HomeGroupsTalkZeitgeist
  • LibraryThing
  • Book discussions
  • Your LibraryThing
  • Join to start using.

History

Build the Open Shelves Classification

Join LibraryThing to post.

This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.

1laena
Feb 23, 2009, 11:56am Top

Includes works on the history of specific regions (e.g. Africa, Ancient Greece), events (e.g. Holocaust), and topics (e.g. Military History or Study & Teaching of History). Please note that History does not mean "anything that happened in the past".

2imbibo
Edited: Apr 22, 2009, 9:19am Top

Since this is a first post for me, here are some disclaimers for those of you who might be tempted to think that this is the full, edited, and proofed list:

1. It is not a complete list. It is nowhere near complete. The order of the levels and everything else are going to be given the once, twice, and three-times over treatment each and every time I or anyone else opens the document.

2. I am not a history wizard, so if there are errors, well, see #1 above. Also, I'm open to suggestions.

Also, Laena has pointed me in the direction of intuitive levels, so that even though we're only supposed to be working on the second levels here, I started treating each second level as if it were a first, and each subsequent level as a second. This is to ensure that the system could be as flexible as one needs (say I was in a specialized library, my second levels would be vastly different than if I were in the most general of libraries). An example:

If I were in a gargantuan public U.S. library, I could have this for Quebec:

HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Quebec / General

and building on that, I could have:

HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Quebec / French Colonial

HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Quebec / Modern

And so on and so forth. I know I have more than two little levels, but what if I was in a library that had specifically Canadian holdings? It might not be necessary to specify "Canada" as a first or second level since it's a given, and want to jump immediately to the provinces. Following this, in this library, "Quebec" might be a top level, and Toronto could be a second level. maybe this:

HISTORY / Quebec / General

HISTORY / Quebec / French Colonial

HISTORY / Quebec / Modern

HISTORY / Quebec / Toronto / General

What if I were in Toronto?

HISTORY / Toronto / General

You get the idea.

These considerations span not just the location of the library, but also the specialization, the holdings, and the whim of the librarians. All of the levels should be adjustable as the library see fit, so the more detailed the list is, the more it can be adjusted to better fit a particular institution.

Also, I've inserted notes into the list, so we can come back to it later, and so that people are aware that there are other options.
First draft list in the next post.

3imbibo
Edited: Apr 21, 2009, 10:25pm Top

Generally, if I've inserted "General" at the end of a line, it means that I've stopped following the possible intuitive second levels and have moved on for now. Likewise, if I haven't inserted the word, I've still stopped following the line for now. Please see previous post for error protocol and probability.

Here goes:

HISTORY / Africa / General

HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / General
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Ancient / General
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / General
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Prehistoric
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Predynastic
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Early Dynastic
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Old Kingdom
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / First Intermediate Period
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Middle Kingdom
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Second Intermediate Period
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / New Kingdom
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Third Intermediate Period
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Late Period
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Greco-Roman / General
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Greco-Roman / Ptolemaic Dynasties
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Greco-Roman / Roman Era
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Ancient / Greco-Roman / Eastern Empire
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Medieval / Greco-Roman / Byzantine
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Medieval / Arabic / 642-1517 CE
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Modern / Ottoman Empire
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Modern / British Occupation
HISTORY / Africa / North Africa / Egypt / Modern / Independent Egypt

***My entire Africa section disappeared...this is what I was able to salvage. Will be back to it soon***

HISTORY / North America / Canada / Colonial / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / Colonial / French Colonial / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / Colonial / British Colonial / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Maritime Provinces / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Maritime Provinces / Labrador
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Maritime Provinces / New Brunswick
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Maritime Provinces / Newfoundland
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Maritime Provinces / Nova Scotia
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Maritime Provinces / Price Edward Island
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Quebec / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Quebec / French Colonial
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Quebec / Modern
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Ontario / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Ontario / British Colonial
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Ontario / Modern
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Alberta / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / British Columbia / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Manitoba / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Northwest Territories / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Nunavut / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Saskatchewan / General
HISTORY / North America / Canada / British Dominion / Yukon / General

HISTORY / North America / United States / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Pre-Columbian / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Indigenous Peoples / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Early Exploration / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Early Exploration / British
HISTORY / North America / United States / Early Exploration / Dutch
HISTORY / North America / United States / Early Exploration / French
HISTORY / North America / United States / Early Exploration / Spanish
HISTORY / North America / United States / Colonial / British
HISTORY / North America / United States / Colonial / Dutch
HISTORY / North America / United States / Colonial / French
HISTORY / North America / United States / Colonial / Spanish
HISTORY / North America / United States / Revolutionary Period / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Early Republic / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Jacksonian Era / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Pre-Civil War Era / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Civil War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Reconstruction / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Industrial America / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Westward Expansion / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Progressive Era / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / World War I / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Prohibition Era / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Great Depression / New Deal Era / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / World War II / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Post-War America / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Cold War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Cold War / Vietnam / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Civil Rights Era / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Watergate Era / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Post-Watergate and Reagan / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Late 20th Century / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / September 11th / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Post-September 11th era / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / (Local Histories, States, City) / etc., etc.

HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Naval / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Colonial / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Colonial / Indian Wars
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Colonial / French and Indian War
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Colonial / Revolutionary War
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / War of 1812 / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Mexican War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Civil War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / U.S. - Indian War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Spanish-American War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / World War I / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / World War II / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Korean War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Vietnam War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / First Gulf War / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Military / Afghanistan and Iraq War / General

HISTORY / North America / United States / Political / Colonial
HISTORY / North America / United States / Political / Continental Congress and the Confederation
HISTORY / North America / United States / Political / Constitutional Congress
HISTORY / North America / United States / Political / Presidential Administrations* / Washington / General
HISTORY / North America / United States / Political / Presidential Administrations / Obama / General
* This is self explanatory, I think, so I'm not going to list all the presidents. Also, the administrations would cover all political actions within each term.

HISTORY / North America / Mexico / General
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Columbian* / General
* I have seen this divided as the "pre – classical” and “classical” periods, but chose Pre-Columbian for consistency. Ideas?
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / General
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / La Venta / Olmec
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / Izapa
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / Teotihuacan
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / Monte Alban
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / Maya / Palenque
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / El Tajin
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / Chichen Itza
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Colonial / Tenochtitlan
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Indigenous Peoples / General
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Spanish Conquest / General
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Viceroyalty of New Spain to 1821 / General
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Mexican Independence / General
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Mexican Republic / Mexican-American War
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Mexican Republic / Civil Wars
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Mexican Republic / European Intervention
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Mexican Republic / Juarez and Diaz
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Mexican Revolution / General
HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Modern / General

HISTORY / Europe / General
HISTORY / Europe / Paleolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / Mesolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / Neolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / Bronze Age / General
HISTORY / Europe / Iron Age / General

HISTORY / Europe / Mediterranean / General
HISTORY / Europe / Mediterranean / Early Aegean
HISTORY / Europe / Mediterranean / Cycladic
HISTORY / Europe / Mediterranean / Minoan
HISTORY / Europe / Mediterranean / Mycenaean
HISTORY / Europe / Mediterranean / Anatolian
HISTORY / Europe / Mediterranean / …

***The reason I have Mediterranean separated out from Greek, Roman, Turkish and other nations with strong Mediterranean influences is for intuition's sake - if I wanted to look up ancient Minoan culture, I'd maybe look in the Mediterranean first, but if I was looking for the Persian wars, I'd look in Greek history and not Mediterranean. Likewise, I've listed Minoan history in both Mediterranean and Greek...also, there must be overlap....I'm not sure if that's what we're looking for....I suppose if we're trying to make this more comprehensive and more malleable in the long run, it can and should be more detailed***

***Plus, I know "Greece" is not Greece until much later, and that "Hellas," "Helladic," "Hellenistic," etc., would be used in an academic/scholarly/authentic setting, but the Western layperson is familiar with "Greece."

HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Neolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Early Aegean
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Minoan
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Mycenae
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Dark Ages
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Archaic Period
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Classical Period / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Classical Period / Persian Wars / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Classical Period / Peloponnesian Wars / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Classical Period / Age of Alexander / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Hellenistic Period / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ancient Greece / Roman Era / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Eastern Empire / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Latin Empire / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Byzantine Empire / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Ottoman Empire / General
HISTORY / Europe / Greece / Modern

HISTORY / Europe / Italy / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Pre-Roman / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Pre-Roman / Etruscan / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy * / Rome / General
* I am putting Roman history under Italy because, technically, it is Italian history. The level "Italy" may be removed as the user sees fit.
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Foundation and Kings / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Early Republic
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Conquest of Mediterranean
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Punic Wars / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Eastern Expansion / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Civil Wars / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Civil Wars / Dictatorships
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Fall of the Republic / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Fall of the Republic / First Triumvirate
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Fall of the Republic / Caesar
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Republic / Fall of the Republic / Second Triumvirate
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Empire / Age of Augustus
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Empire / Early Roman Emperors
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Empire / Antonines
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Empire
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Late Roman Empire / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Late Roman Empire / Decline and Fall
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Rome / Late Roman Empire / Barbarian Invasions

HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Medieval Papacy* / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Gothic and Lombard Kingdoms* / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / City-States* / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Holy Roman Empire* / General
*All of these overlap to a certain extent.
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Renaissance / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Modern / General
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Modern / Unification
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Modern / Monarchy
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Modern / Fascist Italy
HISTORY / Europe / Italy / Modern / Post-WW2

HISTORY / Europe / France / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Paleolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Mesolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Neolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Bronze Age / Gauls and Celts / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Roman Era / Gaul / Roman Conquest
HISTORY / Europe / France / Roman Era / Gaul / Western Roman Empire
HISTORY / Europe / France / Frankish Era / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Carolingian Empire / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Medieval / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Medieval / Capetian Monarchy
HISTORY / Europe / France / Medieval / Hundred-Years War
HISTORY / Europe / France / Early Modern / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Early Modern / Wars of Religion
HISTORY / Europe / France / Early Modern / European Expansion
HISTORY / Europe / France / Early Modern / Louis XIII
HISTORY / Europe / France / Early Modern / Louis XIV
HISTORY / Europe / France / Early Modern / Louis XV
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Revolutionary Period / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Napoleonic Era / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Restoration
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Second Republic / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Second Empire / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Second Empire / Franco-Prussian War
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Third Republic / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Third Republic / Imperial Expansion
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Third Republic / World War I
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Late Third Republic / Inter-War Years
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Late Third Republic / World War II and the Fall of France
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Occupation and the Vichy Regime and Liberation
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Fourth Republic
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Fifth Republic / General
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Fifth Republic / Algerian War
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Fifth Republic / De Gaulle
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Fifth Republic / Pompidou, Mitterand, Chirac
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / Fifth Republic
HISTORY / Europe / France / Modern / General

HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Paleolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Mesolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Neolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Bronze Age / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Bronze Age / Celtic Britain
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Early Britain / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Early Britain / Roman Conquest
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Early Britain / Roman Britain
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / England / Anglo-Saxon Conquest
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / England / Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / England / Danish Invasions
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Medieval England / Norman Conquest
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Medieval England / Angevins Monarchy
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Medieval England / Plantagenet Dynasty
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Medieval England / House of Lancaster
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Medieval England / House of York
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern England / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Early Modern England / Tudors / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Early Modern England / Tudors / Elizabethan Age
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Early Modern Britain / Stuarts / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Early Modern Britain / Stuarts / Early
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Early Modern Britain / Stuarts / Civil War and Commonwealth
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Stuarts / Restoration
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Stuarts / Later Stuarts and Glorious Revolution
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Hanoverian Succession
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Hanoverian Monarchies / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Hanoverian Monarchies / Seven-Years War
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Hanoverian Monarchies / American Revolution
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Hanoverian Monarchies / French Revolution
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Hanoverian Monarchies / Napoleonic Wars
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Hanoverian Monarchies / Regency Period
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Victorian Era / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Victorian Era / Imperial Expansion
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Victorian Era / Industrial Revolution
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Edwardian Era / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / World War I / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Inter-War Years / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / World War II / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Post World War II / General

HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early / Picts, Celts, Scots
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early / Scots Monarchy
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early / English Invasions / Edward I
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Medieval / War of Independence / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Medieval / War of Independence / Wallace
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Medieval / War of Independence / Robert the Bruce
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Medieval / Stuart Monarchy
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early Modern / Protestant Reformation
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early Modern / Union with England
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early Modern / Civil War
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early Modern / Parliamentary Union
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Early Modern / Jacobite
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Modern / Industrial Revolution
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Scotland / Modern / General

HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Neolithic / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Bronze Age / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Bronze Age / Celts
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Early / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Early / Christianity
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Medieval / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Medieval / Viking Kingdoms
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Medieval / Norman Invasion
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Late Medieval / Gaelic Period
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Late Medieval / Tudor Plantations
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Late Medieval / Nine-Years War
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Early Modern / Stuart Plantations
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Early Modern / Cromwellian Era and Civil War
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Early Modern / Stuart Monarchy and Jacobite War
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Early Modern / Penal Era
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Revolution of 1798 and Active Union
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Victorian Era / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Victorian Era / Great Famine
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Victorian Era / Emigration
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Victorian Era / Land Wars
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Edwardian Era
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Easter Rising and War of Independence
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Irish Free State and Partition
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Ireland / Modern / Irish Republic

HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Northern Ireland / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Northern Ireland / 1922-1969
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Northern Ireland / Troubles

HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Wales / General
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Wales / Catherine Zeta-Jones (just wanted to make sure you were paying attention) / General


4staffordcastle
Apr 3, 2009, 12:59pm Top

Hi, imbibo

I notice that under France, you have /Early Modern/ as a level, but under British Isles, the same era is labeled /Modern England/. Any particular reason for that? In my experience, the Tudors and Stuarts are usually considered to be Early Modern.

5imbibo
Edited: Apr 3, 2009, 2:28pm Top

Hmmm...there does seem to be a discrepancy. As I mentioned in one of my posts, I'm no historian, but I do have one close to me and he's the one who recommended both tags. It could be that he just didn't catch it - there's a bunch of stuff we caught, but that one could have slipped through. I'll defo check and see if there's a reason for it; we can absolutely change it. Thanks!

6imbibo
Apr 4, 2009, 10:26pm Top

staffordcastle - i checked around and am going to go ahead and designate the Tudors and Stuarts as Early Modern. Thanks for the head up! Seems like history ain't so popular in these here parts...:)

Also, my sources talked about the changeover from early modern to modern during the Stuart dynasty - we were wondering if it should be handled here or if it's too niggling... thoughts?

7imbibo
Edited: Apr 8, 2009, 4:48pm Top

This message has been deleted by its author.

8imbibo
Apr 8, 2009, 9:45pm Top

As I've constructed this, I've had the Library of Congress classification system open as a guide, as well as BISAC, as well as some other stuff. Here's what I've found: BISAC is rudimentary at best, and LOC is unintuitive and somewhat jumbled. For instance, LOC has huge big holes in their "Africa" section, because they have it arranged somewhat nationally, mostly by countries that didn't exist before 1960, so it doesn't take into account trans-African and pan-African history. Like, the Carthaginian Empire, the Islamic Caliphates, the Ottoman Empire and the Roman Empire don't appear as prominently as they could, if at all. Maybe I'm missing something. Maybe not.

I also could not use the LT tag cloud, b/c it wasn't comprehensive enough.

I'm also wondering if I should include categories like "Egypt." It's a huge subject, but also could be within another level. If we include Egypt, why not Tokyo as a second level? Why not NY? I think there could be an argument for, but...

There has been some discussion in other threads that categories should be simpler, to cater to the average library user, but what of the people who would do the actual shelving, and who would be needing to create and access software that may support this system? Shouldn't they have a flexible guide that leaves them options that would cater to their individual holdings? Or should it just be user-centric? Hmmm...

9imbibo
Apr 9, 2009, 3:34pm Top

I'm wondering about shelf-space and statistical testing here. There seems to be a dichotomy between the conversation here and what's happening in the category threads. How would one evaluate the lists-as-models? As Selanit points out in #12 of the link, many topics aren't well represented here.

Back to shelf order. Continental shelving?

10mattsya
Apr 9, 2009, 4:55pm Top

I don't mean to interrupt your soliloquy here, but in 9 you do bring up an issue that has concerned me. I've brought this up in some other thread somewhere, but I think we do need to start working with some sort of "model library" collection to see how our decisions actually affect the collection. It could be a sampling or a volume for volume copy of a real library's collection, but it needs to be based on something real and not our individual imaginings of what a library is/should be.

11jjwilson61
Apr 9, 2009, 5:06pm Top

That thread was from last July. I don't think he cares about lumpiness anymore given the top level categories that we ended up with.

12imbibo
Apr 9, 2009, 6:33pm Top

>10 mattsya:

Ha, you can interrupt anytime. The silence can wait. In the link that I mentioned earlier (which I know is old, but has good points anyway), the lists will have to be hypothetical unless a physical space is found. My tiny little Manhattan bookshelf won't do.

Caveat - When I started in with this, Laena had said that we should start testing on our own collections, but later said that building the second levels should be more our focus. Maybe we can start soon with what little we have.

>11 jjwilson61:

I'm making sure that I go over and over the original threads in case I've gotten too far off track. Helps me focus.

13jjwilson61
Apr 9, 2009, 6:37pm Top

When you say "testing on our own collections" do you mean our own LT libraries. Because some months back there was a test of the top level where you could click on any book in your library and classify which top level it would fall under. There was also a way to get assigned a random book for you to classify. You can see the remnants of the test at the very bottom of the work pages.

14imbibo
Edited: Apr 9, 2009, 7:53pm Top

Yeah, I suppose that's what she meant, but my mates and I were told to hold off the testing until later. We could assume (making you+me=something about a donkey - ha) we could test our own LT collections.

15imbibo
Apr 9, 2009, 6:42pm Top

also...>13 jjwilson61:...oooh, a random book would be great.

16Suncat
Apr 9, 2009, 9:21pm Top

Yeah, that's the testing where many of us have asked repeatedly to see the results. No one expects that data to solve the open issues of the OSC. But I think it would represent important inputs.

The result data has never been shared. Since you, Laena's crew, are running this project now, maybe a request from you would carry more weight in getting the data to appear? I find I'm still terribly curious about that first round of testing.

17imbibo
Edited: Apr 10, 2009, 10:01am Top

>16 Suncat:...Suncat, to be perfectly honest, we're receiving no more guidance than any other member here. I believe we're all meant to do this with a minimal amount of input from any "higher up." When we began, we got a rundown of what's been going on, and what they needed from us (fleshing out the second levels), but after that....you've seen it. Maybe as a group (by group, I mean all of us here) we should take it upon ourselves to start some prelim testing.

Whatcha think? >14 imbibo: mentions getting a random book - follow me, here....what if someone threw a book into the mix each day (or however we want to time it), and the rest of us cataloged it? For instance, here, someone could throw me a history book and I could catalog it.

I was thinking that LOC built their system through their holdings; we could integrate it, while being aware of other possible categories, and being less Euro/Anglo/US-centric.

Thoughts?

p.s. - I was not involved w/ the top level testing, btw. However, I understand the concern at not seeing the innards of the top level beast. Maybe at the moment, we let go of the top level testing (since we may never see it anyway) and create our own framework here. I think we're perfectly capable. That way we have an actual record of the evolution.

18imbibo
Edited: Apr 9, 2009, 11:19pm Top

And we're not running this project. The call for more moderators came after our formation, I think, and we were informed around the same time this group was. So basically, anyone has the same level of moderator authority as anyone else. I just happened to want to study the evolution.

19Halieus
Apr 10, 2009, 8:09am Top

In post 3 you have:

HISTORY / North America / United States / (Local Histories, States, City) / etc., etc.

If it were me, I'd prefer to see something like this:

HISTORY / North America / United States / States / County / Cities
HISTORY / North America / United States / States / County / Other Local Histories
*/ for ghost towns, unincorporated villages, mines, famous homesteads, etc. Could present a problem for cities spanning multiple counties tho. /*
HISTORY / North America / United States / States / Regional Histories
*/ while this would be fine for Texas' big thicket, it would present a problem for regions as large as say... "The South" or "The Midwest"/*

20imbibo
Apr 10, 2009, 9:58am Top

>19 Halieus:

Sure, That makes sense. I was just being lazy there, but that gives a good direction. Like under politics / presidential administrations, we could just contract the list b/c all of us know what the filler is.

As for regional history, yeah, that problem is messy - bear in mind, we do only have to arrive at second levels, so it's not terrible pressing at the moment. But....could you nominate an actual "regional" book? The weirder the better. Maybe we could see where it would best fit.

21Suncat
Apr 10, 2009, 12:42pm Top

>18 imbibo:

Laena and conners had referred to their "8 graduate students" who were apparently doing lines of background research for the project. It seemed that laena had recruited you all from the outside to do this work since she didn't put a call out to the LT membership for this background research. It was surprising to me, as we clearly have many qualified people already here (as mentioned for example in thread http://www.librarything.com/topic/40861). The earliest any of you joined LT was late January, and we (or at least, myself) didn't learn who any of you were for at least a month and a half.

Then when other commitments caused laena to step away from the project, and she and conners put out the call for other category discussion leaders, we saw that some had already been taken, although it wasn't said then by whom.

This whole thing has just been confusing to me. Taken together, it seemed to me that
1) laena took on half the leadership of the OSC,
2) called together some of her students to work on it,
3) the students joined LT so they could do so and finally
4) when other commitments became too much of a conflict, she turned over her part of the leadership to said students.

Add to that the unfortunate disruptions and misunderstandings when your group did openly join the discussions, and I'm left unsure of who the leaders are now, who will make the final decisions (along with how these will be explained to the rest of us) and how this whole project will be pulled together as pieces are sorted out.

22imbibo
Edited: Apr 10, 2009, 5:39pm Top

>21 Suncat:

Suncat....I do not want to quibble with you. Please read the first paragraph >17 imbibo:, esp. the first sentence. Please hear me: I/we are NOT the "leaders." I don't know who will be making the final decisions, I DO NOT want to. Yes, it's confusing - I count myself one of the affected.

I did NOT know that Laena had pulled out.

The "background research" you refer to is the research I thought anybody would have done in trying to construct a list. The "call" I referred to was the call that was posted by connors for more moderators. Beyond that is beyond me.

As for the experts we already have, no one had touched this category, and this is the category I'm concerned with.

Again, I am not Laena's, nor connor's, student. I have no contact with either of them.

There are two things I want to make clear:
1) I have said all of this before, but I want to reiterate that I am as much in the dark as you as far as leadership and the inner workings as you, and
2) I have tried to make clear that we are not some sort of covert fifth column infiltrated in after the fact, nor did we intend to be.

Is it at all possible that we try to remain constructive?

23imbibo
Apr 10, 2009, 2:38pm Top

> 21

Also, since I don't have hard evidence of actual complete abandonment, I'd like to get back to work and focus on what we could accomplish. I wouldn't change my methodology if there were leaders saying nothing, or if there were no leaders at all.

24TimSharrock
Apr 10, 2009, 3:03pm Top

>20 imbibo:
OK, here is a weird one, though it could possibly be categorised under genealogy, or possible multiple-biographies: change at prescot I have not put a description in yet, but the cover blurb starts "This is a story of two traditions in South West Lancashire..." and chapters include "Rural Tipperary in the early Nineteenth Century", "The Catholic Irish in Liverpool", "The Lancashire Recusant Farming Community", "The Doctor in the community 1890 to 1940", "A Death on the Somme".

The common thread is particular family histories (one of my Great-Aunts and her husband, and their ancestors and relatives), but it then connects to those various places.

25imbibo
Edited: Apr 10, 2009, 4:35pm Top

>24 TimSharrock:

Niiiiicce. Let me think - I just walked in the door (sad, I know, that the first thing I did was check my precious history). :)

Anyone want to weigh in on this awesomely weird book?

26Suncat
Apr 10, 2009, 4:42pm Top

>22 imbibo:

imbibo: Thank you for directly answering my questions. I was citing events I've seen since I got involved with OSC myself (in January) and from reviewing the history of the project prior to that time back to its inception last summer in 2008. From the order of events, I drew certain conclusions knowing I might be incorrect. You have now answered some of my unclear points. And opened up others (a mystery ....).

That concluded, I do like the your idea in >17 imbibo: Whatcha think? >14 imbibo: mentions getting a random book - follow me, here....what if someone threw a book into the mix each day (or however we want to time it), and the rest of us cataloged it? For instance, here, someone could throw me a history book and I could catalog it.

Having participated in the round of testing/voting done in January, this seems a bit like re-work. But we don't have those results. You're suggesting limiting the focus to History. So, why not?

Before you get innundated with books, maybe we should discuss just a little on how to record and collect the results. Just start with the set of subclasses in >3 imbibo:, and see for a set period or a number of books how well things seem to fit? Take a short break and evaluate and tweak the list? Or maybe you've got some better ideas on this kind of research--I've been out of academia so long I'm not sure I'd trust what I remember of the methods.

27PaulDaly
Apr 10, 2009, 4:46pm Top

That's an interesting one Mr. Sharrock- here's one possibility but it probably doesn't quite cover the scope of the book- so using Imbibo's draft categories:
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Victorian Era/ Immigration/ Irish
or maybe
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Victorian Era/ Local History/ Lancashire/Prescot/ Familes
or maybe
HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Modern Britain / Victorian Era /Industrial Revolution/ Liverpool & Lancashire/Irish Immigrants

28imbibo
Apr 10, 2009, 4:57pm Top

>26 Suncat:

Nah, I don't have any better ideas on how to actually record this, save for making sure we post ideas/criticisms here. Wait! Okay, this was what I was going to suggest for the adjustments anyway, so maybe it would work for this category (if the others want to do the same for their threads, that's their decision):

Whenever a proposed change comes up, like the suggestion by PaulDaly (which I'll get to in a moment), if everyone likes the suggestion, I'll just stick it into the post at #3, that way we have an evolving list we can all see that we don't have to backtrack to a million posts. We can do the same for a book list. I (or anyone else) can begin with TimSharrock's book in the next post, and when people have responded and "agreed" (ha) to a particular book, we can stick it into that one post, and everyone could comb through the results in one place.

Thoughts? Does this make sense?

29imbibo
Apr 10, 2009, 5:02pm Top

>27 PaulDaly:

Beautiful, PaulDaly. I suppose given the scope of the book, it could be any one of those, thought I like the last two the best. Are we supposed able to cross-reference here? Why not?

30TimSharrock
Edited: Apr 10, 2009, 5:08pm Top

>27 PaulDaly:
interesting - yes it does span several categories - and also time periods, starting before the Victorian era, and ending after it. (Studies of topics rather than periods often do that, eg the Camel and the Wheel which runs from the domestication of the camel to their importation to Australia... but maybe it should be categorised in Pets :) )

I see also that you picked up the "Irish" tag, which is certainly one theme - but it is at least as much about the English

31imbibo
Edited: Apr 10, 2009, 5:12pm Top

> 30

Pets. :) You could have a career in comedy, or at least a degree in sarcasm.

32TimSharrock
Apr 10, 2009, 5:16pm Top

31>
Sorry! more seriously it could be "history of transportatation", under some transport category, as could generally be the case with many other "history of ..." books, but that is a more general question.

33PaulDaly
Apr 10, 2009, 5:17pm Top

Yep, that's what I meant by interesting- it spans era's Victorian/Edwardian/WW1/Interwar Years/WWII right; Countries England/Ireland; local history in Tipperary, Liverpool and Lancashire; Ethnicities English/Irish....working for twenty years in the book trade as I did, that's the kind of conundrum you'd see every day. One rule of thumb is what is the main theme, the crux of the book and by deciding that you catologue/sell/selve it depending on your needs.

34imbibo
Apr 10, 2009, 5:17pm Top

>31 imbibo:

Hey now! Don't apologize - we need some levity. I thought you were referring to the raging debate over a "pets" category.

35TimSharrock
Apr 10, 2009, 5:21pm Top

32> I was indeed!

36imbibo
Edited: Apr 10, 2009, 5:49pm Top

>31 imbibo:

History of transportation is absolutely a viable category. I'm wondering where to put it. I think there are other histories that need addressing, like maritime history, history of flight, and your history of transportation. Camel and the Wheel might fit into anthropology better than history, but again, maybe not.

How would you organize "transportation?" Maybe chronologically?

37PaulDaly
Apr 10, 2009, 5:38pm Top

Books like Camel and the Wheel and say, Cod are really hard books for publishers, catologue-ers, booksellers to categorize. They tailor their clothe to their respective audience- store/chain book buyers and the book buying public. At home if you put your books in a particular order, I guess you may move it around as the whimsy takes you. I find it hard to conceive of any system which could definitively place the book.

38TimSharrock
Apr 10, 2009, 5:43pm Top

>36 imbibo:

Well there is a "Transportaion" top-level, and there is the overall question is "history of transportation" a subclass of "History" or of "Transportation", is "History of Science" in "History" or "Science" etc,

see http://www.librarything.com/topic/58484 message 30:

Science Second-Level Categories:

GENERAL
- Includes general reference, history of science, philosophy of science, and Natural History.

Natural History... so that is Camels again, and Cod, unless the latter is in ... hmmm I was going to look for a top-level category that includes Fishing as an industry rather than a hoppy, but I cannot find one - Agriculture does not feel right, so it must be history!

39TimSharrock
Apr 10, 2009, 5:49pm Top

37> SNAP!

yes, but most of the books I have that would be tagged "history" are likely to be "themed history", or at least wide-ranging, whether it is Cod, or Blood of the Isles, or A History of the English Speaking Peoples, and public libraries are likely to have many such, so how should they be shelved, do we need to split the second level into both themes and times, though the could be single books that are focussed in both directions, eg a book such as (this one is made up...) "carp ponds in welsh monasteries of the thirteenth century"

40imbibo
Apr 10, 2009, 5:56pm Top

>38 TimSharrock:

re: "Well there is a "Transportaion" top-level, and there is the overall question is "history of transportation" a subclass of "History" or of "Transportation", is "History of Science" in "History" or "Science" etc"

Good point. How far should this particular level extend? In post >1 laena:, Teaching of History is suggested, but that could well go into academics, yes? History of Academia? Is that our scope?

LOC has this for Camel and the Wheel:

Camels --History.
Camels --Middle East --History.
Camels --Africa, North --History.
Wheels --Middle East --History.
Wheels --Africa, North --History.
Transportation --Middle East --History.
Transportation --Africa, North --History.
Animals and history --Middle East.
Animals and history --Africa, North.

Messy, but historical. :)

41PaulDaly
Apr 10, 2009, 6:00pm Top

I think after history you can go down many roads- the second levels should probably be split into themes and eras- but then again wouldn't themes like "slavery" or "immigration" or "local history" or "monasteries" be third, fourth, fifth, sixth levels????

"carp ponds in welsh monasteries of the thirteenth century" that's an ACE book!!!!!!

42PaulDaly
Apr 10, 2009, 6:02pm Top

Blood of the Isles surely genetics??? Subset of medicine?? I know there is lots of history in it but.....

43imbibo
Apr 10, 2009, 6:03pm Top

carp ponds in welsh monasteries of the thirteenth century...*laughing*

44jjwilson61
Apr 10, 2009, 6:08pm Top

Are we supposed able to cross-reference here? Why not?

Do you mean be able to place a book in more than one category? I don't think so. This is about what call number to put on the spine of the book, not what to put in the subjects field of the catalog. So there needs to be one number that indicates where to find the book on the shelves.

45imbibo
Apr 10, 2009, 6:10pm Top

>44 jjwilson61:

Point taken.

46TimSharrock
Apr 10, 2009, 6:19pm Top

>42 PaulDaly:
blood of the Isles quite possibly 37 people tagged it genetics, and 26 history - but there, are similar books (well, at least one, the name of which I have forgotten) which is a step or two more "history" focussed (with a healthy sprinkle of linguistics), but still focussed on "where did we come from?" which feels like history to me (well, until it turns into evolutionary biology.... History > Pre-cambrian)

47TimSharrock
Apr 10, 2009, 6:24pm Top

>my 46
The Origins of the British has 11 History tags and 10 genetics

48imbibo
Edited: Apr 10, 2009, 6:55pm Top

>46 TimSharrock: and 47

Would it do to have a genetic history category? The books you're mentioning, as well as Saxons, Vikings, and Celts: The Genetic Roots of Britain and Ireland...good read, don't think I could place it in science. Maybe:

HISTORY / Europe / British Isles / Genetic History / General

49PaulDaly
Apr 10, 2009, 6:37pm Top

In search of England the Michael Woods book, something like that???? See, as my focus is history rather than genetics I've stuck Blood of the Isles on the shelves between "Age of Arthur" and "1066".
someone else may stick it between Double Helix and a bio of Pavlov. I think it's down to personal preference after a certain point- a classification system can only go so far.

50PaulDaly
Apr 10, 2009, 6:41pm Top

I think Blood of the Isles was the original British title of Saxons, Vikings & Celts showing that the publisher knew which side his bread was buttered on and marketed it in the States accordingly. which illustrates what I mean about making choices when it comes to publishing, selling, displaying, cataloging the book.

51imbibo
Edited: Apr 10, 2009, 6:46pm Top

Ah! My mistake. And I take your point about needing to make choices.

52Munchkinguy
Apr 11, 2009, 8:57pm Top

Similar to some of the comments here, I'd like to point out that the classification here seems to be biased toward Geopolitical History. History can be considered a subject that extends beyond that.

For example, History of Mathematics, History of Religions, History of Education, etc.

How is the OSC going to develop a classification code that is flexible enough for this diversity?

53imbibo
Apr 12, 2009, 1:12am Top

>52 Munchkinguy:

Yes, I think that's what we were addressing earlier - that we should stay withing the realm of geopolitical history. Categories like "mathematics" or "education" may choose to include their own "history" as a lower level, if it makes more sense there.

54vpfluke
Apr 12, 2009, 1:31am Top

Message 37 in this OSC thread: http://www.librarything.com/topic/58701 suggests history along with a bunch of others as a good subcategory that could be put under any number of top-level categories.

55jjwilson61
Apr 12, 2009, 1:54am Top

53> If you want to go that route, just include history as subcategories of geography and be done with the whole history category (he says tongue firmly in cheek).

I don't think that's a good idea. I want all my history in one place.

56kathrynnd
Edited: Apr 12, 2009, 2:54pm Top

Economic History and History of Economics are two separate topics, I've studied both in school, and while some books covering Economic History might be found among Economics books, most were found in the History section in the libraries I used.

When we did the initial first level testing I noticed the majority, when I checked, had Guns, Germs and Steel under History. Somehow Geography & Travel doesn't seem to be the right fit for Historical Geography.

BTW if History does not mean "anything that happened in the past (msg #1) what do we do with Social History?

Edited to fix italics. Really really sorry about that.

57imbibo
Edited: Apr 12, 2009, 12:54pm Top

> 54

I know, but I'm trying to operate within the parameters (however flawed anyone thinks they may be) stated in >1 laena:.

>55 jjwilson61:

I'm not sure about ALL my history in one place. Again, I was trying to stay within the parameters described in the first post, and I felt that staying close to what I might find in an academic setting could be safest. In a history program in a university, it's mostly geopolitical, but if one wanted to major/focus in furniture, it'd be obvious that I would find history of furniture there. Right now, I'm getting a great deal of history of librarianship in my MLS courses, and don't have to go to the history division of my school. Likewise, in a bookstore, if I wanted a history of furniture book, I'd look in furniture, not history. DDC has it in furniture and accessories, as well.

I was trying to combine intuition with what is already available (yes, I know we're trying to construct something newish, but I'd like to use the good parts of that figurative wheel to make a slicker, sturdier, faster wheel). How many of us would look in history first for a history of computers, rather than the computing section? And where would we go for British involvement in WW II?

On the flip, If we all decide that the history of everything belongs in history.... we have a long row to hoe. As the Mad Hatter says, "Start at the beginning... and when you come to the end, stop!" :)

Thoughts? Ideas?

58imbibo
Apr 12, 2009, 12:45pm Top

Sorry - can't unitalicise it...:(

59Suncat
Edited: Apr 12, 2009, 12:59pm Top

Let's see if I can ...

ETA: to see if it worked.

60imbibo
Apr 12, 2009, 12:57pm Top

61Suncat
Edited: Apr 12, 2009, 1:01pm Top

But it didn't work!

Stop it! Stop it! Stop it!

Checking ...

ETA: Finally! *relieved sigh*

62imbibo
Apr 12, 2009, 1:02pm Top

>61 Suncat:

Ha, thanks again. Much better.

63vpfluke
Edited: Apr 12, 2009, 11:12pm Top

Guns, Germs and Steel is tagged ten times more often as history than as geography (1,452 vs 149). The second most common category tag is anthropology (581). I think this book belongs under history. A subcategory of history under anthropology (or geography) would be more of a history of the field or discipline.

I haven't really seen a good statistical breakdown of the initial first level testing, so its hard to know what to say about that effort. I must have categorized 300 or so books in that effort.

When people put geography and history close to each other in a classification, it frequently a parallel category under social studies. I think the feeling of most LTers is that social studies is not truly a satisfactory category, as it seems to blur its contents. But Wikipedia' Portal effort, lists History as a category under Society and Social Sciences. The Social sciences (in the Wiki portal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overviews ) are: anthropology, archaeology, cognitive science, communication studies, critical theory, cultural studies, development studies, economics, education, geography, history, linguistics, law, political science, psychology, social policy, sociology. Society (a separate stratum in the SSS Portal ) includes ethnic groups, group, infrastructure, people (listed one way) and then goes on to redivide the category into: community, social development, social institutions, social network. Obviously the Wikipedia community hasn't fully figured out all of this yet.

64Munchkinguy
Edited: Apr 13, 2009, 1:41am Top

> 53, 56

It might be better to put other subjects as subcategories of history. For example, if 'H' and 'M' was the top level letter designators for History and Math respectively, then a book about the history of mathematics could be classified under HM 123.

Further to kathrynnd's point about Economics and History... the History of Philosophy is very different from the Philosophy of History. So, classifiy the first as HP and the second as PH.

65vpfluke
Apr 13, 2009, 10:57am Top

64

I think combining letters is a creative way of doing classifications.

However, the first letter tends to trump the second (e.g. LOC), so I would reverse your letters: philosophy's history is about philosophy first and I would want to categorize it as PH. History's philosophy is about how you do history in general, and I would catalogue it as HP.

66Munchkinguy
Edited: Apr 14, 2009, 11:37pm Top

That makes sense.

Another possible route would be to stick them all in the General Works section. For example:

M 000 - General works on mathematics
M 001 - History of mathematics
M 002 - etc...

67dlweeks
Apr 18, 2009, 2:10pm Top

imbibo,

Very early in the thread you said you were up for suggestions to replace "Pre-Columbian" in regards to

HISTORY / North America / Mexico / Pre-Columbian

My vote goes for "Pre-Colonial," which would allow for a "Colonial" breakdown as well. To me it would be great to avoid that kind of label, but this is how I've seen it generally discussed. It would also work for other Latin American countries/regions along with the Caribbean.

Columbus isn't really of enough import to justify using his name for an era. And I have a lot of LA history books, all classified as such. I'm new to OSC though, so maybe I'm missing something.

68vpfluke
Apr 18, 2009, 6:30pm Top

Maybe the term Pre-Columbian is more specific (i.e. before 1492) as some colonies weren't established in North America until the 1600's.

69dlweeks
Apr 19, 2009, 11:01am Top

Personal preference I guess. Students of Latin American history tend to dislike the term "pre-columbian" because of it's numerous connotations.

While true that some colonies weren't established until the 1600s in North America, the term colonial generally fits better than Columbian. Columbus stayed in the Caribbean exclusively. Colonies were established throughout all of North and South America.

Just a thought after all.

70imbibo
Edited: Apr 19, 2009, 12:46pm Top

>67 dlweeks:, 68

Hmm, interesting points, and well taken. I like the idea of possibly losing the "Columbu-centricity," ( :) ) but also like the idea that it might indicate specificity. Does anyone else want to weigh in? Anyone feel strongly either way?

dlweeks, how about that designation in the US categories?

71dlweeks
Apr 19, 2009, 4:17pm Top

Columbus works for a time frame, but why not just say pre- and post-1492?

Another one that came to mind after imbibo asked about US categories is the classification "Pre-European Contact." I really doubt that too many people would argue that Scandinavians and Basques, along with Russians and Chinese, had been in contact long enough to relegate this category as unrealistic. Sadly, thanks to our European forebears we don't have much in the way of written histories predating this time reference. So, most of the information that would fall before contact is relegated to anthropological studies. Which, if you were to break it down as such for North America you could use the different anthropological terms that denote certain time frames, as you have with Europe and Mexico.

Another hit against ole Cristobal was that he never really ventured to North America. So, the era pre-his arrival in this hemisphere doesn't seem relevant to US history as such.

72Munchkinguy
Edited: Apr 19, 2009, 10:06pm Top

In that case, pre-colonial and colonial makes sense. No use in interrupting the coverage of an era based on an arbitrary date.

73PaulDaly
Apr 19, 2009, 11:45pm Top

The date 1492 works as it's an obvious watershed year for both Europeans and natives in the America. Within the space of twenty five years, hundreds of thousands of natives would be wiped out because of this "first contact" and the successive waves of European exploration, so the date is neither arbitrary nor is it especially "euro-centric" as it is a clear demarcation for native peoples as well. So pre-Columbian and early colonial work. If you are concerned with the hiatus between the establishment of Spanish colonies in the early fifteen hundreds and the establishment of other European colonies in the sixteenth century you could insert a category using the term we used in history books back when I was a lad - "age of exploration".

74imbibo
Apr 19, 2009, 11:48pm Top

> 67-72

Oi. These are all great points. >71 dlweeks:, you bring up the anthropological perspective, which I tend to fall back upon when I'm unsure. Interdisciplinary approaches never hurt anyone.

Anyway...The term "pre-columbian" could and maybe should be nixed for Mexico, but I hesitate at the one for the U.S. How would one go about describing that period? How would you look for it on a shelf?

75dlweeks
Apr 20, 2009, 10:22pm Top

Can't help much with the US. I live here, but my knowledge of US history is vague compared to my understanding of Latin American and pre-historical America. I do understand that the colonization of North America was much more diverse when speaking in terms of European nationalities involved. Russians on the West Coast, Dutch and Brits on the East, Spanish in the Southwest, French in the Southeast and so on.

76Munchkinguy
Apr 20, 2009, 10:41pm Top

In Canada, we consider Contact as the arrival of John Cabot in 1497.

But still, I disagree that 1492 marks such a transition in indigenous populations in North America. Civilisations living in the harsh prairies, impenetrable boreal forest, and frozen arctic were largely unaffected.

For example, in Winnipeg, European exploration did not reach the area until 1738.

77imbibo
Edited: Apr 22, 2009, 9:20am Top

>75 dlweeks:

I changed "Pre-Columbian" to "Pre-Colonial" in the list 3.

>76 Munchkinguy:

I confess to having no real grasp of Canadian history. Could you suggest a term or terms?

78Munchkinguy
May 25, 2009, 9:42pm Top

I'm not sure how Library and Archives Canada does it, but native cultural areas are usually divided into 6 categories, as described at http://thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0005642

Native history is a big thing in Canada, and it often runs cocurrently with the history of Canada as a nation; the introduction of one does not stop the other.

About

This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.

You are using the new servers! | About | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 114,365,841 books! | Top bar: Always visible