NationStates Jolt Archive

I was in my school library the other day, when a question came into my head. Where do libraries put the Bible?

After a bit of tracking, I found some in the sme place as dictionaries: reference.

This felt...not right. Reference didn't seem the right place. Nor did fiction, as it would offend some. Non-fiction is completely wrong.

So where can we put this, and other religious books?

we had a religious secton in our school library

So where can we put this, and other religious books?

On a finely engraved pedastal in the middle of the library.



On a more serious note...don't most libraries have a 'religious literature' section?

Okay, who said "non-fiction"?

section for religious text makes sense

I was in my school library the other day, when a question came into my head. Where do libraries put the Bible?

After a bit of tracking, I found some in the sme place as dictionaries: reference.

This felt...not right. Reference didn't seem the right place. Nor did fiction, as it would offend some. Non-fiction is completely wrong.

So where can we put this, and other religious books?

Why isn't reference the right place? I don't believe in the Quran, but I think I would put it there too, if I had only these 5 choices.

On a finely engraved pedastal in the middle of the library.

I'm with you, so long as we can enclose it in a plexiglass case, or have it bronzed. Anything that keeps random people from opening it and releasing its harmful effects will do.

Try the mythology section

On a finely engraved pedastal in the middle of the library.



On a more serious note...don't most libraries have a 'religious literature' section?
I thought so … along with the pure forms they also throw the “understanding your bible “ or other third party religious study texts

We had a theology section … everything from Norse gods to Buddhism

The bin. All the way.

New section for religious texts. Would make it a damn sight easier, I want to have a look at the Qu'ran some day…

The bin. All the way.

I love you Melkor.

Why isn't reference the right place? I don't believe in the Quran, but I think I would put it there too, if I had only these 5 choices.

Considering the content of reference books: dictionaries, theasauri, atlases et cetera, to put it there would suggest it's all true, which it isn't (if you ask me or Melkor).

Here's an even more interesting experiment. Go into your average US bookstore and walk into the religion section. All you will see are Bibles and Christian religious commentary.

Looking for a Qu'ran? Oh, that's in the alternative religion section! How about Jewish commentary? Same thing!

Does this make sense? Since when is one of the largest religions in the world "alternative religion"?

Free choice? The fire place.

But from the listed. A religious text section.

Of course, there are plenty of religious texts that are really myths taken to a religious context by the believers of that religion, where do you put those?


Maybe the mythology section would be better.

Sci-Fi :D

Since I don't believe in censorship, I picked "Fiction".

Sci-Fi :D

Where's the science?

I am going to echo many of the other posters here, most librarys already have a seperate religion section. Although the one I visit most often has a seperate new age section that houses somebooks that belong in religion (the only thing they keep in religion is books on Christianity, Judeism, and Islam, with maybe a book or two on Budisim).

I meant to say a new place for religious books, but I aly slipped and said non-fiction. :mad:

Fiction.

It's properly listed in section 220 under the Dewy Decimal system.

It's properly listed in section 220 under the Dewy Decimal system.

Which is...?

The bin. All the way.

If "the bin" means the garbage, I'm with ya. :)

If "the bin" means the garbage, I'm with ya. :)

It does, in most cultures.

The bin.

Non-fiction: while yu might not believe every part of the bible it is a historical text of the people of the Old Testament.

Granted the new Testament has less history, but still has some.

Koran would be in poetry section because it is a book of poetry kind of (with a religious bent)

Which is...?

The Dewy Decimal system is a way of putting all books into 10 main sections. Religion is 200-299 I think, that's generally used for books about religion rather than books of religion. Personally I think it'd be easier to put the Bible, Koran etc. in this section but they often get put in reference. Don't know why.

Where's the science?

The same place as the science in those Startrek/Star Wars novels . . .

Non-fiction:<snip> it is a historical text of the people of the Old Testament.

Including the giants which roamed the land, The Flood, Eden et cetera?

Non-fiction: while yu might not believe every part of the bible it is a historical text of the people of the Old Testament.


Nah, the OT has way to many divine interventions to be historical. In fact, it's nothing but one huge divine intervention with some humans along the lines. You could just as well put any Greek or Norse mythology in there then (like the Illias or Odyssea), because they to have got some historical facts (building ect) in them.

Best to put it in a Religious section, I think. But never in non-fiction

Reference along with the other "opposing viewpoints" type books. After all, it is an opinion. :)

Hrmmm ....

Fiction: No. Can't do that. Too many people believe it to be the immutable divine Word and, well, the US library system is in enough trouble from conservative whack-jobs who are pissed that libraries carry Darwin. Put it in fiction and some innocent librarians will lose their lives when some fundies decide it's time to shoot some of them.

Non-Fiction: No. Can't do that. Non-Fiction should only be reserved for those documents which contain proven historical fact and/or scientific data. Works should only be allowed in this section if they're peer reviewed and proven. The Bible, while it has some nice stuff in it, has too much in it unproven and untested.

Special Religious Section: No. Can't do that. Too many religions hold their text to be holy and to place it on the same level as another religion's holy text would be offensive. Again ... think of the librarians. Any more than you want some Christian nut walking in with guns blazing, you don't want some Muslim nut walking in with a bomb in his BVDs.

The bin: No. Can't do that. Like it or lump it, the Bible has had major impact on world history and Western culture. To get rid of it all together would be a crime against all of humanity by denying it the chance to see the work for themselves.

Hey! I've got an idea! How about: Leave the Bible where it belongs ... at home and in the church! Oh ... and I suppose let them stay in motel rooms. The Gideons were awful nice to do that.

Keruvalia, you make a valid point which I had over-looked.

What the fuck are bible's doing in our schools to begin with???? They don't belong in public schools. PERIOD!

What the fuck are bible's doing in our schools to begin with????

Gathering dust.

Nobody checks them out.

the Bible and other Religious texts should be in Theology or Religious studies. I can see them in Reference but that's stretching the Definition of Reference.

if the Library doesn't have a Religious or Theology section, then Philosopy should work.

and Non-Fiction is a broad term. so the Bible can fit there... as will any and all other Non-Fiction work.

I was in my school library the other day, when a question came into my head. Where do libraries put the Bible?

After a bit of tracking, I found some in the sme place as dictionaries: reference.

This felt...not right. Reference didn't seem the right place. Nor did fiction, as it would offend some. Non-fiction is completely wrong.

So where can we put this, and other religious books?

I don't know about school libraries, but book stores like Borders already have a religious section. School libraries should have the same.

I was tempted to say 'bin' but it's got some good points in (I'd take out my favorite bits, and put the rest in the bin.)

Based on the Dewey Decimal System, the 200's. That's the religion section(I think)

(I volunteer at the library, and I have to help with inventory. We did that section last week)

School libraries should have the same.

Uh, I don't think so. Public schools should have NO religious material period.

Uh, I don't think so. Public schools should have NO religious material period.

Why not? I once had an assignment about religion. Several actually.

The big one was a report.

The teacher was a little upset when I chose Greek Mythology. Multiple People Chose Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and one person even chose Atheism(technically not a religion, but the teacher allowed it because it was a philosphy/belief/theology-type thing).

Uh, I don't think so. Public schools should have NO religious material period.

Oh, they need to have some, otherwise how can we do R.E?

As long as all regilious text is in the same spot, I don't care. And as long as its not in a bin.

This would treat all religions equally, saying they are all together, all on the same line of importance. If we put some in fiction, some in non-fic, some in religious, it would be favoring one religio over another. That also means we can't put the Koran in Non-fiction and the Bible in Fiction (as I have seen before)

BTW useless fact, but in America, the book most often stolen from the book store is the Bible...

BTW useless fact, but in America, the book most often stolen from the book store is the Bible...

Whatever happened to "thou shalt not steal"?

one person even chose Atheism(technically not a religion, but the teacher allowed it because it was a philosphy/belief/theology-type thing).
Except, of course, that it isn't any of those things. It is not a philosophy, and is the very antithesis of a belief or theology. It's like saying water is a type of fire.

Except, of course, that it isn't any of those things. It is not a philosophy, and is the very antithesis of a belief or theology. It's like saying water is a type of fire.

Well then it's an alternative to belief.

I don't know if any librarians posted on this so far, I'll check in a minute, but I can tell you from the library's point of view:

Most libraries would put the bible in non-fiction, in the section with theological works. Because that's basically what it is, a theological book. It would be there together with the Qu'raan, maybe the Bhagvad Gita, and many other works describing religions, faiths and gods.
That fact that many events in the bible may not be 100% correct is nothing to the library. You can't expect librarians to put only books into non-fiction they know to be true... that would end up making that section rather small.

Many libraries would go the additional step of putting the bible up for reference, as well. The thought behinde that is that people who study general topics might come across statements or quotes they need to verify in the bible. A library who puts the bible in the reference section would expect a large number of readers to use it that way, maybe in order to study or write on theological topics.

That's what that library thought when it put the bible in the reference section...

Here's an even more interesting experiment. Go into your average US bookstore and walk into the religion section. All you will see are Bibles and Christian religious commentary.

Looking for a Qu'ran? Oh, that's in the alternative religion section! How about Jewish commentary? Same thing!

Does this make sense? Since when is one of the largest religions in the world "alternative religion"?

Hmmm. I guess all the bookstores I've visited were not average, because I've never seen a bookstore divide the religious stuff into one Religion section and another Alternative Religion section.

I don't know if any librarians posted on this so far, I'll check in a minute, but I can tell you from the library's point of view:

Most libraries would put the bible in non-fiction, in the section with theological works. Because that's basically what it is, a theological book. It would be there together with the Qu'raan, maybe the Bhagvad Gita, and many other works describing religions, faiths and gods.
That fact that many events in the bible may not be 100% correct is nothing to the library. You can't expect librarians to put only books into non-fiction they know to be true... that would end up making that section rather small.

Many libraries would go the additional step of putting the bible up for reference, as well. The thought behinde that is that people who study general topics might come across statements or quotes they need to verify in the bible. A library who puts the bible in the reference section would expect a large number of readers to use it that way, maybe in order to study or write on theological topics.

That's what that library thought when it put the bible in the reference section...

I'll check with the librarian tomorrow, to see why.

I'll check with the librarian tomorrow, to see why.

Sweety, I AM librarian ;)
European, but still a librarian

Hmmm. I guess all the bookstores I've visited were not average, because I've never seen a bookstore divide the religious stuff into one Religion section and another Alternative Religion section.
What the store near me does is they have an entire section for Christianity and Bible Study. I don't there is any Jewish stuff or Muslim stuff.

Sweety, I AM librarian ;)
European, but still a librarian

The last sentence suggests that I am not from Europe.

I am.

Britain, to be exact.

And many great libraries were European, just look at Ancient Greece.

The last sentence suggests that I am not from Europe.

I am.

Britain, to be exact.

And many great libraries were European, just look at Ancient Greece.

:D I know about the libraries, and many more in fact.
I just assumed you might be American, I apologise and didn't mean to offend you.
Many in this threadd quoted American bookshops and the DDC (Dewey's Decimal Classification), which by the way in hardly ever used in libraries in Europe as it is of course focused on the USA and would be to complicated to adapt.

What the store near me does is they have an entire section for Christianity and Bible Study. I don't there is any Jewish stuff or Muslim stuff.

That's understandable. There may not be enough market for other religious or religion-related books that deal with other religions to make buying them profitable for the bookstore. In some towns in the US, everybody is Christian (of some sect) and that's all the bookstore will need to offer.

What makes less sense to me is dividing the religious stuff into two sections, one for Christianity and one for everything else. I wonder if there's some marketing research that says why it's effective to do that.

:D I know about the libraries, and many more in fact.
I just assumed you might be American, I apologise and didn't mean to offend you.
Many in this threadd quoted American bookshops and the DDC (Dewey's Decimal Classification), which by the way in hardly ever used in libraries in Europe as it is of course focused on the USA and would be to complicated to adapt.

It's okay, no need to apologise.

We have a little chart explaining the DDC and it is used in our library because the summer holiday is very long and boring.

What makes less sense to me is dividing the religious stuff into two sections, one for Christianity and one for everything else. I wonder if there's some marketing research that says why it's effective to do that.

It may not even be a concept, it can be just "the way we always did it"
I would imagine that a bookshop that has been in business for a few decades started out with putting theological books about Christianity in one section and all other theological works in another, because the customers back then would regard Christian theology different form other religious works, being themselves predominantly Christian and/or from a Christian background.
And that system simply never got changed.

I remember when I started at my library, Nordic mythology was actually placed with the fairy tale and folk tales section... and trust me, it took aome convincing of older staff to have that changed.

I'd stick it in non-fiction, where it usually goes, with Moore, Coulter, and Shakespeare.

I imagine a religious section would be best, though you'd be legally compelled to put things like witchcraft in with it, and people would whine about that.


Reference is fine, so long as all the religious texts are put there.

I once found the Neon Genesis Evangelion manga in a "religious texts" section of a store.

It may not even be a concept, it can be just "the way we always did it"
I would imagine that a bookshop that has been in business for a few decades started out with putting theological books about Christianity in one section and all other theological works in another, because the customers back then would regard Christian theology different form other religious works, being themselves predominantly Christian and/or from a Christian background.
And that system simply never got changed.

I remember when I started at my library, Nordic mythology was actually placed with the fairy tale and folk tales section... and trust me, it took aome convincing of older staff to have that changed.

That's an excellent point, and a possible reason for layout of the bookstores mentioned by Dempublicents.

I once found the Neon Genesis Evangelion manga in a "religious texts" section of a store.

Well, it is heavily based on Christian mytholgys regarding Angels.

butt sex with dogs :mad:

butt sex with dogs :mad:

Oh, ta much for demeaning the whole thread.

Explain yourself.

Oh, ta much for demeaning the whole thread.

Explain yourself.
I was arrested for five accounts of rape on a watermelon

I was arrested for five accounts of rape on a watermelon

And what does this have to do with where we should put the Bible in a library?

And what does this have to do with where we should put the Bible in a library?
Do I have to spell it out for you? If I can rape a watermelon and have butt sex with dogs then the dictionary should be burned altogether

Well, it is heavily based on Christian mytholgys regarding Angels.

But I didn't know theologians took Eva seriously.

But I didn't know theologians took Eva seriously.

I'm just saying I can see it beeing shelved there for the same reasons as Narnia or Left Behind. It's also posible that it was horibly mishelved.

Do I have to spell it out for you? If I can rape a watermelon and have butt sex with dogs then the dictionary should be burned altogether

That makes...no sense whatsoever.

You are a strange individual.

That makes...no sense whatsoever.

You are a strange individual.


He a troll, stop feeding him.

He a troll, stop feeding him.

Aw, but it's fun to feed the trolls, and this one's funny.

Besides, a troll is supposed to make a large group of people angry. I'm not angry, just amused.

Aw, but it's fun to feed the trolls, and this one's funny.

Besides, a troll is supposed to make a large group of people angry. I'm not angry, just amused.

Maybe he'd be funnier if my blood sugar wasn't low. I should go home and eat something.

Maybe he'd be funnier if my blood sugar wasn't low. I should go home and eat something.

You sound like someone who just played Counter-Strike for 10 hours.

Eat, eat.

I used to be an asst librarian and I find nothing wrong with it's current place. Yes, it's in non-fiction, but so is all mythology. The non-fiction area has a section for religious text and mythology from all religions past and present.

Aw, but it's fun to feed the trolls, and this one's funny.

Besides, a troll is supposed to make a large group of people angry. I'm not angry, just amused.
I'm glad I'm funny, that's my goal :D

THE BIN PWNZ j000!!!

I would say the bin!!! WOOO HOOOOO!!

In the library by my house it goes in the non-fiction section near the other religious texts.

I once found the Neon Genesis Evangelion manga in a "religious texts" section of a store.
so are you saying we shouldn't worship neon genesis? BLASPHEMY!!! all manga and anime must be worshipped!!!
now on a serious note, as long as all religious texts are kept in the same place, then it should be ok. though i would nearly burn it if i saw the new testament while looking for a commentary on the torah, i do admit that they should be kept in the same place

The Bible lies on that fine line between fiction and not. We can't prove it did happen, and we can't prove it didn't. Therefore, to avoid a PR disaster and by using common logic, we can't put it in either the Fiction or Non-Fiction sections. However, Reference is also a bad place for it, as reference books (like the dictionary) are used as sources of pure, undebatable knowledge. Seeing our current issue in this country is exactly whether or not the Bible is undebatable (Commandments in the court houses, affects in congress, etc.), it does require its own section.

Hrmmm ....

Fiction: No. Can't do that. Too many people believe it to be the immutable divine Word and, well, the US library system is in enough trouble from conservative whack-jobs who are pissed that libraries carry Darwin. Put it in fiction and some innocent librarians will lose their lives when some fundies decide it's time to shoot some of them.

Non-Fiction: No. Can't do that. Non-Fiction should only be reserved for those documents which contain proven historical fact and/or scientific data. Works should only be allowed in this section if they're peer reviewed and proven. The Bible, while it has some nice stuff in it, has too much in it unproven and untested.

Special Religious Section: No. Can't do that. Too many religions hold their text to be holy and to place it on the same level as another religion's holy text would be offensive. Again ... think of the librarians. Any more than you want some Christian nut walking in with guns blazing, you don't want some Muslim nut walking in with a bomb in his BVDs.

The bin: No. Can't do that. Like it or lump it, the Bible has had major impact on world history and Western culture. To get rid of it all together would be a crime against all of humanity by denying it the chance to see the work for themselves.

Hey! I've got an idea! How about: Leave the Bible where it belongs ... at home and in the church! Oh ... and I suppose let them stay in motel rooms. The Gideons were awful nice to do that.


I agree with you completely. You get a cookie.

THE BIN PWNZ j000!!!

I would say the bin!!! WOOO HOOOOO!!
Why?

:headbang: When I first entered the string I voted for a seperate section on religious works. Of course I'm no library connoisseur, thus quite inept at handling such an issue. Later on I realized non-Fiction is actually the place it's intended to go since it's not the actual facts in the book that need to be proven, but the general intention of the writing that should be taken into account, and religious texts are meant to be believed, even if proof is not forthcoming. Otherwise why (or even how) would anyone be expected to even bother reading it, if it's supposed to be fictitious, hypothetical and plain untrue to begin with. Even implying such a thing would be negating the sole purpose of the writings.

:confused: As for reference I agree to that as well (i.e. having religious works as reference in more than one places in the library), since people making a study of theological subjects would need to look up certain passages. Having more than one religion's writings is also OK, just as long as the other writings are useful (and needed) as a reference, meaning the section needn't be representative, after all if nonone is asking for a certain text (as far as reference is concerned) why put it out there? Reference isn't meant to express the whole of human knowledge, just to help along and clarify.

:eek: The bin is plain wrong! It's not the religious texts that cause people to act stupid and out of line, its bad training and education and a general lack of humanitarian education and acceptance of the general principles that it teaches. If the people who made said proposition should be angry at someone it should at those that missinterpret those texts, those who allow ignorance to spread, and themselves for not beeing more accepting of peoples personal "flackiness" and beeing more patient with them.

:mad: A special religious section would only make matters worse, since seperating (if not segregating) religion from general fact and knowledge would imply religious writings had special meaning and value, but which ones? Each person would feel offended at finding "heretic" and "pagan" texts alongside his/her symbol of faith in the "Faith" section.

:cool: Of course all of the above are stated with a multi-racial (for lack of a better term) society in mind. The same dynamics exist in uni-racial societies, they are just not that easy to perceive.

P.S.: Sorry, I just couldn't resist the smilies... :p

Pesonal note: I'm a Greek resident, Greek national and "officially" a member of the Greek Orthdox Church. Personally I do not ascribe to any dogma or faith, but care to follow my own beliefs.

I was in my school library the other day, when a question came into my head. Where do libraries put the Bible?

After a bit of tracking, I found some in the sme place as dictionaries: reference.

This felt...not right. Reference didn't seem the right place. Nor did fiction, as it would offend some. Non-fiction is completely wrong.

So where can we put this, and other religious books?

Check the Dewey Decimal SYstem. It has a few places it could fit.

Me, I'd put it in the 398s. Folklore.

Actually, it has it's own spot: 220. :)

The library in my town places them in or around the 220's in non-fiction. It's actually quite extensive, with both religious texts and books about religion ranging from Christianty and Islam to Witchcraft and Taoism.

I like 'em where they are. :)

It is the only book of TRUTH and therefore the only one needed for reference. Make sure you have 2 or 3 at home as well. It needs to be refered to on a daily basis. GOD bless!

It is the only book of TRUTH and therefore the only one needed for reference. Make sure you have 2 or 3 at home as well. It needs to be refered to on a daily basis. GOD bless!

How do I cook pasta properly then? Oh look, Revelations 10:15 tells me perfectly. Well that's alright.

Who was Prime Minister of GB in 1906? Wait, I know, Romans 16:4.

Yeah, sure.

Bonfire?

Bonfire?

NO WAY!

No book that was ever written, no matter how bad, incomprehensible or trashy it may be, should EVER be burned.
I can't make that illegal, of course, and I wouldn't if I could. I just wished people had more respect for the written word...

"No war in the history of mankind ever changed the world as much as the invention of the alphabet did" - Unknown

And many great libraries were European, just look at Ancient Greece.

If you are referring to the Greek library at Alexandria, that was around Egypt IIRC, not in Europe

If you are referring to the Greek library at Alexandria, that was around Egypt IIRC, not in Europe

Deli used to have a world-famous library in Antique times, I think he might have been referring to that one.

Please don't ask me where I want you to stick your fuckin bible....

I'm not, after all, TRYING to get forumbanned.....





That lame-assed and obvious response being said, books are some of the greatest treasures we have. They represent our past, our thoughts, our future, and ALL of them - even some crappy romance fucking piece of tripe - deserve to be treated with the ulitmate respect. They represent a record of people's ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and knowledge, and as such are all historical treasures to be cherished.

I don't believe in the bible, but I would treat one in my possession with the same reverence as I would an archeological site.

NO WAY!

No book that was ever written, no matter how bad, incomprehensible or trashy it may be, should EVER be burned.
I can't make that illegal, of course, and I wouldn't if I could. I just wished people had more respect for the written word...

"No war in the history of mankind ever changed the world as much as the invention of the alphabet did" - Unknown
meh, I couldn't care less about people burning books, as long as they paid for them theirselves and they aren't burning my books :D

meh, I couldn't care less about people burning books, as long as they paid for them theirselves and they aren't burning my books :D

You're talking to a bibliophile librarian here... books are important, whether you own them or not. ;)

You're talking to a bibliophile librarian here... books are important, whether you own them or not. ;)
well ok, I could make an exception for library books, 'cause I can read those as well, but really, is it such a big deal when some twat buys a cheap paperback Harry Potter(for example) and burns it?

well ok, I could make an exception for library books, 'cause I can read those as well, but really, is it such a big deal when some twat buys a cheap paperback Harry Potter(for example) and burns it?

In a way, it is.
Sure, a book is just an item, a thing.
But books in general represent the collected knowledge of mankind, of centuries and centuries of thinking, researching, studying, exploring.
Every book has s story to tell, every book is capable of teaching, every book is a world of thought of another human being. It can contain experience, new revelations, cross references, a new way of thinking, a revolution in opinion. It can entertain you, inform you, help you, excite you, soothe you, make you curious, bore you, appal you, scare you, amuse you, make you laugh or cry, teach you, instruct you, stimulate your imagination, inspire you, offend you, captivate you and anger you. You never know which until you read it. Erich Kaestner once said "Being able to read is like having a second pair of eyes"

Do you remember those flag-burning threads? It feels a bit like that, only books are much more than a flag. Books CONTAIN all the ideas behind all the flags in the world.

It doesn't really matter what book gets burned, it will always make me feel uneasy. It can be a political action or a moral outcry; I normally don't have problems with people burning books because they don't agree with the contents (in most cases, that just shows their own small-mindedness), but every book is in a way a representative for all books, for all writen knowledge. And that aspect makes me cringe whenever I hear about people burning books.

It also stirs some very uncomfortable memories about the autdafes of the past... The burning of books in Grenada after the reconquista drove the Moors out of the country, the pyres in Berlin when the Nazis burned books by authors they didn't agree with....

And finally, burning a book is an act of censorship. By burning a book you declare that in your opinion, nobody should read this.

Deli used to have a world-famous library in Antique times, I think he might have been referring to that one.

If you mean Delos, maybe. If you mean Delphi, I rather doubt an Oracle would put much stock in a library. Ancient Greeks were quite the religious zealots and probably wouldn't heve let slandering philosophers invoke the gods' wrath on them. :gundge:

take for example Hitler's "Mein Kampf" much of what is said in it's pages is clearly incorrect and offensive but it is nonetheless an important part of history. Just because some find it less than tasteful does not mean it should be thrown away.

The same goes with religious texts, while clearly not a philisophy to live your life by they offer a facinating insight into the culture of the times in which they were written, so don't discard them, put them with first source history books.

First source being an account or other writing by someone who witnessed or was around at the time of the events in question, usually subjective in nature

as opposed to

second source which is an objective account usually written a good time after the events by someone who wasn't there at the time but has read many first source works from many different people with differing oppinions and view points.