEWAYS TO THE GROUND.' Signed: design forming initials JAP (J. A. Pasquier?); 'E. Evans Sc'. Paper thickness: .112.

2. Facing 449. [164 x 114; no plate mark] Two men standing beside and looking into open coffin, woman's face visible within coffin. Letterpress caption: '6 Page 452. | "They stood beside the coffin's foot and head. | Both gazed in silence, with bowed faces — Grey | With bony chin pressed into bony throat."' Not signed [but by A. B. Houghton (Rossetti Papers 243, 284 — 285)]. Paper thickness: .112.

paper. White wove unwatermarked.

typography. Main text: 40 lines (p. 433); text 160.3 (170.3) x 101 mm; 10 lines = 40.3 mm; face 2.3 (1.3x) mm. Note: pp. 449 — 459, two columns per page, with variable spaces between paragraphs of verse; p. 456, text left column 161 (168.3), right 162 (169) x 50.3 mm each; total page width 105.3; for both columns 10 lines = 28 mm; face 2 (1.3) mm. Running titles: black letter face, 3.3 (2.3x), centered above text with no rule beneath; text varies with section title; pp. 416 'Brakespeare; or,' and 417 'The Fortunes of a Free Lance.' No RT on first page of article. RT on 16 in normal face (2 mm), 'The Broadway Advertiser.' with rule beneath. Pagination: Black letter face, 3.3 mm (p. 433). Direction line: volume number 1.6 mm, signature 2 mm. Article titles: black letter face 7 (3x) mm. End-of-text bylines: face 2.3 mm. Rules: short rules [10 mm] between chapters of fiction on 415, 423, 469. Double rules at end of item on 428 [32 mm]; 448 [35 mm]; 480 [42.3 mm].

binding. Paper wrapper: thickness .184 mm; color: light yellowish pink. Front: [the following within double rule border 204 x 128 (202 x 125) mm] [design: two women; woman on left wears helmet; woman on right, no helmet, dress with stars on bodice, striped skirt; each woman extends one arm towards the other, clasping hands in center of design; each woman holds trident in other hand (left) or arm (right), and each woman stands on a pedestal, upon which hangs a shield representing Britain (left) and United States (right). Women stand in front of large circular frieze with a small scroll at the top. In front of the women and beneath their hands is a larger scroll; ends of scroll are wound around the staffs of the two tridents]. Text: [between points of tridents] PRICE SIXPENCE | [within small scroll at top of circle] 1868 | [within another small scroll suspended above clasped hands] THE [within larger scroll below hands] BROADWAY | LONDON | AND | NEW YORK.| [within left pedestal, above shield] No. 6. [within right pedestal, above shield] FEBRUARY. | [in rectangle between pedestals] A | MONTHLY | MAGAZINE | [within rectangle beneath pedestals] LONDON: THE BROADWAY. LUDGATE. NEW YORK: 416, BROOME STREET. Note: the lines "A MONTHLY MAGAZINE" are in outline face. Inside front: 4 ads, "Benson's Watches," "Brown & Polson's Patent Corn Flour," "Maravilla Cocoa," "Bryant and Mays Patent Safety Matches". Inside back: 3 ads, "John Gosnell & Co.," "Maizena," "Keating's Cough Lozenges". Back: 2 ads, "Railway Passengers Assurance Company," "Crosse & Blackwell". Spine: not available.

miscellaneous. A publisher's case, frontispiece, volume title and volume contents were available for volume 1 of The Broadway.

Publisher's case: medium green calico, stamped in gilt. Front: within double rule border (213 x 114, 209.5 x 112 mm) another diamond-shaped double rule compartment, within which: 'THE | BROADWAY | ANNUAL' on background of fish, shells. Back: blindstamped design same as front but no text or ornamentation within diamond compartment. Spine: oval design, ornamented with trident (at top) and fish (at bottom), and background of acorns and oak leaves, and containing three scrolls, each containing one word in intaglio: 'THE | BROADWAY | ANNUAL'.

Frontispiece: (on grey background, 164.3 x 107 mm, within thick-thin gilt rule frame, 173 x 115.7 [170 x 113] mm), illustration of two women, standing in front of a rose bower, sharing a copy of The Broadway, with another copy at their feet (to left). Woman on the left light-haired, with flower in hair, wearing pendant; woman on right dark-haired with a crown of six stars, striped dress. Signed: (on bottom left) 'McE' (on bottom right) 'W. T. Homas, Sc.' Text (not letterpress; at bottom, still within grey): 'Be rivals only in your love.'

Volume title: (on grey background, 165.3 X 108 mm, within thick-thin gilt rule frame, 173 x 116, 170 x 113 mm) THE | BROADWAY | ANNUAL | A MISCELLANY OF | ORIGINAL LITERATURE | IN | POETRY AND PROSE. | [ornament, leaf pointing down, 4.5 x 3.7 mm] | LONDON AND NEW YORK: | GEORGE ROUTLEDGE AND SONS.

Volume contents: a gathering of four leaves, signed 'b' on i. Contents as follows: i untitled poem, stanzas I — III, first line 'One face from where the Northern star'; ii device, "Harrild Printer London"; iii through v 'CONTENTS.', vi 'LIST OF FULLPAGE ILLUSTRATIONS.'; vii 'A LIST OF AUTHORS.' and 'LIST OF ARTISTS.'; viii within single rule frame [180 x 105 mm] ad for 'NEW SERIES. | [wavy rule 31.3 mm] | THE BROADWAY MAGAZINE, | PRICE ONE SHILLING, MONTHLY. | [wavy rule 31.7 mm] | No. 1, READY ON SEPTEMBER 1, 1868, | CONTAINS THE OPENING CHAPTERS OF | NEW NOVELS | BY | HENRY KINGSLEY and ANNIE THOMAS; | AS WELL AS | PAPERS AND POEMS | BY JAMES HANNAY, | FREDERIC LOCKER, | WALT WHITMAN, | BARRY CORNWALL, | THE REV. NEWMAN HALL; | AND OTHERS.'

copies examined. All volumes include frontispiece, volume title, and volume contents.

ICN (Newberry) A 51.168. Bound volume, wrappers and title-pages intact.

IEN (Northwestern) 051.B8635. Bound volume, publisher's case. No head titles or wrappers. Missing pages vii and viii, 1 — 2, 49 — 50.

TxU (U of Texas, Austin) Woolf 7717. Bound volume. No title-pages or wrappers.

TxHR (Rice) AP4.B9. Bound volume. No title-pages or wrappers.

Notes