That 667 field was added to any authority record with a subfield $c in the 100. It doesn't necessarily mean that the heading is not a valid RDA heading.


The examples in 9.4 are used as additions to the preferred name. See 9.19.1.2.1.  The heading for the princess is probably OK as it is.


------------------------------------------
John Hostage
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Harvard Law School Library
Cambridge, MA 02138
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI
0000 0000 4028 0917



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Jessica Janecki <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 14:26
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] NARs for princesses
 

I turn to the collective wisdom for help with a NAR for a Duchess of York, Frederica Charlotte of Prussia. I find the RDA rules for royals (see 9.4 and 9.2.2.14) to be extremely hard to parse. She’s a royal both by birth and by marriage (daughter of a king and wife of a king’s son). She also doesn’t have a last name in any real sense and the examples in 9.2.2.14 all involve people with last names. The examples at 9.4 only show the title and don’t show the whole preferred name.

 

There is currently a NAR in the NAF, but it has a 667 THIS 1XX FIELD CANNOT BE USED UNDER RDA UNTIL THIS RECORD HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND/OR UPDATED and I want to do the right thing and clean up the record while I am looking at it.

 

Current heading:

Frederica Charlotte Ulrica Catherina, ǂc Princess, Duchess of York, ǂd 1767-1820

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Frederica_Charlotte_of_Prussia

 

Thanks in advance,

Jessica