Pictures in Print
Data creation rules
The data fields used are derived from UK MARC, to ensure data portability and enable records to be imported into other library catalogue systems if required. The significant fields used are listed in the data profile. The content for the fields is created according to AACR2, using the additional rules for cartographic materials - Stibbe, Hugo, et. al., Cartographic materials: a manual of interpretation for AACR2, prepared by the Anglo-American Cataloguing Committee for Cartographic Materials (Chicago, 1982) - and graphical materials - Betz, E.W., Graphic materials: rules for describing original items and historical collections (Library of Congress, 1982) - for maps and topographical prints respectively.
Authority controlled indexing
Four categories of index terms were used: people, corporate bodies, places and subjects.
Construction of person index terms was done according to AACR2, following the UK MARC field structure and punctuation (this 100/600/700 field is one of the major cases of difference between UK and US MARC, and will require some amendment if the structure is to conform to MARC21 in the future). The subfields provided were $a, $c, $d, $e, $f, $h, $l and the first indicator, of which only $l (indicating that it was a family rather than an individual name) was not required. For more information on how this worked, and other non MARC fields provided, see the database section on authority control.
Although provison was made to enter persons as the subjects of maps or prints (i.e. MARC 600), in fact personal name index terms were only used for creator (MARC 100) and other contributor (MARC 700) fields. Very few prints proved to contain recognisable individuals, and where they did they were often named in the title or dedication of the piece. In no case was the person the prime subject of the print (or it would have been classified as a portrait) and the infrequency with which individuals appeared led to the suppression of indexing people as subjects. Perhaps in other situations, this would need to be reviewed before making it a matter of policy.
Construction of corporate index terms was done according to AACR2, with the additional $x, $y and $z fields available for indexing a corporation as a subject (MARC 610). The primary subfields used were $a, $c and $e, and the first indicator. The majority of corporate bodies indexed related to the production of the items (MARC 110 and 710) - lithographers, engravers and publishers, but especially in the 19th century corporate bodies also appear as subjects (MARC 610). Industrial bodies, such as railways and port authorities issue maps of their infrastructures, and patterns such as religious observance are represented in map form. Generally individual locations such as appear in prints of factories or collieries were not given corporate index terms for the current name of the body running the operation, but were rather just subject indexed according to the nature of the industry. Where more time or information is available, it might be worth considering adding company names, but this would require significant additional research and often a more accurate date for the image.
Construction of place index terms was done according to AACR2 with the additional $v, $x, $y and $z fields available for indexing a place as a subject (MARC 651). There were two points of divergence from standard practice, which related to the problem of distinguishing for ordinary users between the county and city of Durham. These were recorded respectively as "Durham (England : County)" and "Durham City". The $x (subject) subdivision was not required, and there were some standard models for the $v usage. In general, this was either "Pictorial works" or "Maps", but for larger areas only (such as counties), two possible map formats were given "Maps, General" or "Maps, Smaller areas". The date ($y) subfield was always supplied, although often only as an approximation. In the case of larger places with a series of possible views, the $z place subdivision was used, although this only proved necessary with Durham City. Places were only authority controlled when used to index the content of items.
Construction of subject index terms was done according to LCSH, although where necessary the spelling was anglicised (e.g. it seemed confusing to index "Harbours" as "Harbors". Subdivisions $v, $x, $y and $z were used, although neither $y (date) nor $z (place) proved necessary. $v (format) was useful occasionally, in the cases were it is possible to have both "Maps" and "Pictorial works", such as "Rivers" or "Towns". The $x (subject) subdivision was not used very frequently, but allows for making finer distinctions if either the main LCSH entry is not specific enough, or a large number of items have similar subjects and some further differentiation is required.
Back to table of contents
Page maintained by Richard Higgins
(e mail - email@example.com). Last revised: May 2004