ABSTRACT
This chapter interrogates the deep-seated archival impulse that drives the study of nineteenth-century periodicals; by contrast, offers readers a more practical reflection on the mapping processes that can enable and modulate that impulse. It offers advice on how to recognize and avoid possible pitfalls, cul-de-sacs, misleading sign-posts, and highways to nowhere. The chapter shows at the stage where maps need to be constructed less through bibliographic studies of digitally scanned material than through the analysis of physical texts. It examines few of the issues raised by this kind of bibliographic work, such as the problems of defining what a periodical is, the implications of using digitized collections, and the incompleteness of the archive. The chapter focuses on the very basic, but often challenging, methodological issues that arise when trying to identify and chart the lifespan of a periodical. It concentrates on three bibliographical elements – each periodical's title; volume and issue numbering; and frequency or publication pattern.
