Bibliography in the British Museum (Natural History)

Abstract

Bibliography resembles some species complexes with such overlapping diversity that they can be regarded as a single polymorphic species or as an assemblage of several closely allied and subtly distinguishable species or as a hybrid swarm derived from intercrossing in past. It is a matter of definition. As John Carter has said in his ABC for Book-Collectors (1952), may be enumerative, analytical or descriptive; broadly defined, it is the description or knowledge of books in regard to their authors, subjects, editions and history. Thus in biological terms biblio­ graphy is a polymorphic species embracing numerous variants, i.e. lines of enquiry. Some of these, however, interest only bibliophiles. Others are highly relevant to procedures in natural history and have accordingly received much attention within Natural History Museum during past hundred years; moreover their utility will continue. The importance of bibliography for such an institution as Natural History Museum at South Kensington, which is primarily taxonomic in its research, comes from importance of printed record as a long-lasting continuously usable source of taxonomic information. For this information to be retrievable with minimum of inconvenience and loss of time, stability of nomenclature and resolving of synonymy are in turn important. As stated in International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, principle III, the nomenclature of a taxonomic group is based upon priority of publication. The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature puts same emphasis on priority: the valid name of a taxon is oldest available name applied to it... provided that name is not invalidated by any provision of this Code or has not been suppressed by Commission. Relative dates of publication of competing different names for same organism or of like names for different organisms can thus determine name which should be adopted. To ascertain relative dates of publication often involves difficult and time-consuming bibliographical enquiry but this must nevertheless be undertaken when result may be crucial for correct nomenclature. That is why Natural History Museum has long been a major centre of such bibliographical enquiry and why Society for Bibliography of Natural History was formed under Museum's auspices in 1936 and has received so much support from Museum. The Society has never been officially part of Museum, but this Museum support has been vital to its maintenance and success. On other hand Society, by publishing results of bibliographic al and associated biographical enquiry relevant to natural history, has much benefited workers in Museum and elsewhere. The relations of two, in biological terms, have not been simply commensal but symbiotic.