Featured Huge military book -British

Got this huge book unfortunately the binding ain’t the best but the pages are in great shape.

if anyone has any family in the army 1905 I can see if their name is in it.

 

An important piece of history.

 

In the states these rosters, particularly from the Civil War, are sought after by genealogists & historians. They're often pretty beat up, so the crude tape 'repair' to the spine isn't necessarily a killer. Can't say I know British collecting interests quite as well, though, and some of these things have been reprinted, which lowers the value.

 

Thanks 2manycats yes valuable information here for sure, historians and genealogists would definetly have a field day! It is in great shape with a good repair job on binding I’d say too!

 

I don't know if You already know this, but the reason why the 'spine' of a book is called this, is an interesting fact.

It goes back in history to the times when books were written upon Vellum/calfskin. Only the back of the animal was used (the leather to each side of the spine-bones) as these pieces could be treated & flattened for writing or painting upon. The marks/scars in the leather/vellum left by the animals spine would be hidden along the centre of the book, in much the same way as modern-day stitched & glued books are, and so the word 'spine' of a book still remains today due to the above book making process.

 

Those on eBay say reprints

 

I believe there are reasons to doubt this explanation for the term.

The use of "spine" in reference to the binding of a book first appears in the early 20th century. Prior to this the terms back, backbone, or shelf-back were used. Of course, these could also refer to the spine area of animal skin.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/parts-of-a-book-terms-and-meanings/spine

But it is more likely that the terms are based on a comparison of the structure of a bound book with human anatomy - the stiff element of support to which other parts are attached is the spine/backbone. Additional meaning is derived from the historical practice of shelving books with the back/spine facing the back of the shelves, with the fore-edge facing out. It was not until the mid 16th century that information such as the author and title were placed on the spine of a book, leading to the practice of the book being shelved with the spine facing out.
Petroski, Henry: The Book on the Bookshelf. Alfred A. Knopf, 1999.

The forerunner of the earliest codices (codexes), (manuscripts bound in a form that we would recognize as a book, as opposed to a scroll), was a device used by the Romans to record written information. These were wooden tablets with a recessed surfaced which held wax that could be written on with a stylus. Tablets were sometimes tied together along one edge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex

These had the basic elements of the structure of a book, but clearly not an association with animal skin parchment. Some of the earliest codices are made of papyrus, a plant material.

Parchment was a labor intensive and expensive material. A skin would be used in the most efficient way possible, and not limited to just the "back" portion. Surviving examples show that scribes sometimes used pages that show the irregular outline of the extremities of the original skin, and that flaws in the material could be accepted and worked around. The way pages were cut from the skin would depend on the size of the skin and the size of the desired pages. Sections were cut and then folded to form 2 or more "leaves". It seems unlikely that orienting the spine of the animal with the spine of the final book would be a significant priority.
https://library.osu.edu/site/rarebooks/2008/12/01/107/

 

@2manybooks I was watching a recent tv documentary, about historical Vellum manuscripts, and it was from this that the 'spine' explanation was mentioned. It kind of made good sense, but as to when the term was first used I cannot say. They showed a guy making Vellum from start to finish from calfskin. It was quite a process!

 

Yes -- yours clearly isn't. It looks different from the Hart's lists you can find archived online, for example at the National Library of Scotland: https://digital.nls.uk/british-military-lists/archive/101172420

Does yours also have pages of advertising for everything from soup to boot polish?

Bear in mind that the Army List only listed officers, not NCOs or other ranks. (So there won't be any of my forebears in there!)

 

Yes it’s different, mine doesn’t have any ads. I think it’s a complete list of all personnel in the army although I could be mistaken. If you have anyone in mind and an idea of what rank or service they provided I can check?

 

I found this merged checklist from the British Library on the various service lists they hold:

https://www.bl.uk/britishlibrary/~/media/subjects images/government publications/pdfs/service-list-army-navy.pdf

It appears to confirm that there should only be officers in your book.

I'll also add two UK National Archive links for the benefit of anyone who stumbles on this thread while looking for information about pre-WWI officers and soldiers:

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk...h/research-guides/british-army-officers-1913/

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk...arch-guides/british-army-soldiers-up-to-1913/