Terra Incognita asks:
>How about Irripi Ontor and Buserian?
>I think LM and these two have various classification system.
>What's the common and variable methods of each Cults?
There's a couple of differences between the three. Off the
top of my head:
- Busarian -- The "oldest" continuous tradition. Whatever the
classification system, it is old, universal, and fairly rigid -- the
Solars are not noted for their wild invention. I image that there are
two systems -- one for the oldest records (on clay or metal tablets)
that is simpler (deals only with prayers, rituals, tax records, etc)
and another for whatever system of writing the Dara Happans now use
(on some flexible media -- paper, parchment, papyrus, etc) that
should be more complex and able to deal with letters, reports,
poetry, etc. I picture the Busarians as archivists rather than
librarians -- they are concerned with collections of documents past
their first use that are stored and used as units (the rituals
enacted by Alexfergumander, Priest of Yelm, during his tenure, for
example). The concern should be with having, preserving, and
accessing knowledge, not necessarily knowing it. Order is all.
- Lhankor Mhy -- The focus is on knowing, whether through memory,
inspiration, study, or records. We know that there is no set
classification system. Sages arrange things as suits them. In large
libraries, smaller collections are erratically incorporated as the
sages die, Chief Priests reorganize when they can manage it, and
other sages swipe things, mess with the records, etc. While the
Busarians are essentially state functionaries, Mhyites are
independent scholars in a loose community (should there be enough of
them in the area) rather than librarians. They also always charge for
services, if I recall. It would not surprise me if Mhyites saw
writing and records as a sort of "external memory" -- sacred and
personal (so no imperative to make it accessible to other users).
- Irripi Ontor -- Somewhere between the other two. They are not as
rigid as the Bs, nor as erratic as the LMs. They are not necessarily
part of a state apparatus (although they can be), nor do they need to
charge for services. They have a balance between access and knowing.
They probably have a variety of classification systems depending on
whether they are librarians, archivists, or scholars and the
traditions of the institution they serve, if any. While I suppose
there is a mandated Imperial Classification System (perhaps LC or
"Lunar Classification"), I doubt it is really universal -- lots of
local collections, especially those of Dara Happan institutions have
been clumsily incorporated with mixed results.
A few further points -- none of these systems will have
anything like a card catalog. At best, the various "volumes" will be
recorded on shelf lists, which are more inventories than finding
aids. Indexing and cross-referencing seems pretty much unlikely. You
find about specific title through friends and mentions in other
sources; bibliographies are limited to the minds of the scholars (and
Thanitari heads, I suppose, for the unsqueamish). Jane Average
Gloranthan, even if literate (making her not average), will need to
go to a B, LM, or OI to find anything. Besides, no one is going to
let a non-initiate browse in the stacks -- you ask for something by
topic, author, or title, and you take what the cultist gives you.
Peter Larsen