I do the same here at St Hilda's - creating seperate records for each item that was originally issued seperately. I add two local notes for items that are bound together with other items, following DCRM(B) 7B19.3.4 and 7B18 for the formulation of the second note. For example: Item 1 of 6 bound together Bound with: Lighfoot, John. Elias redivivus. London : Printed by R. Cotes, for Andrew Crooke, 1643 -- Lightfoot, John. An handfull of gleanings out of the book of Exodus. London : Printed by R. Cotes, for Andrew Crooke, 1643 -- Lightfoot, John. A sermon preached before the honorable House of Commons. London : Printed by R.C. for Andrew Crook, 1645 -- Lightfoot, John. The harmony of the foure evangelists. London : Printed by R. Cotes for Andrew Crooke, 1644 -- Lightfoot, John. A commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles. London : Printed by R.C. for Andrew Crooke, 1645 I use the related records function in our LMS Heritage to link the records together. Erika On 15/04/2015 15:56, Dunia Garcia-Ontiveros wrote: > > Here at the London Library we use Aleph and catalogue each pamphlet > separately and then link them together. That way you can provide a > much more detailed and relevant description, without creating a long a > confusing record. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* CIG E-Forum <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Jane > Gallagher <[log in to unmask]> > *Sent:* 15 April 2015 15:19 > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance > > Hello all, > > I’m another latecomer, I’m afraid, though I have been lurking all day > and enjoying the conversations. > > I’m more at the ‘user’ end of the spectrum in my current role at the > University of Kent’s Special Collections, but I have been involved in > cataloguing in the past. > > I’m interested in the use of single record for multiple items bound > together and how people generally cope with recording specific copy > information for these. So far, it sounds like it can be difficult, but > you are mostly recording all item specific information into one record. > > A significant part of our collection deals with plays, produced as > separate pamphlets but later bound together, creating a mixture of > provenance information for pamphlet and bound volume. In the past, > we’ve experimented with creating multiple bib or holdings records > linked to single items etc. (using the 3 tiered Voyager hierarchy, as > Karen mentioned below), but the in-house suggestion now is that we > keep all of the information in a single bib, holding and item record. > > From the user’s point of view, however, it can be a challenge to > understand why an item is returned in the catalogue when it appears to > have nothing of interest in the main (title) fields. > > Apologies for a rather wide ranging question, but I wonder if anyone > had any thoughts on this? > > Best wishes, > > Jane > > *Jane Gallagher*| Senior Special Collections Assistant > > Special Collections & Archives, Information Services, University of Kent > > Templeman Library > > Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NU, UK > > Tel: +44 (0)1227 823127 > > www.kent.ac.uk/library/specialcollections/index | > blogs.kent.ac.uk/specialcollections | @UoKSpecialColls > > *From:*CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of > *Karen Pierce > *Sent:* 15 April 2015 14:53 > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance > > Hello, > > I tend to put ‘copy 1’ or ‘copy 2’ etc in the field where I am > recording unique detail, I then note in the item record which copy it > is (this is using Voyager which has a 3 fold hierarchy – bib record, > holding record, and item record) > > As I am not on the receiving end of users coming to request items I > don’t know how well this works – but I would always assume that the > staff member in Special Collections would look up the record to check. > > Karen > > *From:*CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of > *Katie Flanagan > *Sent:* 15 April 2015 14:37 > *To:* [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > *Subject:* Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance > > Hi Rhiannon, > > Where I’ve had multiple copies of the same item, I’ve generally > started each field where I want to record something unique with the > shelfmark of the item in square brackets, to make it clear which item > I’m referring to. > > So: > > 561 [D4.5.10]Armorial bookplate of Fred Bloggs inside front board. > > 561 [H2.2.4]Pencil inscription on title-page: “Katie’s book”. > > It seems to be easier to use a shelfmark (which the user would also > use to request the book), than an item ID, which is a string of > numbers and, I fear, more chance of introducing a typo? > > *Katie Flanagan *BA(Hons), MA, MCLIP > > Special Collections Librarian > > T+44 (0)1895 266139 > > *From:*Rhiannon Lawrence-Francis > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > *Sent:* 15 April 2015 14:27 > *To:* Katie Flanagan; [log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > *Subject:* [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance > > Hello again everyone > > I have also been puzzling over about how best to deal with the knotty > problem of how to represent copy-specific information in multiple > copies of the same edition. > > To me, the most important thing to give readers information about what > makes the item “unique” – in the sense of it being in a hand-crafted > binding, perhaps with some pages missing, and some inserted, and > bearing annotations, inscriptions, bookplates and so on. > > To a non-rare books cataloguer the important thing seems to identify > the edition, and then the number of copies the library holds. > > How do colleagues resolve this? Would you ever create multiple > bibliographic records, i.e. one for each copy of the item? Or would > you record copy-specific information in one bibliographic record and > give details of each copy within that one record? > > There are specific MARC codes for recording copy-specific information > – 561 for provenance, 562 for details such as decorations, annotations > and imperfections, and 563 for bindings. This works if you only have > one copy of a certain item, but if you have two more, your MARC record > would become very unwieldy and in many cases ambiguous, which I would > want to avoid at all costs. > > At Leeds we use Sierra for creating book records, but are able then to > pull these records through to EMu, the library management system used > for Special Collections materials. EMu can cope with having several > different records for several different copies of the same edition, > and we can link them together, import images, create narratives and so on. > > When describing the incunabula here, I took the slightly unorthodox > decision of creating a new bibliographic record for each copy of the > book. This meant I could record in great detail provenance, > decoration, annotations, bindings and so on. It was one solution to > the problem for the pore-1500 books, but whether it can be applied > more widely across the collections I doubt very much. > > I hope my questions / comments makes sense. > > Rhiannon > > *From:*CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of > *Katie Flanagan > *Sent:* 15 April 2015 14:00 > *To:* [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > *Subject:* [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance > > Good afternoon, and welcome to the second session of the ‘rare books > cataloguing’ e-forum. > > This afternoon we’ll be focussing on standards and provenance, but > please do continue threads from this morning’s session if you would > like to. > > Provenance is one of the areas where rare books cataloguing differs > hugely from other cataloguing. And, whilst normal cataloguing > standards are obviously also applicable to rare books, there are other > standards to use on top of this. > > I’ve come up with some questions to start things off or please do ask > your own on these themes. > > -What is provenance and why would you record it? > > -How should you record it? > > -Have you encountered any problems with recording it in catalogue > records, perhaps using a particular library system? > > -Can you recommend any books and/or training material about provenance > and how to record it ? > > -What standards do you use when cataloguing rare books? How do they > differ from other standards? > > -Has anyone used RDA when cataloguing rare books? > > -What do you do about subject headings? > > Katie > > Please note: I work Mon – Wed each week. > > *Katie Flanagan *BA(Hons), MA, MCLIP > > Special Collections Librarian > > T+44 (0)1895 266139 > > Connect with me on *LinkedIn* > <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/katie-flanagan/1b/471/bba>*, **Twitter* > <https://twitter.com/KatieDFlanagan>** > > ** > > *Brunel University London* > > Library > > Bannerman Centre, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, United > Kingdom > > T+44 (0)1895 266141 > > *www.brunel.ac.uk* <http://www.brunel.ac.uk>*/library* > > ** > > Connect with the Library on *Twitter* > <https://twitter.com/Brunel_Library>*, **Facebook* > <https://www.facebook.com/#%21/BrunelUniversityLibrary>*, **WordPress* > <http://bookmarkdaily.wordpress.com/>** > -- Erika Delbecque BA MA MCLIP Assistant Librarian St Hilda's College Library Cowley Place Oxford OX4 1DY (01865) 276 849