Part IV

.) “Bibliographical knowledge alone is not sufficient for producing a satisfactory manual—it requires unremitting industry and perseverance.” (Appendix.)

But what would he have said if he had executed his work thoroughly, devoted twenty years to its compilation, aided scarcely by a single hand, instead of by numerous coadjutors? We candidly confess that we are disappointed in the new edition of Lowndes. What unveiling of pseudonyms, what anonymous books ascribed or given authoritatively to their real authors had we not a right to expect from one who had been all his life among books and literary men? And yet we ought to thank Mr. Bohn if only for making Lowndes cheaper.

[54] We believe the old notion that a bibliographer must know everything it is possible to know has long since exploded. It was a very popular thing for the early writers in any science to give a list of the qualifications a man required to follow it. They generally were so numerous that to have attempted to study the science according to their plan would have been madness. Peignot in his MANUEL DU BIBLIOPHILE, Dijon, 1823, p. lii., says that a bibliographer should have a knowledge of all sciences. This may be requisite for any one who is attempting universal bibliography—not for a special bibliograph; if he has a good education combined with the above qualities, though even in a less degree than Quérard, he may justly hope for utility and success.