Newspapers and Periodicals Compared to Books

      Evidence suggests that newspapers and periodicals were more than one hundredfold as numerous and important as books in every subject, from the most popular to the most esoteric. Peddie's English Catalogue of Books lists the following number of titles (in round figures):

1800-1835 25,000
1835-1862 64,000
1863-1871 28,000
1872-1880 60,000
1881-1889 75,000
1890-1897 60,000
1898-1900 22,000
Total: 334,000

      This is about 2.7 times the number of titles of periodicals and newspapers, which the editor of this reference work estimates at 125,000. Keeping in mind that the majority of these books were single-edition, and often with a much smaller print-run than the majority of newspapers and periodicals, it becomes evident that in statistical terms at least, newspapers and periodicals were more significant. Many of the newspapers ran daily or several times weekly for many years. So it is probable that nineteenth century newspapers alone far outnumber books. Other periodicals ran weekly, monthly or quarterly for years, even decades. Furthermore, the periodical press was perhaps more likely to glean multiple readers per issue. Is it possible that, less expensive and less daunting, the periodicals were read more thoroughly and passed on more freely? and in every field?

prev

next