Thread Name: How reliable are the back-of-book catalogs? From: Scot Kamins <kamins@removed> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 11:34:11 -0700 In entering each new piece of my collection in my database, I like to include the printing date of each book and (if different) dust jacket. I do this by looking at the catalogs on the back of the dust jacket and at the back of the book (if these catalogs exist) and comparing what I find to the date charts from the guide and from my Web site (http://www.dogeared.com/indentifyDate.html). I often notice a disparity -- and sometime a wide one -- between the date I glean from a catalog at the back of a given book and the binding of that book. For example, the guide might indicate that a specific book's binding was in use between 1930 and 1935 (I'm making these dates up because my guide isn't nearby), yet the highest numbered book in the catalog at the back of that same book might be one from 1937. So my question is: How reliable is the catalog at the back of the book? Were there years when the catalogs were absolutely accurate and others when they were completely unreliable? ------------------------------------- From: BooksetcSF@removed> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:49:20 EDT I don't think it is question of the reliability of the catalogues in the djs, but whether the djs were switched or later ones put on by the publisher. The addition of new dust jackets by the publisher I believe was not particularly unusual. ------------------------------------- From: Scot Kamins <kamins@removed> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:25:55 -0700 Right. But I'm speaking now specifically of the book itself in terms of its binding (and the dates we attribute to the use of that binding) and the titles that appear in the catalog at the back of the book. An example would be the catalog at the back of a number 7 binding, reputedly out of existence by 1940, listing a copy of Babbit (162.2) which didn't start until 1942. A more common case would be a later book with an earlier catalog. For example, let's say you had a Babbit (first published in 1942) and the catalog's latest listing was for a Lewisohn. Choose your own examples -- the real question is: Were the catalogs reliably up to date, such that they can be used as valid dating tools? ------------------------------------- From: BooksetcSF@removed> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:20:56 EDT THE SHORT ANSWER IS PROBABLY NOT, for the publisher's planned ahead for future publications and then did not necessarily bring them out when they intended to. If the books had really been brought out sequentially the number of a book (excluding when a number was used again) would directly correspond to the date of publication. This is often not the case. So, I expect some dj listings are accurate whereas others are not!! A great help. -------------------------------------