In discussions with university policy-makers grappling with what it means to decolonise the curriculum in South Africa, one sometimes encounters the view from partisans that the aim is to expunge the West's influence, or that the objective should be to displace Western knowledge and replace it with African or Afrocentric knowledge. And, on the other hand, those sceptical of or opposed to the need to decolonise knowledge refer to this aim as a kind of parody, articulated as a lament that describes the problem with injunctions to decolonise knowledge. This latter view would then go on to describe, perhaps with more nuance than expressed in the above-quoted tweet by the former leader of the official opposition party in post-apartheid South Africa, how colonialism gifted the colonies technology and infrastructure, healthcare and the rule of law. Let us not, these voices would warn, throw the baby out with the dirty bathwater. The assumption is that despite the violent history of colonialism, without that intervention there would not be a modern society. As an argument, it offers a defence of the legacy of colonialism based on the benefits of technology. In turn, technology is assumed to be an achievement of scientific thinking, which in turn is understood to be a gift to humanity from Western civilisation. This chapter problematises various assumptions in this argument about Western knowledge and also some of the ways in which it is critiqued by some proponents of decolonising knowledge.

As a reaction to the kind of thinking expressed by those who defend colonialism as a bad but ultimately good fact of history, the sentiment that displacing Western knowledge with African knowledge would, on the face of it, make sense as a decolonial act.

AA! ZWELIYAZUZA! ITSHAWE LASEBHRITANI

NguMzimbuyaqhum’ elokubuliswa;

NguMzimbuyavuth’ elomteketiso;

NguZweliyazuz’ elibizwa ngasemva;

NguTshawuzimiban’ elibizwa yiMbongi;

Sinnika!

Phumani nonke nize kufanekisa!

Phumani zizwe nonke nize kufanekisa!

Sisilo sini n’ esi singaziwayo?

Singajongekiyo singaqhelekiyo?

Yaz’ ithi kanti yile nabulele;

Isilokaz’ esikhulu seziziba;

Yaz’ ithi kanti ngulo Makhanda-mahlanu,—

Inyok’ enkul’ eza ngezivuthevuthe;

Yaz’ ithi kanti ngulo Gilikankqo,—

Isil’ esikhul’ esingaziwa mngxuma.

Le nt’ umzimb’ uyaqhuma ngathi liziko;

Le nt’ umzimb’ uyavutha ngathi lidangatye;

Le nt’ iqhuqhumb’ iintlantsi ngathi nguSindiyandiya;

Le nt’ itshawuz’ imibane ngathi sisibhakabhaka; Sinnika

Nalo lisiz’ iTshawe leBhilitani!

Inzala yenyathikaz’ uVitoliya;

Inkazan’ ebuthixorha kwizwe lakwaNtu,

Ebumoyarha, butolarha, bugqirharha.

Nants’ isiz’ ikwekwe kaJoji wesiHlanu;

Yez’ emadodeni ikwekw’ akomkhulu,—

Umdak’ oliso litshawuz’ imibane;

Lithi lakukujezul’ ung’ ungaphanyaza;

Tarhu Bhilitan’ eNkulu!

Bhilitan’ eNkul’ engatshonelwa langa;

Siya kumthini na lo mntwan’ okumkani;

Siya kumthini na lo mntwan’ omhlekazi;

Khaniphendule nani zintaba zezwe lethu!

Nani milambo yakowethu khanithethe!

Maz’ aselwandle khanimthule kambe,—

Mthuleni maz’ aselwandle!

Sikhe simbone, simjonge, simlozele;

Ibilapha nenkwenkwez’ enomsila;

Angaba yen’ usekhondweni layo.

Ibize kwabakwaPhalo kaTshiwo;

Ibize kumaZulu kubeSuthu;

Ibize kumaSwazi kubaTshwana;

Ibilundwendwe losapho lukaNtu!

Kub’ uYehov’ uThix’ uyalawula,—

Uyathetha ngendalo yakhe.

Uyawakhawulezis’ amaxesh’ akhe!

Tarhu Langaliyakhanya!

Uphuthum’ inkwenkwezi yakowenu na?

Thina singumz’ owab’ iinkwenkwezi;

Nalo kamb’ ikhwez’ inkwenkwez’ akowenu.

Sibambana ngesilimela thina,—

Yona nkwenkwezi yokubal’ iminyaka,—

Iminyaka yobudoda, yobudoda!

Hay’ kodw’ iBhritan’ eNkulu,—

Yeza nebhotile neBhayibhile;

Yeza nomfundisi’ exhag’ ijoni;

Yeza nerhuluwa nesinandile;

Yeza nankanunu nemfakadolo.

Tarhu bawo, sive yiphi na?

Gqithela phambili Thole lesilo!

Nyashaz’ ekad’ inyashaza.

Gqitha, uzubuye kakuhle,—

Ndlalifa yelakowethu.

Makadl’ ubom ukumkani!

Ndee ntsho-ntshobololo!!

Ngokwalaa nkwenkwezi yayinomsila!!!

In March 2015, student protests erupted at UCT – a prominent, formerly whites-only university in South Africa. They focused on removing a statue of the imperial mining magnate Cecil John Rhodes from its magisterial position on the campus. The moment and the Rhodes Must Fall movement quickly spread to other campuses across the country, finding resonance in other parts of the world as well. While South Africa had formally ended apartheid in 1994, the targeting of the Rhodes statue signalled that for this generation of students, the end of apartheid did not mean the end of colonialism. Colonialism as a problem in society and in the university was identified as an ongoing one, and therefore necessitated anticolonial political intervention to decolonise knowledge in the university. If earlier critical moments in the university found succour variously in Marxist, African anticolonial thought and postcolonial theory, this moment enabled some to introduce into the South African debates ‘decolonial theory’, a particular school of intellectual critique that initially emerged from scholars in Latin America and its diasporas. The movements referred to here – in Latin America, those focusing on the work of scholars associated with the theoretical programme called Modernity/Coloniality/Decoloniality (MCD), and the African movements such as the Africa Decolonial Research Network (Adern) – shared a concern with what the chapter describes as ‘the problem of colonialism’, expressed in this particular instance as the wish to undo the legacy of colonial education. The emphasis on ‘the problem of colonialism’ here is a way of drawing attention to how calls for the decolonisation of knowledge interpret the problem that is the target for these political interventions.

While previous generations may have turned to the pioneering writings of Cheikh Anta Diop, Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, C.J. Chinweizu or Ali Mazrui, ‘the problem of colonialism’, as it registers in contemporary theoretical and political discourses of critique emerging from significant parts of Africa, is more influenced by the Latin American MCD conception of colonialism. This theorisation by Latin American decolonial theorists, taken up by some scholars in Africa, places an emphasis on assimilation as the essential feature of colonial epistemic violence.

The University, Then and Now

The modern university in its Western iteration has always been defined by a tension between its elitist historical role and its modernist imperative to democratise access and equality. The modern university in its colonial form before 1857 was created to form a comprador class of educated natives, along the lines of Thomas B. Macaulay's 1835 ‘Minute on Education in India’: ‘Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect.’ Whether directly created by the colonial state or by missionaries, its rationale was assimilationist.

After 1857, especially in anglophone colonial territories, the rationale changed – it was to create the personnel for native administration. The rationale was no longer assimilation and incorporation but administration, order and difference.

As a settler society, South Africa created both kinds of universities, which ran parallel to each other after 1950: a tier of universities with a civilising liberal or nationalist mission internal to white society, and a tier of universities with functions defined by the imperatives of indirect rule – not to be assimilated but to be deployed in racial enclaves, to administer own affairs, or in the bantustans to administer ethnicised political communities.

Post-apartheid South Africa inherited these two tiers of university systems, but politically tended to think of them not in terms of their different rationales, but in terms of their resource differences – as advantaged and disadvantaged. The question might have been how to reconcile the two tiers, with their different colonial rationales – did one become the ideal and the other the pathology needing to catch up? Or should there be a synthesis of these two inheritances in order to create something new? These were the choices after 1994. As I see it, policies opted for the former rather than the latter. Historically black universities were put on the catch-up route or absorbed, while the elite white English- and Afrikaans-medium universities retained their status and were normalised as ‘world class’.

Athambile Masola

Ndingabhala ndithi yintoni engekabalulwa ngembongi yesizwe jikelele? Ngaphandle kwelizwi nomsebenzi wosiba lwayo, uSamuel Edward Loliwe Ngxekengxeke Krune Mqhayi (1875-1945), uncwadi neelwimi zesiNtu zingangamaqokobhe, umphanda ongenamanzi. Ngeso sizathu, eli phulo lokuvuselela umsebenzi kaMqhayi eluntwini sisipho kuthi njengabafundi nababhali besiXhosa kwakunye nesipho kumbhali lo, usingaye. Uthando lukaMqhayi ekukhuseleni isizwe sakhe lwaluvuthelwa luphenjelelwa yinkolelo yokuba ikamva labantu abaNtsundu liza kuzalisekiseka, alisokuze longanyelwe bubukoloniyali lide libhange.

USamuel Edward Krune Mqhayi wazalwa ngonyaka ka1875 ngomhla wokuqala kweyoMnga kwaGqumahashe. Wafunda e-Evergreen eTyhume nakuCentane. Waqeqeshelwa ubutitshala eLovedale. Ekuhambeni kweminyaka uMqhayi waya kuma eNtabozuko, indulana ekuhola wendlela ephakathi kweQonce neMonti. UMqhayi wayeyimbongi yesizwe, umntu wabantu bakhe, umshumayeli wevangeli, umfundisintsapho, intatheli ebhalela amaphephandaba aliqela, nomthandi wenkcubeko yama-Afrika. Uyibhale ngokwakhe imbali yakhe exubene nembali yamaXhosa kwincwadi ethi uMqhayi waseNtabozuko. Ubhala ngokubanzi ngembali yooyise-mkhulu; ngenxa yenkolelo ethi ‘Iingcambu zomntu ngooyise booyise’. Abazali bakhe yayingamaKrestu, oko kukuthi wafumana khona isiseko esingqindilili ekhaya ukuze akwazi ukuphila phakathi kweenkqwithelo ezifana neemfazwe kwakunye nombuso wasentshona. Walishiya eli ngomhla wama29 Julayi ngo1945.

UMqhayi ukhule phakathi kwempixano phakathi kwesintu nempilo yasentshona. Le mpixano yadala umahluko phakathi komzi ontsundu yaye yanefuthe kumsebenzi wakhe nawoogxa bakhe. Eyona nto eye yatshisa ibunzi uMqhayi noogxa bakhe abaye bakhulela kule meko yotshintsho, kukulondoloza isintu kwakunye nokuphakamisa isidima somzi ontsundu esasidotyelelwa kukuxhatshazwa ziimfazwe nokuxuthelwa umhlaba ngumbuso wasentshona. Yayinganqabanga ukuba umntu abengumfundisintsapho kwakunye nombhali wembali kwakunye nomvangeli wenkonzo, kwakunye nombhexeshi womculo. Imisebenzi ooMqhayi abaye bangena kuyo iyabonakala kwiimbalo zabo, eziqulathwe kwizincoko, imibongo nemihobe, iinguqulelo, iinoveli, imbali, iibhayografi kwakunye nezinye.

Ndiyithandile indlela abalisa ngayo indlela awaye wawongwa ukuba abeyimbongi yesizwe. Uthi xa ebalisa:

Eli bali lisibonisa ukubaluleka komsebenzi kaMqhayi jikelele, hayi phakathi kwamaXhosa kuphela

Ukuze ndiwazi umsebenzi kaMqhayi ekukhuleni kwam, ndancedwa ngumboniso kamabonakude Ityala Lamawele ka1989 (isekhona nakuYouTube namhlanje). Nangona ndandilazi ibali, ndawazi ngokuphangaleleyo umsebenzi kaMqhayi, mhla ndandifundela isidanga sokuqala kwiYunivesithi yaseRhodes.

INGQUNGQUTHELA YEZIZWE

UJohn Thengo Jabavu

Khawuqokele njengel’ enduna!

Khawuqokele nqeberh’ enkulu!

Kukhe kwakuhle wakuwela,

Oko wabuya nenkwenkwezi;

Bath’ abanye yekaEdwadi;

Zath’ izizwe zabelana—

Ath’ amaXhosa yekaNtsikana;

Bath’ abeSuthu yekaMshweshwe;

Ath’ amaZulu yekaTshaka;

Ath’ amaSwazi yekaSotshangana;

Ath’ amaNdebele yekaNobengula.

Phindela kwakhona njengel’ enduna!

Phindela kwakhona kwedini yaseMbo!!

Zophela ngokwaz’ iimfazwe zamakhaya,

Zoxel’ umbethe kwakuvel’ ilanga,

Zoxel’ amagqabi kwakuvel’ ubusika,

Thina maXhos’ ikhwele saligweba,

Salichitha salitshisela nezindlu;

Salingcwaba nothuthu lwalo.

Azi ngubani na l’ulivumbululayo?

Qabel’ amanzi njengel’ enduna!

Qabel’ iinduli zamanzi thole laseNtla!!

Khuph’ ilang’ emafini,

Yitsh’ iindlebe ziphez’ ukubethana,

Yitsh’ amathumb’ ayek’ ukuxuxuzela,

Yitsho kuse kwabajonge ngeentanyongo,

Thob’ izandla kwabalibele ngumkhanya,

Ngazwinye nquml’ ingxolo bawo,—

Nquml’ intetho kwabamilomo ingangeyengcungcu,

Yitsho zivuthuluk’ iingxabano zamakhaya,

Namhl’ uzubuye nenkwenkwezi kaJoji,

Zizokukwaz’ izizw’ ukuhlomlelana.

Ncincilili!!!

UMAFUKUZELA (UDR. J. L. DUBE)

“Lowo uwufumeneyo umphefumlo wakhe wolahlekwa nguwo, nalowo uwulahlileyo umphefumlo wakhe ngenxa yam uya kuwufumana” (Mateyu 10 : 39).

Phindela phesheya nto kaDube!

Phindela phesheya Mafukuzela!

Nkamel’ ethwal’ iinzingo zeAfrika;

Ithwal’ iingxakeko neembandezelo zayo,

Ikhe yathwal’ ezinye yaziphumeza,—

Yathwal’ ezinye, ezinye, kwanezinye;

Thole lenkunzi yaseMpumalanga,—

Bath’ ukuyibiza nguMafukuzela.

Phindela kwakhona nyath’ ematyhobozo!

Thole lesilo, thole lerhamncwa.

Nkunz’ ekhonyel’ iinkunz’ ezikude.

Phesha kwemilambo naphesha kweelwandle;

Nkunz’ eth’ ukukhonya yenz’ umpongampo

Ithath’ izisind’ iziphose ngasemva;

Ikhuph’ umnqambulo kwezinye iinkunzi,

Ibeth’ elundeni kwizaphuselana.

Ndathanda thole lohlanga ndathanda,—

Lagquba ngothuli lijonge ngaseNtla.

Labeth’ Ohlange kwaphuma neLanga,

Langqish’ eRhawutini kwavel’ iGolide,

Babukel’ ooGumede nabooRhadebe,—

Wafunz’ okaThema nokaMakgatho,

Yalal’ enkonxen’ iKolon’ endala,

Ishwatyaniswe nakukwaluphala.

Phindel’ edabini nto kaDube!

Ukuzalwa wedwa ngumluwanyama;

IAfrika ayizalang’ izalele phantsi;

Nempundan’ ekhoy’ ibulew’ intliziyo,—

Yaf’ ihamba yaxel’ umkholonjane.

Sibe kuy’ egqirheni lahlab’ ishwangusha,

Ichanti, nohili, nomgubo kaphezulu;

Sakunyuka nengalo lihla noNondyola.

Phindela phesheya mfo wakwaSenzangakhona!

Ndibev’ apha isimbonono;

Bathi, “Kwathi kwathi Afrika mayibuye,”

‘De ndabuz’ ukuthi: “Ningoobani na nina?”

Unanamhl’ andikeva mpendulo.

Bholish’ ikrikithi Langalibalele!

Le nt’ asinguwo mdlalo ngumtyabulo

Bholishani nzima nikhuph’ iBhritani!

Awu! Laqumb’ ithole lesilo sakwaZulu!

KwaSithole, kwaNtombela, kwaMalandela.

Namhla lifunzele kooDyubhoyise;

Kumadod’ antliziyo zingaziwayo,

Okhe walikhathaz’ uya kutshiswa ngemililo;

Kuya kuvuk’ iimini zikaTshaka;

Kuya kuvuk’ iziphendu nezivondoviya;

Kuya kuvuk’ ingxoviya lezulu.

Awu! Laqumb’ ithole lakwaJama!

Lalahl’ isonka lalahl’ iinwele,—

Lemka ngendlela lemka ngenkqayi;

Lalahl’ impilo kwanomphefumlo—

Ngenxa yesizwe sasebantwini,

Ngenxa yenkonzo yesizukulu.

Uya kuwufumana won’ umphefumlo,

Ziyabuya nezonka, iyabuya nempilo.

UMNYAKA OMTSHA, 1915

“1929”

“Kuba ndinguYehova igqirha lakho.” (Eksod. 1526).

Ilizwi leenkosi liphelelwe sisidima; ngenxa yale nto ke izikolo ziwile,—iidemoni zibuye ngasixhenxe ngasixhenxe; ivuke yema ngeenyawo imvelo, nendalo ifuna okwayo, kuba asingenanga egazini, apho sasithe siphuma sisiya khona. Ngako oko:

Mandiphinde ntombi kabawo,—

Ndithi kuwe, “lahla!”

Nakuwe nyana kabawo,

Ndithi kuwe, “lahla!”

Ndinankunqele yegqirh’ endiyazivo.

NguMakhanda-mathathu igama lalo.

Ndandingumntwana kuqala,

Namhla ndisekwaluphaleni,

Andizange ndilive likhohlisa,

Ndingazange ndive likhohliswa;

Ndiyalazi yingwangqaz’ enkulu,

Int’ etsho ngesidlokolo samazulu;

Int’ ethetha ngemibane nangeendudumo;

Kanti xa kulaph’ iyavumisa,—

lngwangqaz’ enkulu yaseSebhayothi!

“Vumani!” “Siyavuma!”

“Vumani!” “Siyavuma!!”

Sikhe sazithath’ iintonga sabekelela,

Sabekelela say’ emzin’ ent’ enkulu;

Sifike kumakhazikhaz’ angenakujongeka;

Suk’ af’ amehlo kwavel’ angaphakathi;

Sifike kwintshinyela yomzikazi,—

Kumzikaz’ onamanzi nemithi,—

Umthi wobom kulaph’ ukhona.

Ukwalaph’ umthikaz’ omagqabi mahle,—

Omagqab’ angawokuphiliswa kweentlanga.

Ukhe wawunikw’ uMosisi eMara,

Kuz’ aguqul’ amanz’ akrakra,

Bathi ubukrakra bayincindi yobusi!

Siwubon’ aph’ umfisi waseGiliyadi!

Siyibon’ aph’ imisedare yaseLebhanon,

“NdinguYehova igqirha lakho:”

“Vumani!” “Siyavuma!!”

“Vumani bo!” “Siyavuma!!”

This chapter is arranged as the main body of the Note-book. Books only are entered here; periodical articles are entered as footnotes.

GENERAL.

1. Bibliographies.

• [1] BURTON, Margaret, and Vosburgh, Marion E: Bibliography of librarianship, etc. Library Ass. 1934. Excludes material in Slavonic & Oriental languages.

• [2] CANNONS, Harry G.T: Bibliography of library economy; a classified index to the professional periodical literature… 1876-1920. Chicago: American Libr.Ass. 1927. Superseded by Libr.Lit.[10]. led. published 1910.

• [3] COLE, George Watson: Index to bibliographical papers published by the Bibliographical Society and the Library Association…1877-1932. Chicago: Bibliographical Soc.of Amer. (1933)

• [4] CROSS, Tom Peete, comp. Bibliographical guide to English studies; 10ed. Chicago Univ.Pr. 1951.

• [5] GRAHAM, Bessie: Bookman's manual; a guide to literature; 6ed.,rev…by Hester R. Hoffman. N.Y: Bowker 1948.

• [6] HANDBUCH der Bibliothekswissenschaft; hrsg. von Georg Leyh; 2Aufl. Stuttgart: Koehler 1950+ lAufl. by Fritz Milkau was published 1931-40. 3v.

• [7] HART, Horace: Bibliotheca typographica…a list of books about books…introd. by G.P. Winship. Rochester, N.Y: Hart 1933.

• [8] INTERNATIONALE Bibliographie des Buch- und Bibliothekswesens. Neue Folge. Leipzig: Harrassowitz 1,1926+ Erste Folge (Bibliographie des Bibliotheks- und Buchwesens 1904-12; 1922-5 (published 1925-7) was published as a Suppl. to Zbl.BiblWesen.[104]. None published since 15,1940.

• [9] LEXIKON des (gesamten) Buchwesens; hrsg. von Karl Löffler und Joachim Kirchner, unter Mitwirkung von Wilhelm Olbrich. Leipzig: Hiersemann 1935-7. 3v. “Manul” reprint advertised by Breslauer in 1952.

• [10] LIBRARY Literature. N.Y: Wilson 1921/32+ 1921/32 published by the Amer.Libr.Ass. Abstracts books, pamphlets & articles from about 100 professional periodicals. 3-yearly cumulation (except 1940/6 published in 1 vol.). Dictionary arrangement.

• [11] LIBRARY Science Abstracts. Library Ass. 1950+ Quarterly. Each number contains about 50 abstracts arranged under broad subject headings. Abstracts about 50 periodicals. Annual author and subject index.

• [12] NATIONAL Book League: Catalogue of the library. Cambridge Univ.Pr. 1944. Ed. 1-er3 called: Books about books.

• [13] ULRICH, Carolyn F., and Küp, Karl: Books and printing; a selected list of periodicals 1800-1942. Woodstock, Vt: Rudge; N.Y: Public Library 1943.

• [14] VEREENIGING ter Bevordering van de Belangen des Boekhandels: Catalogus der bibliotheek. Amsterdam: Nijhoff 1920-49. 6v.

It gives me very great pleasure to write a foreword to Mr Freer's “Bibliography and Modern Book Production”. Naturally I make no pretence to being a bibliographer; but what I do know is Mr Freer's intense interest in his subject.

Mr Freer was born in 1893 and entered the library world as a boy, at the age of 14, in the Birmingham Reference Library, and in 1909 the University Library. He was there till War Service took him away in 1914. On his return from the war he entered the University of Birmingham as a student graduating B.A. with Honours in 1922. After a period at the Norfolk and Norwich Library, Norwich, he came to the Union as Under-Librarian, South African Public Library, Cape Town, in 1926 and in 1929 was appointed Librarian of this University. He is retiring at the end of this year at his own request after 46 years in library work.

Ever since I came to know him in 1929 I have realized his immense keenness not only as a working librarian, but also as a student and teacher of bibliography. After Mr Freer had been at the University for two years we lost almost the whole of our book collection in a disastrous fire, but nothing daunted, he set to work again and assisted with the design of the new building, funds for the erection of which were provided by generous donors. At the same time he began once more to build up a book collection of which the University is rightly proud.

But Mr Freer has not limited his activities to the service of the University. All South African scholars are deeply indebted to him for his “Catalogue of Union Periodicals”. He was also one of the prime movers in the establishment of the South African Library Association and has at all times devoted special attention to its Education Committee and the instruction of its students in Bibliography.

The present book is the outcome of his studies and his lecture notes, and I commend them to librarians both here and overseas as the essence distilled from a lifetime of experience in the subject.

I. MODERN BOOKS.

The normal “make-up” of a present-day printed book, according to Simon is (a) Half-title, Title-page (recto and verso), Dedication, Acknowledgments, Contents, List of illustrations, etc., List of abbreviations, Preface, Introduction, Corrigend(a)um or Errat(a)um, constituting the Preliminaries or “Prelims”; (b) The Text, or Body of the Book; (c) Subsidiaries: Appendixes, Author's notes, Glossary, Bibliography, Index(es).

Esdaile varies the order and adds the following to (a) Imprimatur, Number of copies printed; to (c) Imprint or Colophon, “Finis”, Blank leaves, Plates, End-papers, Dust-jacket.

Actually the inside of the book may have, in addition to all the above (a) On the verso of the half-title, also called bastard-, false-, or fly-title: Publisher's advertisement, “By the same author”, Series note (which sometimes appears at the top of the title-page, or may even have a title-page of its own, facing the title-page of the specific volume in the series); and Frontispiece; Foreword (before contents only if short), Addenda slip, or Postscript, a half-, or caption-title repeated between the “Prelims”, and (b) the Text; the illustrations often appear amid (b); (c) Sometimes a duplicate, printed title-label is pasted in between the last page and the end-paper1. Advertisements (especially…19th century).

Then outside the book proper as part of the binding, we have the fly-leaves (back and front), trimmed, stained, sprinkled, marbled, or gilded edges, the covers (casing) and finally the lettering.

Some of the “Parts” call for further comment. The titlepage proper (recto) may carry a printer’s, or a publisher's device and, of course, the latter's Imprint. The verso may state the edition and year of publication (which we prefer to find on the recto, or title-page proper). On this verso we often find a bibliographical “history” of the book, i.e. a note on reprintings, revised editions, etc., and a copyright date (always in U.S.A. titles) and frequently the printer's imprint, which may, however, occur at the end.

No questions of the “write-short-notes-on-the-following”-type are included. Students would do well to learn the definitions from the Index.

* The questions marked thus should not be attempted before these Notes have been mastered.

PART 1.

CHAPTER I.

What is meant by the statement “True [descriptive] bibliography is the bridge to textual, that is to say literary, criticism”? (Greg)

What do you understand by the term “analytical bibliography” and what are the wider purposes which it serves? (L.A. 1945)

“Bibliography” has been variously defined. To what different kinds of activity do you consider the term may properly be applied? (L.A. 1950)

*”…yet without this sort of editing there is no security that we are reading what the author intended us to read”. (Esdaile)

What sort of editing is probably meant, assuming the work to be a 16 century text? (L.A. 1950)

CHAPTER II.

If you had to deal with a library containing many early printed books, what bibliographical aids would you consider essential? (L.A. 1941)

Describe in detail the scope and arrangement of three bibliographies of bibliographies. (L.A. 1944)

In what main bibliographical works is English Literature down to the year 1800 recorded? (L.A. 1944)

Trace the development of modern English trade bibliography, including a critical commentary on its resources. (L.A. 1944)

Name and describe briefly the main general bibliographies of German literature. (L.A. 1946)

Write a brief review of the main published catalogues of the British Museum. (L.A. 1951)

• (a) What is the distinction between “primry” and “secondary” bibliographies? Give two examples of each.

• (b) What in your opinion are the most important gaps in the primary bibliographies of this country. [Union of South Africa] (S.A.L.A. 1949)

Discuss, in relation to South African conditions: “It is to a large extent true of bibliography…if you take care of the present, the future will not have to take care of the past”.

A facsimile has been defined as “a reproduction which copies the original…as accurately as is possible within the limits of the reproductive process employed”. The expression can of course be applied to illustrations as well, but this aspect has already been treated in the previous chapter. We are here concerned only with reproductions of books as a whole, text-matter or MS. Weitenkampf says that “every facsimile is a copy, but not every copy is a facsimile”, and further that “before 1870, the use of the word had no justification whatever”. Contrast a saying by another prominent bibliographer, that “photographic reproductions [are] reliable but illegible, reprints are legible but unreliable”.

The user of facsimiles must make his choice according to his requirements. The word “facsimile” was known and used long before 1870; apart from the reproduction of pictures they were used as precepts when the interest in handwriting awakened. Today they are used widely by scholars for critical editions, where every existing copy of an early, rare book should be examined; for research purposes when inaccessible materials are wanted; for literary students who may be satisfied with a reprint in one form or another; by scientists for articles in periodicals; by the general public for whom early editions have an aesthetic appeal; and lastly, by those individuals who fabricate old and rare editions, of whom more later.

The categories fall into the three well-known groups: relief, intaglio, and planographic, each again within the two groups: non-photographic, and photographic.

I. THE HISTORY OF WRITING.

‘The history of writing is the history of variations and their causes’. Stanley Morison suggests as the chief causes of variation: (a) Necessity for speed; (b) Reservation of special hands for certain purposes; (c) Change in the nature of the materials and tools of writing, and in the manner of their employment.

The earliest method of communication and transmission of thought was by means of words: story-telling. Memory aids followed as the “Knot-writing” of the Peruvians and various drawings and picture writings, e.g. the one the American Indians used until fairly recent times (Pictographs). The Egyptians used Hieroglyphics which were of five kinds:

• 1. Thing-pictures = Pictograms.

• 2. Idea-pictures = Ideograms.

• 3. Word-sound pictures = Phonograms.

• 4. Syllable-sound pictures.

• 5. Letter-sound pictures.

The Chinese still use hieroglyphics and write in the same way as the Egyptians used to, i.e. from the top of the page to the bottom. Chinese ink is very quick-drying, but Egyptian not, and when they found that they smeared the first line when writing the second they changed to writing horizontally, and since the scribe kept the roll in his left hand while writing, he wrote from left to right.

The Hieroglyphics changed gradually to Hieratic (Greek: hieratikos = priestly) writing, a sort of speeded-up form of their writing.

The Phoenicians brought writing another step forward. They probably got most of their characters from the sound-symbols of the Egyptian hieratic writing about 1,200 B.C., but may also have been influenced by the cuneiform (wedge-shaped) characters of the Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Hittites, all of which were Ideograms. The Phoenician alphabet had no vowels and was written from right to left.

AUTHOR AND PRINTER.

The student should have realized by now that most books consist of: I - Text, and II - Illustrations, and that the Text is often divided into (a) Preliminaries (‘Prelims’, or Front matter); (b) Main Text, or Body; and (c) End matter. The detailed enumeration appeared in Chapter V. Simon [173] is a safe guide on such matters as format, type, and design. (See Chapters VII–IX and XI for Paper, Printing, Illustration, and Binding).

In the preparation of manuscript (MS.) or typescript (TS.) for publication there are three main stages: From the author's MS. to the typist's finger tips; From the TS. to the printer, including his proofs; The final production, including Distribution: Publishing, Bookselling, and Copyright.

Although the student may have decided to use 3” x 5” cards for his bibliographic entries, he will wisely use divisions of post 4to sheets (10” x 8”) for his notes. An experienced writer would probably scribble straight on to half-sheets (5” x 8”) but the student should begin on slips (2½” x 8”). Both sizes can later be arranged, re-arranged, and be easily rewritten, before their final pasting down for the typist.

Illustrations accompanying books have been known since the Egyptian “Book of the dead”. The medieval manuscripts were illustrated, and had borders in colour. The initials are a chapter in themselves. In early printed books the outlines were stamped in and then coloured by hand. Illustrations fall into the same three groups as ordinary printing: Relief, Intaglio, and Planographic (and were invented in this order). They may be either by the artist's own hand: autographic, or by one of the photo-mechanical processes.

A. AUTOGRAPHIC.

I. Relief.

• 1. Woodcut. The oldest method used for reproducing illustrations. Used in China. In Europe used for printing patterns on textiles and playing cards before the invention of printing with movable types. The first wood-cuts printed white lines and the craftsman got the impressions by rubbing the back of the paper. But as the first printing presses could not print the large, black areas, the cutters began to make two cuts for each line and to cut away the areas between the lines. Pfister did this for book-illustration for the first time, in 1461, but in 1471 Zainer got into difficulties with the cutters’ guilds and was not allowed to cut his own blocks. 1486 Cross-hatching begins.

• 2. Wood-engraving. Began about the end of 17th century in an effort to imitate copper-engravings. Reached perfection in the hands of Bewick, but sank quickly to a spiritless reproduction by craftsmen of artists’ drawings. Modern revival began about 1920 with the foundation of the Society of Wood-engravers.

• 3. Lino-cut. 1934(?) Potato. Rubber.