On Copying and transmission of knowledge
“By the second half of the nineteenth century, though American piracy of the Encyclopaedia Britannica continued, many publishers of encyclopedias felt legally or morally obliged to purchase the rights to sources that they intended to use.” —Jeff Loveland, 2012 (from ‘Why Encyclopedia’s Got Bigger…and Smaller. ’Information & Culture: A Journal of History, 47, 2, pp. 233-254)
I spent a few days in January in the British Library. While there, I looked at section of the Imperial Dictionary, the People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge, Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, and Chambers’s Encyclopaedia, edition 1 (the inital version that came out in parts) and edition 2. I had read that People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge was basically copying Chambers’s and I was curious to see what that was about. I happened to have Noah Webster’s dictionary out as well because I was doing a separate comparison of images in general. I was just looking to see if there were any patterns about what was chosen to be illustrated.
And then I discovered something. People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge did copy Chambers’s content in an abridged fashion (usually the first 3 paragraphs practically verbatim, then shortened the last few sentences if the article ran longer than that, after all, it was a 3 volume work, while Chambers’s was a 10 volume work). Not only that, the images from the People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge seemed to be coming from Webster’s Dictionary.
The two antelope pictures above should give you an indication of how nearly identical the images are.
I don’t know if Chambers’s editors were aware of this, if the People’s Cyclopedia paid them for the content, but when I get into the archives in the next few months, that seems something worth specifically looking for, because this has implications on the reception of the work.
Below are some of the notes that I took on the images in these different reference works. I didn’t get any scans myself of what was in the British Library, as at the moment I would get charged for each one. (In April, the reading room I use will be allowing readers to use their own cameras), but there is a version of Webster’s online as well as some flickr photos showing the People's Cyclopedia of Universal copying…. I mean ‘Knowledge’ at:
Sample of my notes on these entries from "B":
Baboon - image of baboon in People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge is identical to the image in Webster’s dictionary (although image seems to have been inked heavier). The text in this entry is also identical to Chambers’s first edition. Baboon is illustrated in Imperial, too. (Baboon from Webster's and People's Cyclopeadia is shown to the right... I'm not sure why anyone would want to copy that image, but it's there.)
Banyan - image of banyan tree in People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge is identical to the image in Webster’s dictionary (although image seems to have been inked heavier). The text in this entry is also identical to Chambers’s first edition.
Banner - is an illustrated image and an entry in Webster’s and People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge. Only entry in Imperial and Chambers’s.
Bark (small vessel) illustrated in Webster and People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge (US). An illustrated image of Barge in Imperial and Chambers’s (UK)
Basilisk - Imperial doesn’t have an illustrated image. Image in People's Cyclopedia of Universal Knowledge is identical to the image in Webster’s dictionary (although image seems to have been inked heavier). All images show a “hooded Basilisk.” The text in this entry is also identical to Chambers’s first edition.
