I have also looked at  Instead of looking at the Greek forms of the work, especially the abbreviations of those works, one should look at standard of lists of abbreviations of those works (Latin works, too).  I think you will find such lists in works on classical dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc. devoted to those works.  Many times the Greek works are abbreviated in Latin terms.  The idea of using nominative terms (changing the genitive terms to nominative), especially if you start the title with a preposition, such as "de," which is not an article in Latin.  I would stick with RDA, inspite of the "clarifications" made by LC.  

Gene Fieg

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Yang Wang <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Yes, I am aware of the RDA and LC/PCC instruction (NACO training module #6, slides 28-32). The key word here is “well-established.” Slide 28 gives us this list to base the preferred title (for a work created before 1501) on:


a) In the original language

b) By which the work is commonly identified

c) As found in modern reference resources


In the footnote of the same slide (March/2017), we find this explication: “Notice that reference sources take priority over embodiments of the work, although we still choose a title in the original language in most cases.  This reinforces the ‘commonly-identified’ criterion as being the overarching principle behind the instructions.”


Slide 29 is, however, is an exception to the above rule (with regard to Greek titles and anonymous works)—here we go “parochial” first and foremost, namely, use English titles whenever possible:


a) A well-established title in language preferred by cataloging agency (English for NACO)

b) The Latin title of the work

c) The Greek title of the work


In the footnote: “The LC-PCC PS to designates English as the preferred language. Neither RDA nor the LC-PCC PS attempts to quantify well-established. Take this as a matter of cataloger judgment. If there is more than one English title, choose the one that in your opinion is the commonly identified.


What I find perplexing is the abundance of Latin titles and just a couple of English titles currently in NAF for Galen. I fully understand that LC/PCC’s effort to defend the established headings like Homer. $t Iliad and Homer. $t Odyssey, but with Galen, who is hardly a household name to the general public, we are supposed to choose “commonly known” English titles for the preferred titles from now on? Really?! The full title of Galen’s shorter work Ad Glauconem de methodo medendi is not even in Oxford classical dictionary or in Britannica, and only mentioned in abbreviated form in Latin “Ad Glauconem” in Brill’s New Pauly (Dictionary of Greek and Latin authors)—which itself is a translation of the German Neue Pauly. What is exactly its “well-established title” in English language then? Based on what reference sources? Can the English title “Method of medicine for Glaucon” from the Loeb translation be taken as “well-established”? What happens to “reference sources take priority over embodiments of the work” and “‘commonly-identified’ criterion as being the overarching principle behind the instructions”?




From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]GOV] On Behalf Of Bushman, Barbara (NIH/NLM) [E]
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2018 1:20 PM

To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Auth rec for Galen's "On the therapeutic method"


I forwarded this conversation to our Senior Rare Book Cataloger in the our History of Medicine Division and while she has no objections to creating a separate authority record for the smaller work “… to Glaucon,” changing the 1XX from On the therapeutic method to the Latin title would contradict the instructions at LC-PPC PS, and create unnecessary BFM.   The policy statement says to choose the well-established title in the language preferred by the cataloging agency.  The statement continues to say, that if there is no well-established title in the language preferred by the cataloging agency, use the Latin title.    Since U.S. libraries prefer English, and there is a well-established title in English, then the 1XX should not be changed to the Latin title.





Barbara Bushman
Assistant Head

Cataloging and Metadata Management Section
National Library of Medicine
8600 Rockville Pike
Building 38, Room 1N08D
Bethesda, MD 20894
301-402-1211 (fax)
[log in to unmask]




From: Yang Wang [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2018 11:55 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Auth rec for Galen's "On the therapeutic method"


Before we do that, I’d like to throw in a few thoughts of mine.


1. At this point, would it be possible to revise the existing title “On the therapeutic method” to the more commonly known Latin title De methodo medendi or De methodo medendi libri xiv


2. Could or should the heading (AAP) for the shorter work be set up as Ad Glauconem de methodo medendi or Ad Glauconem de methodo medendi libri ii?


3. At variant access points, should we use nominative forms (or commonly known title phrases) for the title instead of truncated genitive forms?


                400 0   Galen. $t Θεραπευτικῆς μεθόδου βιβλία ιδ’

                400 0   Galen. $t Μεθόδος θεραπευτική


400 0   Galen. $t Γαλήνου τῶν πρὸς Γλαύκωνα θεραπευτικών βιβλία β’

400 0   Galen. $t Τῶν πρὸς Γλαύκωνα θεραπευτικών βιβλία β’

400 0   Galen. $t Πρὸς Γλαύκωνα θεραπευτικών

                400 0   Galen. $t Θεραπευτικά πρὸς Γλαύκωνα


4. In scholarly publications, especially in citations therein, works are cited most often in abbreviations, and it is not easy to recall or search for fuller titles (I am thinking of those pieces contained in Plutarch’s Moralia, e.g., De aud. poet. De audiendis poetis, De com. not. = De communibus notitiis contra Stoicos).  Would it be considered a good practice to add commonly known abbreviations of such titles as variant access points, if we cite their usages in a 670? 


                400 0   Galen. $t De meth. med.

                400 0   Galen. $t Ad Glauc. de meth. med.            


5. In Corpus Galenicum (Tübingen, 1990), G. Fichter gives us a compilation of 434 work titles, including those of spurious works. A lot of them are not in Kühn’s edition; some do not even have Greek titles, as they originated from Latin translations of Arabic texts, etc. I am thinking that perhaps we could make a shortened list of titles of G’s extant works based on CG, and add it to LC Classification Schedule (as I mentioned earlier in the thread)? A feasible project? In OCLC there appear to be a lot of Galen’s works/translations, but to sift through them and look for specific titles (in various languages) is very difficult, because often there are no AAPs or other types of title controls, or, lumped together in compilations. If a publication is Arabic, for example, and no Latin title is given in the bib, how can a library user search for any clue and find the proper connection?


Thanks for your time and attention!


Best regards,




From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]GOV] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 10:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Auth rec for Galen's "On the therapeutic method"


And now how or who will the auth. rec?


Gene Fieg

On Thursday, May 24, 2018, Robert Maxwell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Thesaurus linguae graecae also lists these as two different works:


De methodo medendi libri xiv ; edition: C.G. Kühn, Claudii Galeni opera omnia, vol. 10, Leipzig: Knobloch, 1825 (repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1965): 1-1021. Word Count: 157,545

Ad Glauconem de medendi methodo libri ii ; edition: C.G. Kühn, Claudii Galeni opera omnia, vol. 11, Leipzig: Knobloch, 1826 (repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1965): 1-146. Word Count: 22,888



Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Robert J. Rendall
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 9:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Auth rec for Galen's "On the therapeutic method"


These are different works, and the one addressed to Glaucon is shorter. De Methodo Medendi is in volume 10 below, and Ad Glauconem at the beginning of volume 11.


Robert Rendall

Principal Serials Cataloger

Original and Special Materials Cataloging, Columbia University Libraries

tel.: 212 851 2449  fax: 212 854 5167


On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:35 PM, Gene Fieg <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

So far as I have found that the work to Glaucon is Loeb no. 523.  It appears that they are two different works.  BUT, I cannot find it now, but somewhere in my searching, chapter 7 of Method of Medicine is the same or similar to the the Method sent to Glaucos.  So not only may it be a separate work, but a work, a part of a whole, which has its own title.  If you have LCL 523, take a look at it.


Gene Fieg

Ret. Cataloger


On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Ehlert, Mark K. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

A question for the classicists on the list.


Does the authority record for Galen. On the therapeutic method (n98078266) conflate two different works?


I have in front of me Galen’s Method of Medicine, volume 516 in the Loeb series.  On page ix of the introduction, the Latin title is given as Methodus medendi, which is found in one of the record’s 400 fields.  The introduction’s author later points out that Method of Medicine “is supplemented by the much shorter Method of Medicine for Glaucon,” a work also covered by the same authority record.  The Greek title for the work in hand is presented on page 1; I believe it would be transcribed as: Galenou Therapeutikes Methodou.





Mark K. Ehlert                 O'Shaughnessy-Frey Library
Cataloging and Metadata        University of St. Thomas

  Librarian                    2115 Summit Avenue

                               St. Paul, MN 55105


- Alma: NA02 // Primo: MT NA01


  "Experience is by industry achieved // And perfected by

the swift course of time"--Shakespeare, "Two Gentlemen of

Verona," Act I, Scene iii



[log in to unmask]" alt="Image removed by sender. University of St. Thomas : All for the Common Good">