Good afternoon. I have a few questions regarding the authority record for the “Amsterdam edition” of Erasmus’ works:


010  n  86716878  ǂz n  85331727

040  DLC ǂb eng ǂe rda ǂc DLC ǂd DLC ǂd UPB ǂd MoSU ǂd UPB

046  ǂk 1969 ǂ2 edtf

050 0PA8500 1969

1001 Erasmus, Desiderius, ǂd -1536. ǂt Works. ǂf 1969

377  lat

381  Series (Publications) ǂ2 lcsh

381  Multipart monograph

4001 Erasmus, Desiderius, ǂd -1536. ǂt Works. ǂl Latin ǂf 1969

4001 Erasmus, Desiderius, ǂd -1536. ǂt Works. ǂl Latin ǂs (Amsterdam edition)

4001 Erasmus, Desiderius, ǂd -1536. ǂt Works. ǂl Latin ǂs (Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen)

4001 Erasmus, Desiderius, ǂd -1536. ǂt Opera omnia Desiderii Erasmi Roterodami recognita et adnotatione critica instructa notisque illustrata

4001 ǂw nnea ǂa Erasmus, Desiderius, ǂd d. 1536. ǂt Works. ǂf 1969

642  ordinis 2. t. 4 ǂ5 DLC

643  Amsterdam ǂa New York ǂb North-Holland

644  f ǂ5 UPB

644  n ǂ5 DLC

645  t ǂ5 UPB

646  c ǂ5 DLC

670  Erasmus, Desiderius. Adagiorum Chilias secunda, 1988: ǂb series title page.

670  Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, Victoria University in the University of Toronto, via WWW, 17 November 2016 ǂb (Opera omnia Desiderii Erasmi Roterodami is the third edition of Erasmus's complete works, and the first critical edition; also known as "the Amsterdam edition" and cited as ASD. The organization follows Erasmus's own organization into 9 "ordines". ASD will not include a new edition of Erasmus' correspondence (Ordo 3), there being no need to replace P.S. Allen's excellent critical edition: Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami (Oxford: 1906-58))

670  Erasmus, Desiderius. Works. 1969. Ordo 4, tomus 7, 2017: ǂb title page (Opera omnia Desiderii Erasmi Roterodami) title page verso (sous le patronage de l'Union académique internationale et de l'Académie royale néerlandaise des sciences et des sciences humaines)

670  Erasmus Center for Early Modern Studies website, viewed December 7, 2016 ǂb (The Erasmus Collection is an indispensable resource for the edition of Erasmus's Opera Omnia which is being published by the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW)) ǂu


  1. Shouldn’t the publication year in the 050 field be recorded in a subfield $b?
  2. I typically see series format information in the 380 field. For this record, the fields were changed to 381. Is this a new practice?


Thanks in advance,

Morris Levy



[log in to unmask]" alt="The Ohio State University">
Morris S. Levy, MS(LIS), MA
Head of Bibliographic Initiatives
Assistant Professor
The Ohio State University Libraries
120G Library Technical Center, 1165 Kinnear Road, Columbus OH 43212

614-688-3210 Office

[log in to unmask]