This article was downloaded by: [University of Chicago Library]On: 07 October 2014, At: 20:04Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Library & Archival SecurityPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wlas20

Manuscript Collections, Archives, andSpecial CollectionsRichard C. Berner aa Head, Archives and Manuscript Division, University of WashingtonLibraries, Seattle, WA, 98105Published online: 23 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Richard C. Berner (1984) Manuscript Collections, Archives, and SpecialCollections, Library & Archival Security, 5:4, 9-17

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J114v05n04_02

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

Manuscript Collections, Archives, and special Collections:

Their Relationships Richard C. Berrier

ABSTRACT. Manuscript collections and institutional archivcs often began as miscellaneous, non-conforming collections of library ~naterials. These collections, along with other non-conforming ma- terials and rare books were often joined together under :I spccial col- lections administration. Typically, the adnlinislrative head wns a rare books persons who brought that point of view to the overall ad- ministration, but particularly to nil nu script collcclions. This "ri~r- hies" approach to manuscripts is obsoletc in tlcaling with modern ~nanuscript collcctions, yet it rcrnains a controlling factor. Scale and technical considerations require autonomy for truly modern manu- script collections. And where there are institutional archives and manuscript collections, they should be joined under a common atl- ministration, and a single point of access should be provided to a11 sucl~ holdings.

Special collections units were fortned for administrative conven- ience in libraries to take care of miscellaneous nonconforniing l i - braryjmaterials such as photographic collections, incnni~bula, and historical and literary manuscripts; "archive's" of thc institutional variety are a more recent addition to thc list. Traditionally these ma- terials have been adtninistcred by existing techniques and practices of librarianship because rnorc suitable practices had either not been dcvcloped.to handle them, or practices were underdeveloped, or suitable practices that had been developed were consitlcrcd irrele- vant.

Many of these "odds and ends" have become sizable collections. This is particularly true of nlanuscript and institutional archival rec-

Richard C. Bcrncr is Head of Archivcs ilnd M a ~ ~ i t s ~ r i p t s Division. U~livcrsily of Wnsl~ingtot~ Iihrarics. Scnlllc. WA 98105.

Library & Archival Scc~~rily. Vol. 5(4), Wiulcr I Y R 3 8 1984 by Tl~c Haworth Press, Inc. All riglw rcscrvcd. 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

10 LIBRARY & ARCHIVAL SECURI7Y

ords. The scale of such collections demands thut they be treatcd on their own terms, both intellectually and administratively; othcrwisc they cannot both be treated adequately and integrated fully with all other relevant materials. A look at the historical development of special document collections shows why this is so.1

Let us turn first to historical manuscripts. Normally such ma- terials were opportunistically acquired in the first place, and were not the conscious product of a cohercnt collection development policy. Private collectors typically sold or donated their collections to libraries or historical societies, and these collections in turn served as a nucleus-potential or real-for future institutional collecting.

In the library or historical society these collections accumulated more often as backlogs than as actively used collections. In the i~b- sence of coherent collection tlcvclopment policies thesc collections remained embryonic because their inherent documentary linkages with extant collected and uncollected matcrials were not being red- ized-I iitn speaking mainly of thc era before 1950. What thesc manuscripts also represent are the accidental documentary remains of the past that happened to have been collected, then made publicly accessible in libraries i d historical societies. The items and clustcrs of items that were accessioned had becomc dissociated from relilted itelm with which they were once joined in series. They were con- sidered not only "rarc" but prestigious to own. (Owncrship of them often bccame the major reason for having them, but that is itnother pertinent feature of their administration that can take us off course.)

The combination of being rare ilnd septlratcd from related items with which they were formerly linkccl as documentation, suggested that they betreiltedas itenls, likc books i n fact. And, therc being only one body of knowledge to dcel with books-librarianship-this is the way they were trcated, us discrete ifetns.

Normally these historical manuscripts were piaced in subject or form classes and arranged chronologically within. Typically, citl- endaring was the goal, a proccss whereby items are arrangcd chron- ologically and are accompanied by ;I synoptic statement. Item cata- logs, special subject indexes, shelf lists and other finding aids gave provisional access prior to calendaring. Given the nature of the ma- terials-accidental documentary remains 01' the past-these techni- ques sufficed until collecting of 20th century materials bcgiin in earnest in the 1930s. By the mid 1950s they constitutctl thc bulk of most rna.jor manuscript collections.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

The "register" was added by the Library of Congress in the 1950s to the above array of finding i~it ls .~ Combined, these aids re- present elements of what I have ch~rracterizetl ;IS onc of the chief e k - ments of the Historical Manuscripts Tradition. Each finding aid was the co-equal of the othcr, there being no singlc point from which the information in them could bc approached, iis in a union catiilog, for cxamplc. This is particularly ironical ~ C C ~ I U S C thc Library of Con- gress was the forcmost promoter of the union catalog concept if not its originator. Although the register was dcvelopetl by the Library of Congress to deal with 20th century acccssions, i t waslis not itself used as the primary information source whcn cati~loging of thc accession w a s h done. 1 have tcrmetl this prolifcri~tion of rinding aids a brjkrcated system, although "systcn~" lends i t too ~nuch credit, I believe. This system persists despitc its obsolcsccnce in thc form of Chapter 4 of the AACR2, tleilling with manuscript collec- tions.)'

With this historical backdrop in mind, let us turn to another linc of development, that of the Public Archives Tradition (PAT), The PAT was initiated by the Amcricim Historic;~l Associi~tion whcn it established its Public Archives Commission in 1899, out of which state archives enabling legislation was passed in ahout 30 states bc- ginning in 1901 (Alabama) and I902 (Mississippi). From the start it was agreed that library practices wcrc inapplicable, and that govern- mental agency records should be kcpt eccording to thcir origins in- stead of being distributed among pre-conceivctl subject and form classes. Thesc state archivisk, joining with historii~n Waltli) G . Le- land' and bibliographer Victor Hugo Paltsits, found thc European Principle of Provenance applicablc to the records they werc en- countering-administrative records that were integrally linked througli~record series in which items werc classilied originally ilc- cording to administrative needs ilntl filctl i~ccortlingly-no "acci-. dental remains" here, if they remained substantially int;~ct.

Historical manuscripts wcrelare collected primarily for thcir po- tential research value and pridc of instilutional ownership: miiny pre-20th century accessions are artificii~l creations of items taken out of their original functional context. Howcver, collections of20th ccntury niaterials share all of the essential characteristics of public archives due to their integri~l or organic character. In thc PAT rcc- ord items derive their meaning from thcir original i~ssociation with othcr items i n the same and related record series. To deal with III;IS- sive 20th ccntury collections effectively, neth hods for i ~ ~ t ~ l l ~ c t u i ~ l

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

12 LIBRARY & ARCHIVAL SECURl7Y

control were borrowed from the PAT, contributing to that curious amalgam-a bifurcated system, mentioned earlier.

A further complication is that administratively, in academic li- braries at least, these historical manuscript collections remained in special collections units even after the collections had developed be- yond the embryo stage. Often there is more than one category of manuscript collection at one institution, and ususally each is auton- omous, even to the degree that there is no union catalog to all the manuscript collections of that institution-an ironical by-product of the HMT, h is in the nature of special collections units also, that each component tends to be independent on the basis of format, but each initially is nevertheless treated technically as though existing techniques of librarianship could provide suitable access to the col- lections. Ultimately'disillusionment follows and either alteration of library techniques occurs or they are abandoned altogether. Revi- sions occurring in revision of AACR2 for these non-conforming tnaterials is a measure of this process.

To academic institutions, recently, college and univcrsity ar- chives have bcen added-thc largest growth scctor in the archival field since the mid-1960s. These also are usually administered sep- arately but normally under a special collections director, whose background typically is in rare books and/or pre-modern manu- scripts. Missing in this concept of historical manuscripts, literary manuscripts, subject collections, and institutional archives is the recognition that all documentation is part of a cot~tiriuurn. The main problem is to link the parts together, as best it can be done, by first collecting, and then by developing appropriate methods of intcl- lectual control and acccss. But collecting itself must be guided by coherent policy if there is to be a foundation on which linkages can be structured.4

For the documentation that is collected to be authoritative it must show evidence of being essentially intact-of its having passed through different custodial hands with substantially littlc disturbancc of the original order, and subjected to cautious minimal weeding. To do this effectively, on a continuing basis, records and personal papers of the contemporary scene must be collected, wliile contin- uing to collect more accidental rcrnains of the remoter pitst.

Institutional archival programs try to achievc this objcctive of au- thoritativeness by means of record management tecl~niques that were originally developed in the National Archives to control the life cycle of records.5 Manuscript collections of all types lack this

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

records management perspective on thcir collccting elti~rts. 'rhc onc exception is at those institutions having thc equivi~l~~lt of standing archival agreements with private corporate bodies ;~nd with living people whereby inactive rccords and papers arc transfcrrcd on e regular basis to the milnuscript collection. This trend is ;I growing one and is realistic if our objective is to rnaintairi the inlegrity of thc documentation as best as possible. I n such c a m , thc ~iianuscr~ipt col- lection staff serves in effect as records rnanagcr for thc pcrson or corporate body whose rccords are trmsferrcd to custody of the manuscript repository; normally part of an originid ;~greemcnt pcr- mits weeding. Also, rcfcrencc service on the person's or organi- zation's own records is performed in much the samc way 21s t h i ~ t done by the institution's own archives.

In addition to serial continuity, collecting must aim at compre- hensiveness. No one issue is adequntcly documented from the rec- ords of only one key participant, if there is morc than one such party to an issue. If comprehensiveness is to be a major factor in collec- tion development, the collector must acquirc rclatcd sources andlor know those related sources that exist at other repositories.

Within a given institution, collection development nus st be com- plemented by oral interviews and parallel collecting of rclatctl non- textual sources such ;IS photographs, pamphlets, and ci~rtographic materials.

Cooperative projects must bc conceivctl with other rcpositorics 'having common collecting interests. To attain thcir connnon goal repositories-having. authoritativeness as an objective-must co- operate. Indeed, since the late 1960s cooperation has been gradually displacing competitiveness. But cooperation nccds to be in concert so that the growing network of archival sources will become de- liberately rationalized.

As to cooperation and collaboration in the archival licld, the pros- pects are good. Thc younger generation sharcs such vslues in con- trast to those of my generation and carlicr, who sensed that some other institution's gain was their own's loss. The new generation seemsio realize there is morc archival documentation to be col- lected than all existing archival repositories can possibly collcct. The present generation seems t o agree that the emphasis should bc upon research and reference v i h e instead of ownership-that pres- tige will come primarily from use ;md not merely owncrship. This transition has occurred only since the early 1960s.

A similar transition must take place in the orientation of dircctors

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

14 LIBRARY & ARCtllVAL SECURITY

of special collections units if the records and papers of contemp- orary society are to be successfully collected and administered. The directors of such collections typically came from rare books back- grounds and have carried over that orientation to manuscript col- lecting and administration; they must adapt to changed needs and environmcnts, Authoritativeness and comprehensive coverage as goals conflict with the rarities approach to collection building.

Records appraisal also poses a nagging problem. Mass must be reduced to manageable proportions for the repository and the user alike. With collecting of 20th ccntury materials constituting the typical manuscript collection now, the motive for collecting has changed to the seeking of fullness of documentation so that research can be more authoritative. The objective is to collect complete rec- ord series in which the items within them derive meaning and impart a validity that is lacking, as when they have been dissociated from other items with which thcy had formerly been linked in a record series.

The degree to which completeness of documentation has been preserved also provides a solid basis for appraisal of their documen- tary value to take place. Weeding of these massive 20th century col- lections is essential, but it must be done with an awateness of what documentation already exists and in relation to other series of the given accession. Appraisal was not a serious factor in collecting of pre-20th century materials-collectors were grateful for almost any record that survived extinction.

Appraisal is essentially a records management function. It is ac- complished mainly by means of records disposition and retention schedules, which are the first formal appraisal documents. There is now general agreement that records management should be the foun- dation for any institution's own archive, but it also follows that in collect.ing 20th century papers and records a manuscript repository also must perform these records management tasks as well on the materials it collects. An essential component for effective records management is a records center. You can see this records man- agement direction takes the program cvcn further out of the Histor- ical Manuscripts Tradition. It also calls into question the appropri- ateness of its place under a special collectio~ls.administrator.

Two dynamic factors have been identified thus far thllt help to dis- tinguish manuscsipt collections and institutional archives from other materials that fall under library administration. These are collection dcvelopmcnt and in~ellectual control, with control responding to thc

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

collecting. Together, thcy constitute it form of dynamic equilibrium unconscious though it be-mcthotls of control havc chiulgctl iIs thc naturc of collecting has ch;uigctl. But thcsc tlyna~nic fi~ctors i l k also a source of tension within the speciid collcctions framework bccausc oncc they have maturctl in cvery csscntii~l way the tensions bccomc jurisdictional, inevitirbly. What arc solnc of the implic;~tions of tlrc foregoing for library administration of manuscript collcctions ;~nd institutional archives?

Scale is a major factor to consider. I f thc aim is to bc colnprc- hcnsivc coverage and contiauity of ~ni~jor rccortl scrics, then pro- g r am must bc developed to achicve thcsc objcctivcs ils cffcctivcly as possible. Storage space, processing procctlurcs, finding aid sys- tems and informatiorl-shirring Inust become tuned t o implcn~cnt the nccessary programs. Records miln;lgclncnt nrust bccomc ;In i~ltegri~l clement. A vital part of effcdtive records miinagcrncnt is the key role that a records center must play its the connecting link bctwccn .an institution's own arcliivcs and its records rniulilgelnent program. In this context, a ~nanuscript collection shiiring thc sillllc objcctivcs must serve as i~ records center for tlrc rccortls i~ritl pcrsonid papers i t acquires by mcans of its indivitlual i~rcliival iigrcelncnts. Is thc tri~tli- tional special collections division i~pproprii~tc to i~dministcr such col- lections in addition to its othcr colnponcnts of far lesser sc;~lc i111d

less complexity? ScAe also affects the mcthods of control that arc choscn. Proces-

sing and intellectual control progriuns must abandon thosc pri~cticcs that are rootcd in thc Historicill Manuscripts 'I'ratlition and instc;~tl fully incorporute proccdurcs of the Public Archives Tradition. This Incans abolition of traditional cataloging with its rantlolnncss and in- stead articulating ilrrangclncnt and description iIs two parts of it

single process of control. To do this, control must proccctl progrcs- sively by record levels and a control docu~ncnt must bc protlucctl from which indcxing can be done. The inventory format is thc only format devisctl thus far thiit is suitable for use as il control tlocu- mcnt. With nutotnation, it will bc possiblc i n the futurc to intlex while composing the inventory. I n prcscnt mi~nual systems, index- ing must be tlonc after inventory composition. But i n either case, thc inventory is !he control document. lndcxing fro111 i t can be undcr control at all timcs. That a controllctl information sourcc for cat+ loging is a novel idca is its own comlncntary on the state of the art.

This radical departure is onc [hilt 1 vcnture few directors of spe- cial collections units are prepared emotionally anrl i~ltcllc~tuidly to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

16 LIBRARY R ARCHIVAL SECURITY

t a k e . And, if t h e y c h o o s e t h i s r a d i c a l departure in order to cope w i t h 20th century c o l l e c t i o n s , wi l l they s t i l l b e able to j u s t i f y a d m i n i s t e r - ing t h e s e c o l l e c t i o n s a s p a r t of a s p e c i a l c o l l e c t i o n s unit, or for t h a t m a t t e r , other c o m p a r a b l e s p e c i a l m a t e r i a l s c o l l e c t i o n s t h a t h a v e r e a c h e d m a t u r i t y ? The i n c o n g r u i t y s e e m s blatant. W h a t i s l o s t to a s p e c i a l c o l l e c t i o n s unit by allowing m a n u s c r i p t c o l l e c t i o n s and i n s t i - t u t i o n a l a r c h i v e s to become a u t o n o m o u s , to b e a d m i n i s t e r e d in t e r m s of their own c h a r a c t c r i s t i c s ? Both s c a l e and t e c h n i c a l c o n - s i d e r a t i o n s s e e m to j u s t i f y autonomy.

B e a r in mind t h a t " a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n v e n i e n c e " w a s a major f a c - tor l e a d i n g to thc e s t a b l i s h m e n t of s p e c i a l c o l l e c t i o n s in l i b r a r i e s . I t h a d b e e n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y more c o n v e n i e n t to group c o l l e c t i o n s of non-conforming m a t e r i a l s a c c o r d i n g l y , a s a kind of m i s c e l l a n y . A s long a s s u c h collections r e m a i n e d s m a l l , a n d as lsnn a s they c o u l d be h a n d l e d by only s l i g h t m o d i f i c a t i o n s of traditional l i b r a r i a n s h i p , no s e r i o u s harm w a s f o r e s e e n - i n t e r m s or r e s o u r c e s c o m m i t m e n t p a r t i c u l a r l y . But when s c a l e i s magnified, a n d when a d a p t a t i o n s of t r a d i t i o n a l l i b r a r i a n s h i p no longer s u f f i c e , t h e n s u c h c o l l e c t i o n s m u s t be a d m i n i s t e r e d in t e r m s that are c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the c h a r a c t e r - i s t i c s of the m a t e r i a l s . O n c e the "miscellaneous" c o n n o t a t i o n i s no longer a p p l i c a b l e , once thc i n f a n t h a s reached adulthood, i t s h o u l d be t r e a t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . Modcrn m a n u s c r i p t c o l l e c X i o n s a n d i n s t i t u - t i o n a l a r c h i v e s are no longer infantile, but a r e v i g o r o u s progcny re- quiring t h a t t h e y be t r e a t e d on t h e i r own t e r m s .

N O T E S

I. The liistoricnl bnckground can be read in Rcrncr, Arclrivnl7heory n~dPrncficc it1 rke Vr~ired Sfnfes: A llisloricnl A~tolysis (Scnttlc: Univcrsity of Wnshington Press, 1983).

2. Thc rcgistcr was adnpted by the Librnry of Congrcss lrom l l ~ c prc l i~~~ inary i~ivcntory for~~iet cniploycd by tllc Nnlionnl Archives, nnd wns inspired by Solon J. Duck w l ~ c l i hc bc- CIIIIIC liead of Mn~n~scripls Division upon resigning as Archlvisl of thc Unitcd Slntcs in 1948. Thc rcgistcr i s divided inlo sevcrnl sections, tho main oms being a scopc nnd c ~ ~ n l c ~ i l s notc, biogrnpl~ical oatlinc, scrinls listing, and n conlni~~cr l ist. 'rhc scopc of contcn~s note provides the only sourcc for nddcd cnlrics, while tl lc conlnincr l ist wol~ld bc thc richcsl sourcc i f ltsctl for tl inl purpose. See pnssim. Chapter 3, nnd Knlhcrinc Ilrnnd.."Dcvclopmcnt in lhc Hnncl- ling of Rcceul Mn~n~scripts in l l ~ c 1.ibrnry of Co~~grcss," An~ericnn Arcltivisr I 6 (April 1953): 99-104; nnd "l'lic Plncc of lhc Rcgistcr ill thc Mnnuscripls Division of l l ic Library of Con- gress." An~ericnr~ Arcl~ivisr I 8 (Jnnuary 1955): 59-67.

3. Scc Bcrncr, passiai, Chnptcr 6. AACR2 Cliaptcr 4 on the n~nnl~scripl col lcct io~~s rcc- o~iimends that calaloging be done fro111 lhc "wholc collection," which lllenns lhnl it bc donc fro~n thc actunl ninnuscripls, and not from n sccondnry sourcc such as one or more finding nids. To corrccl lor this inipracticnl rcconi~iicndntio~i, u lask lorcc drnft report gcncrnted by 111c Mnnuscripls Division of l l ~ e Library o l Congrcss lias rccom~i~cndcd lhnl finding nids bc

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4

uscd as lhc (~riaciplc suurcc o f c~~ l i~ log ing infor~rxl ion. 1.ilcking hcrc i s nny idc i~ 1l1n1 IIIC~C should bc n co~~tro l lcd inlor~llntion soarcc.

4 For some of lhc most cl~nllcnging l l ~ o t ~ g l ~ l on [his problen~ scc P. Gcri~ld H i w , "'~IIc Arcl~ivnl Etlgc," Anrericcrt~ Atdiv i . r l38 (Jonui~ry 1975); 5-13; ;~nd "Arc l~ iv i~ l Slralegics for the Post-C~~slodinl Ih." AIIIC~~COII Archivisr 44 (SIIIIIIIIC~ 1081): 207-16.

5. A l l l~uug l~ l l~c rc is n volumino~~s lilcrnnlrc 1111 records lanllngc:clllcnl, n IISCTIII in t rod~~c- lion may be found i n Wi ln~cr Mnctlkc. Mnry Rohck. :lot1 Gcrnkl Ilrowll, h l /omor in~~ n~rrl Records Mnrmngonctrl (Glcncoc Press, 1974), pp, 1-08.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 2

0:04

07

Oct

ober

201

4