That 667 field was added to any NAR with a 100 $c, that wasn’t on a list of valid RDA qualifiers that a Task Group I participated in could agree in fairly short order.  An awful lot of perfectly good RDA qualifiers weren’t on that list – if anyone had the slightest doubt about a qualifier, or thought the facts might need looking at again, it was left off. Some qualifiers just need punctuation changing. Much of this was due to be done in the now mythical Phase 3B LC/NAF RDA conversion. I agree the current example is probably fine.


Richard Moore
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library

Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546104
E-mail: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hostage, John
Sent: 22 January 2018 20:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] NARs for princesses

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  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
[log in to unmask]<../../owa/redir.aspx?C=fff0248a4daa423caadeb2f835259a11&>
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917

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

Thanks in advance,


Experience the British Library online at<>
The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts :<>
Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book.<>
The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
Think before you print