On a first and superficial look it seems like the Heythrop Library uses the Library of Congress Classification (LCC), but this is not true. There are some classmarks which look like LCC, but are in fact an adaptation: the Lynn-Peterson scheme (first edition from 1937! See https://archive.org/details/lynn-alternative-classification-for-catholic-books-1937); the second edition (with supplement) of 1965 is used by us. The Library nowadays makes also one radical change from LCC to some classmarks which are otherwise, LCC.
Classmark areas which are more or less LCC are:
B to BP & BR & BS
B = Philosophy
BJ = Ethics (Philosophy)
BL = Religions (actually “Philosophy of Religion” and “Religious Studies”)
BM = Judaism
BP = Islam
BR = “Christianity”
BS = Bible Studies
For the above, librarians nowadays avoid using cutter numbers, unless they are part of the main classmark. One minor tweak to the LCC is that we only use [dot letter] if it is a sub-division of the main classmark; we do not normally use these cutter number for the author’s name or an element of the title.
An example might help to understand this. The following book
| Author | Longarino, Joseph, 1987- author. |
| Title | Pauline theology and the problem of death / Joseph Longarino. |
| Imprint | Tübingen : Mohr Siebeck, [2021] |
| Copyright date | ©2021 |
| Descript. | xv, 195 pages ; 24 cm. |
has the following LCC classmark:
BS2655.D34 .L66 2021
BS = biblical studies / Bible
2655 = New Testament : Epistles of Paul
.D34 = Death [Topic]
.L66 = “Lon”, the first 3 letters of the author’ surname
2021 = the year of publication.
Altogether: BS2655.D34 .L66 2021
So the minor tweak to the LCC is:
BS2655.D34 LON 2021
as we find the .L66 (surname/author element) less intuitive than “LON”.
Come back for the second and third part of us explaining our classification system!
CG
What are your thoughts about the above?