Reply To: collection management policy re: duplicates of "rare" books


Charlene – It sounds to me me like you’ve already gotten to the point  where you can look at each of the titles as indvidual cases. I’m not sure if it falls under your scope of “marginalia/historical value” but I would also look at the importance of the book to your institution’s scope. Are they like the ones Leslie mentions, in which they are important locally/ to your institution’s scope , and therefor would be used more often?

And although 1927-1943 doesn’t really fit the criteria for rare books in most collections, if a book is obscure and may only be of interest to certain population, it is more likely than not, that other institutions would be culling them (I’m not sure if this is the appropriate term here) from their shelves.

My personal opinion is that if you have the room, you should keep the extras, especially if the content matter is relevant. You may want to keep copies in both the “rare books” and your reference collection. (I am assuming here that “rare books” are going to be treated more like artifacts and less like regularly used reference books)