Basically, we have the use of one term here to cover two different things: books that are canonical in the Catholic canon and the same term for those that are excluded from the Jewish, Protestant, and Catholic canons.
Another term used for the latter is: Pseudepigrapha. On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Robert Rendall <rr2...@columbia.edu> wrote: > ** > The instruction in 6.23.2.6 that says, "For compilations of apocryphal > books, apply the instructions at 6.2.2.9.2" is clearly a mistake, since, as > Charles says, these apocryphal books are not considered to be parts of the > Bible or any other larger work. A simple correction of this to "apply the > instructions at 6.27.1.4" was included in a larger revision proposal > prepared by the American Theological Library Association and presented at > ALA's Midwinter Meeting in January 2012 (see page 4): > > http://www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/jca/ccda/docs/atla2011-1.pdf > > ATLA was asked to revise the larger proposal and work on that is not yet > complete, but the proposal itself says this particular correction could be > handled as a fast-track change; this discussion here may serve as a helpful > reminder of that. > > Robert Rendall > > > On 3/28/2013 3:40 PM, Charles Croissant wrote: > > Ione, > > coincidentally, I have been struggling with the exact same question, and I > followed the same path that you have followed. I would also be grateful to > hear what others are doing. > > My personal take on the situation: > > As I read it, RDA allows 3 "collective" subdivisions of the Bible: > Bible. Old Testament > Bible. Apocrypha (limited to the list given in 6.23.2.9.4) > Bible. New Testament > > Since the other apocryphal books are considered extra-canonical, I think > the RDA viewpoint is that it is not appropriate to provide some other > collective subdivision for them following the title Bible. > > That basically leaves us with no option for providing a collective title > access point for a compilation of extra-canonical apocryphal books. > > RDA's approach, I think, would be to treat the title on your resource as > the preferred title for the compilation (in MARC terms, just a 245 with no > 130), then provide added access points for the individual apocryphal books > contained in the compilation. This is the approach I am following at the > moment, until something better comes along or the instructions are modified. > > I don't think the LC-PCC PS for 6.2.2.9.2 was written with the needs of > theological librarians in mind, and I think that in this special case there > is justification for disregarding the PS. Instead, we could follow RDA's > original instruction in 6.2.2.9.2 and "record the preferred title for each > of the parts" -- as an added access point, i.e. 730. > > Of course, if it's a big compilation containing a long list of books, this > may not be an attractive option. > > We still have the subject heading Apocryphal books (New Testament) as an > access point that would pull various compilations together, though the > formulation of this heading may be open to question if we follow the logic > above about extra-canonical books. > > There may be a need here to propose a change to the instructions. I'd be > interested in hearing from others who have lots of Bible-related headings > to deal with. > > Charles Croissant > Senior Catalog Librarian > Pius XII Memorial Library > Saint Louis University > St. Louis, MO 63108 > On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Ione Damasco <idamas...@udayton.edu>wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> I have a question about how to properly formulate a particular Bible >> heading, that I don't think will be covered by the Phase 2 changes. I have >> a record for an older book, and it has the following main entry, which is >> now no longer valid under RDA: >> >> 130 0 _ Bible. $p N.T. $p Apocryphal books. $l Italian >> >> There is also a 650 0 0 Apocryphal books (New Testament) $x Criticism, >> interpretation, etc. >> >> This is what I have found in RDA (I apologize for the profusion of >> cutting and pasting): >> >> *RDA 6.23.2.9.4 Apocrypha* >> *Record Apocrypha as a subdivision of the preferred title for the Bible >> for the compilation known as the Apocrypha (1–2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, >> Rest of Esther, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, History of >> Susanna, Song of the Three Children, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of >> Manasses, 1–2 Maccabees).* >> >> The work is not dealing with these books; therefore, this instruction >> does not apply, but it tells me to look at the following instruction: >> *For apocryphal books, see >> 6.23.2.6<http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6&target=rda6-5421#rda6-5421> >> .* >> >> RDA 6.23.2.6 says: >> *An apocryphal book is one that is not included in the Catholic canon >> nor in the Protestant Apocrypha. Choose as the preferred title for an >> apocryphal book the title commonly found in sources in a language preferred >> by the agency creating the data.* >> * * >> * * >> * * >> *EXAMPLE* >> *Book of Jubilees* >> *Epistola Apostolorum* >> *Gospel according to the Hebrews* >> * * >> * * >> * * >> *For compilations of apocryphal books, apply the instructions at >> 6.2.2.9.2<http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6&target=rda6-2556#rda6-2556> >> .* >> 6.2.2.9.2 Two or More Parts >> <http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp6&target=lcps6-315#lcps6-315> >> Alternative >> <http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp6&target=lcps6-323#lcps6-323> >> When identifying two or more unnumbered or non-consecutively numbered >> parts of a work, identify the parts collectively. Record the conventional >> collective title Selections as the preferred title for the parts. Apply >> this instruction instead of or in addition to recording the preferred title >> for each of the parts. >> >> >> >> EXAMPLE >> Selections >> Preferred title for the parts of the work in a compilation comprising >> books 1 and 6 of Homer’s Iliad >> Selections >> Preferred title for the parts of the work in a compilation comprising >> four episodes of the television program The Simpsons originally >> broadcast between 1990 and 2001 >> >> But I am confused by the instructions at this point--and my library >> follows the LC-PCC PS for instructions, which in this case tells me to: >> >> LC-PCC PS for >> 6.2.2.9.2<http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6&target=rda6-2596#rda6-2596> >> ALTERNATIVE >> LC practice for Alternative: Instead of recording the preferred title >> for each of the parts, record the conventional collective title Selections >> as the preferred title for the parts. If one or more parts is especially >> important, also record the part title(s). >> >> So what would be the appropriate heading for the 130 in this case? In >> the authority file there are plenty of headings for individual New >> Testament apocryphal books, but none for the books as a group. And the >> individual books are established by the individual book name, and are not >> established as parts of the Bible. For example, the following heading: >> >> 130 _0 Abgar letters >> >> has the following 4xxs: >> 430 0 Bible. ǂp Apocryphal books. ǂp Abgar letters >> 430 0 Bible. ǂp N.T. ǂp Apocryphal books. ǂp Abgar letters ǂw nnaa >> >> I am totally lost at this point. Any and all help is greatly >> appreciated! >> >> >> Regards, >> Ione Damasco >> >> -- >> Ione T. Damasco >> Cataloger Librarian >> Associate Professor >> Roesch Library >> University of Dayton >> 300 College Park >> Dayton, OH 45469-1360 >> (937) 229-4238 >> idamas...@udayton.edu >> > > > > > > > -- > Robert Rendall > Principal Serials Cataloger > Original and Special Materials Cataloging, Columbia University Libraries > 102 Butler Library, 535 West 114th Street, New York, NY 10027 > tel.: 212 851 2449 fax: 212 854 5167 > > -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edu Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content contained in this forwarded email. The forwarded email is that of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University. It has been forwarded as a courtesy for information only.
