This is an interesting question, one that we have wrestled with. I tell our NACO contributors that the principles are the same, so the first choice would be to base the name on usage in published sources by the person/issued by the body. If that isn't feasible, the archival collection is a reference source, and we may use other reference sources as needed. Among the archival materials, I'd look for something that seems "official", like the name of a photographer or company that has been stamped on the back of a photograph, or a signature that appears to be formal or added with some kind of deliberateness. It's a judgment call.
Because it seems useful to show what was in front of us that caused us to create the authority record, I like to cite the archival collection (the work cataloged) in the first 670, saying [name not given] in subfield b if that's the case. But not everyone here agrees with me, and it has been said recently that this is 675 information--a good point, especially as we think about machine manipulation of all this data.
On recording the information found, DCM Z1 (670) gives a little bit of guidance, and says the main thing is to be clear and accurate.
Here are some citations we have made from archival collections. Not submitted as "best practice"-- we're just inventing!
670 Aldo Tambellini collection, 1960-1971 [motion picture], 1960-1971: |b credits for the film Sights and sounds of youth (Aldo Tambellini, director)
--the bracketed info is 245 |h
670 Haskell photograph collection of early American architecture [graphic], 1834-1950: |b finding aid (photographs taken by Arthur C. Haskell)
670 Stereographs, stereo cards, cabinet cards and cartes-de-visite collection [at Princeton University], ca. 1860-1920: |b stereograph recto (J.W. and J.S. Moulton, Salem, Mass.)
I come from a library/book/serial/NACO environment, which is shaping the comments above. Archivists may think differently about authority work--what it is for, how it is to be done, and at what level of detail. You may know about the new standard SAA is launching, EAC--CPF (Encoded Archival Context--Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families). Hopefully the various approaches can eventually live happily together in a linked data environment.
Hope this provides some grist for the mill.
Mary Jane Cuneo
Harvard College Library Technical Services
Harvard University Library
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Fairclough
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 7:16 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: NARs and archival collections
Dear PCCLIST readers,
When creating name authority records for individuals and bodies represented in archival collections, do the principles differ from those for published materials? Of specific concern is recording data found.
Please discuss this question! Thanks - Ian
Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - [log in to unmask]