Print

Print


The groupings, as far as I know, are longstanding (since at least the Renaissance) and pretty definitive. There are four main groups in Cicero’s “oeuvre”: letters (epistulae); speeches (orationes); philosophical works (philosophica); rhetorical works (rhetorica). See Brill’s New Pauly Dictionary of Greek and Latin authors and texts (2009), p. 160-190.

 

Bob

 

Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 9:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Classical works : Cicero

 

Are these groupings of Cicero's works definitively established by tradition, or are there cases where a work might be contained in both groups, or where its inclusion in a group would be disputed? The Bible's Old Testament and New Testament are less definitively defined as groups in RDA than they were under AACR2. Is something similar the case for these groupings of Cicero's works?

 

Stephen

 

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Robert Maxwell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Cicero’s works are traditionally so grouped. The NARs could be improved by clarifying which works are included in each group (listing them in a 677/678 and/or recording 500 “container of (work)” relationships), but in my opinion they are fine in RDA.

 

Bob

 

Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Monday, April 3, 2017 5:05 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Classical works : Cicero

 

I am/was working on AAPs for Cicero's works.  For some I had created a larger expression, Works. Sellections or Essays. Selections.

But now I see AACR2 AAPs:

Cicero. Philosophical works

Cicero. Rhetorical works

These have not been reviewed; dont see a 667 field.  Are these still valid in RDA?  Or they be more properly brought into line with RDA.

 

Comments?

 

Gene Fieg



 

--

Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist

Data Management & Access, University Libraries

University of Minnesota

160 Wilson Library

309 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455

Ph: 612-625-2328

Fx: 612-625-3428

ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242