Perhaps of interest...

Happy Holidays!
Linde M. Brocato

-----Original Message-----
From: Danley, Mark H CIV USA USMA [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 07:48
To: Linde M Brocato (lmbrcato) <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: RE: Prefer England to Great Britain? or United Kingdom?

Yes, Great Britain is a component of the United Kingdom.   Having United Kingdom be a UF for Great Britain in the authority file is just one of those cataloging conventions that someone(s) made up long ago for convenience -- probably back them *with* the acknowledgement that it wasn't accurate and historically correct but they were going to tolerate that because of some advantage in terms of file management etc.  Somebody with a deeper historical knowledge of the LCNAF and LC Subject Cataloging might be able to correct me on that if I'm wrong or clarify if needed.

I think Adam is on perfectly reasonable ground preferring to record both Great Britain and the constituent country.  I cannot see how it would hurt and it is technically and logically correct.

"England" vs. "Great Britain" will always offer challenges to catalogers, but in my experience it's usually in other areas of cataloging than a 370 field -- given the logic of how they're wanting us to do those 370 fields in authority records I think either is OK.

Now, one area where there IS always a challenge is when somebody needs to know whether to use England or Great Britain as a jurisdiction, especially when they have an English/British corporate body they need to set up as a $b following the 110 $a.  For a lot of the early modern stuff you need to  use England and Wales because of the post-1536 union -- but they have that nicely explained in the NARs, and also with nice 667's letting you know the whole thing above about subject usage.  I would have cited something other than Wikipedia -- I mean good grief, it's not like there's a dearth of authoritative scholarly reference sources on English/British history out there, but ok.

Lots of times I think people assign "Great Britain. Army" to works about the English army before the Act of Union in 1707.  Again, this is technically incorrect but it *seems* by cataloging "convention" that we're OK with doing that.    Perhaps that's for the best.  There's literary warrant for tolerating such a technical inaccuracy.  For instance, lots of British historians (including me) talk about Marlborough's victories at Blenheim and Ramillies as being part of the history of the "British army" but, well, being in 1704 and 1706 respectively they took place before there was a Great Britain.    It might be worth a note in the LC SHM documenting that we assign 610 Great Britain. $b Army for works about subjects after some certain date.  This makes me want to go back and look at whether we are rightfully assigning 610 England and Wales $b Army to works about Charles II's army, William III's doing in the Nine Years' War, etc.

Anyway, there's a lot there but it's an important question for anyone interested in English and British history.

Oh yeah, and I'm not sure where the cataloging implications of this manifest themselves, but one area where the different between "England" and "Great Britain" makes a difference is in established religion.  The Queen is the head of the *Church of England* and they mean *ENGLAND* -- Wales has not had an established church since the early twentieth century; Scotland has a different established religion (Presbyterianism).    

Yeah, feel free to share this with any and all whom you wish.

Happy Cataloging!

Mark


_________________
Mark H. Danley, Ph.D.

Librarian, Information Resources
United States Military Academy Library

Jefferson Hall
758 Cullum Road
West Point, NY 10996-1709

845-938-8268

[the above is the result of my own professional judgement and not the official position of the U.S. government]



-----Original Message-----
From: Linde M Brocato (lmbrcato) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 12:35 AM
To: Danley, Mark H CIV USA USMA <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Fw: Prefer England to Great Britain? or United Kingdom?

Thought this relevant... I'll relay your cooments if you'd like...

Talk soon!

L

________________________________

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Adam L. Schiff <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 5:44:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Prefer England to Great Britain? or United Kingdom? 
 

I am in the habit of recording BOTH the constituent country AND Great Britain in two $c's.

 

Adam Schiff

Principal Cataloger

University of Washington Libraries

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ann Heinrichs
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 1:27 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Prefer England to Great Britain? or United Kingdom?

 

Hello, colleagues - 

I have an author who was born in London, so I assume his 370 $c is England. *Or not?* Under what circumstances would someone's 370 $c or $f ever be "Great Britain" instead of "England"? Only if he/she were a monarch?

BTW, United Kingdom is listed as a UF under Great Britain. Aren't I right in saying that is factually incorrect? Isn't Great Britain a subset of the United Kingdom, whose full name is "the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"? Interestingly,Wikipedia calls the UK a "country" and GB the largest island in the UK.

But mostly I want to know about England/GB/UK in the 370.

Thanks in advance for your wisdom.


-- 

Ann Heinrichs

Metadata/Cataloging Librarian

The Paul Bechtold Library

Catholic Theological Union

5401 S. Cornell Ave.

Chicago, IL 60615
http://www.ctu.edu/library

[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>