Definition
Quod vide (commonly abbreviated q.v., or in the plural quae vide, qq.v.) is a Latin bibliographic instruction meaning "which see." It directs the reader to consult another entry, passage, section, or cited work for additional or related information. The phrase functions purely as a cross-reference signal — it carries no substantive legal meaning of its own but serves as navigational shorthand within legal texts, treatises, digests, and dictionaries.
When a writer uses q.v. after a term or citation, they are indicating that the referenced source or entry will supply further elaboration, definition, or authority bearing on the point under discussion. It is the functional equivalent of "see also" or "refer to," compressed into two Latin words.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): "Which see; used after a cross-referenced term or name to direct the reader to further information elsewhere in the work."
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Not independently defined as a standalone entry; treated as standard Latin bibliographic abbreviation familiar to educated readers.
Editorial note: In ordinary scholarly and reference usage, quod vide is a neutral pointer with no meaning beyond direction. In legal texts, the same is true — but researchers should be alert that in older legal dictionaries and digests, q.v. cross-references may direct them to terms or maxims that no longer appear in modern editions, or to sources that have been revised, superseded, or reattributed. The signal is the same; what waits at the other end of the reference requires independent verification.
---
Common Confusion
Quod vide is occasionally confused with the related Latin phrase vide, which means simply "see" and functions identically as a bare cross-reference directive. The distinction is minimal: vide is the direct imperative ("see this"), while quod vide means "which see," implying the preceding term or passage is the antecedent being pointed to. Both appear frequently in the same sources and are interchangeable for practical research purposes. Neither should be confused with the substantive legal maxim quod voluit non dixit ("what he intended he did not say"), an entirely separate Latin phrase that occasionally appears in proximity within older dictionary entries — including in both editions of Black's — due to alphabetical sequencing rather than conceptual relationship.
---
Why It Matters in Research
For researchers working in the Law Mind corpus, quod vide matters less as a legal concept and more as a navigational artifact embedded in historical sources. Several practical points:
First, q.v. references in older treatises and digests are only as reliable as the editions in which they appear. A cross-reference in an 1890 legal dictionary may point to an entry that was renamed, consolidated, or dropped in later editions. When following a q.v. signal in a historical source, confirm that the target entry still exists in the form expected.
Second, the abbreviation q.v. appears throughout multi-volume digests, encyclopedias, and annotated codes from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Researchers scanning these sources for substantive content may inadvertently read past cross-references or, conversely, may mistake a navigational cue for a term of art. Neither quod vide nor its abbreviation signals any substantive legal rule.
Third, in the context of legal maxims collections — a significant category within the historical legal corpus — quod vide often appears at the end of a maxim entry directing the reader to a related maxim or to a treatise discussion. These chains of cross-reference can be productively followed to map the full doctrinal context of a maxim, but they require patience with the organizational conventions of the specific source.
Fourth, the plural form quae vide (qq.v.) appears when more than one preceding term is being cross-referenced simultaneously. Researchers encountering qq.v. should understand that all the immediately preceding terms in the list are being directed to separate entries, not that a single combined entry exists for them.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Both the first and second editions of Black's Law Dictionary define quod vide consistently and briefly: "Which see. A direction to the reader to look to another part of the book, or to another book, there named, for further information." The two editions are in complete agreement and neither adds doctrinal content, because none exists to add.
Notably, both editions place quod vide in immediate alphabetical proximity to quod voluit non dixit, a substantive maxim bearing on statutory and testamentary interpretation. The physical adjacency of a pure bibliographic phrase and a meaningful interpretive maxim within the same dictionary column is itself a reminder that Latin legal vocabulary spans a wide range — from the procedural and clerical to the deeply substantive — and that alphabetical organization in historical sources does not signal conceptual kinship.
No historical dictionary consulted treats quod vide as anything other than a bibliographic convention. There is no recorded legal dispute over its meaning, no jurisdictional variation in its use, and no evolution in its definition across time. It means what it has always meant: look elsewhere.
---