共查询到10条相似文献，搜索用时 401 毫秒
1.
Eric Ketelaar 《Archival Science》1987,1(2):131-141
Archivists and historians usually consider archives as repositories of historical sources and the archivist as a neutral custodian.
Sociologists and anthropologists see “the archive” also as a system of collecting, categorizing, and exploiting memories.
Archivists are hesitantly acknowledging their role in shaping memories. I advocate that archival fonds, archival documents,
archival institutions, and archival systems contain tacit narratives which must be deconstructed in order to understand the
meanings of archives.
Revision of a paper presented, on the invitation of the Master's Programme in Archival Studies, Department of History, University
of Manitoba, in the History Department Colloquium series of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, 20 February, 2001. Some
of the arguments were used earlier in two papers I presented in the seminar “Archives, Documentation and the Institutions
of Social Memory”, organized by the Bentley Historical Library and the International Institute of the University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, 14 February, 2001. 相似文献
2.
Brien Brothman 《Archival Science》2002,2(3-4):311-342
In the last ten years, influential voices within and on the periphery of the record keeping community have succeeded in establishing
the preservation of “evidence” as the governing purpose of contemporary archival theory and methods development. Afterglow
offers a critique of the concept of evidence in archival discourse. Its main contention is that one can put records into evidence;
one cannot set out to put evidence into records. The argument rests on the following assertions: (1) current discussions of
evidence rest on a blindness to certain contradictions embedded in claims that record keeping principally involves evidence
keeping, or “evidence management”; (2) a politics of temporality, under which an interplay of disciplinary knowledge claims
and professional interest is discernible, helps to account for the contemporary rhetoric describing the relationship between
“record” and “evidence”, and (3) the late-twentieth century legal, political, and cultural climate, along with the technological
environment, explain the increasing prominence of “evidence” in these knowledge claims and professional ambitions. The essay
concludes with recommendations for addressing these issues.
Thanks go to Terry Cook, Visiting Professor in the Archival Studies Programme, Department of History, University of Manitoba,
and co-editor of this series of essays, for his close reading and detailed comments on this essay. Particularly invaluable
was his knowledge of historical and contemporary archival thinking on the notion of evidence. 相似文献
3.
Brian Edward Hubner 《Archival Science》2007,7(3):195-206
Census information of some form has been collected in Canada since the 1611 census of New France. Aboriginal people, identified
or not, have been included in these enumerations. The collection of this information has had a profound impact on Aboriginal
people and has been an element that has shaped their relationship with the dominant society. In response, Canadian Aboriginal
people have often resisted and refused to co-operate with census takers and their masters. This article is an examination
of this phenomenon focused on the censuses conducted in the post-Confederation period to the present. A census is made to
collect information on populations and individuals that can then be used to configure and shape social and political relations
between those being enumerated and the creators of the census. However, the human objects of the census are not just passive
integers and they have resisted its creation in a number of ways, including being “missing” when the census is taken, refusing
to answer the questions posed by enumerators or even driving them off Aboriginal territory. A census identifies elements of
the social order and attempts to set them in their “proper” place and those who do not wish to be part of that order may refuse
to take part. Archivists and historians must understand that the knowledge gained in a census is bound with the conditions
of own creation. This has been noted by contemporary Aboriginal researchers who often state that the archival record of their
people often distorts history and reflects the ideas and superficial observations of their Euro-Canadian creators. Changes
to the Census of Canada since 1981, have increased the participation rate and therefore changed the nature of the record.
Brian Edward Hubner is currently Acquisition and Access Archivist at the University of Manitoba Archives & Special Collections. He was previously employed at the Archives of Manitoba, in Government Records; Queen’s University Archives, Kingston; and at the National Archives of Canada, Ottawa. He has a Master of Arts (History, in Archival Studies) from the University of Manitoba, and a Master of Arts (History), from the University of Saskatchewan. The 2nd edition of Brian’s co-authored book on the history of the Cypress Hills of Saskatchewan and Alberta is being published in 2007. He has published articles and delivered conference papers on Canadian Aboriginal peoples including “Horse Stealing and the Borderline: The N.W.M.P. and the Control of Indian Movement, 1874-1900.” His current research interest focuses on relationship between Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples and Canadian archives. Brian is married and has two children. 相似文献
| Brian Edward HubnerEmail: |
Brian Edward Hubner is currently Acquisition and Access Archivist at the University of Manitoba Archives & Special Collections. He was previously employed at the Archives of Manitoba, in Government Records; Queen’s University Archives, Kingston; and at the National Archives of Canada, Ottawa. He has a Master of Arts (History, in Archival Studies) from the University of Manitoba, and a Master of Arts (History), from the University of Saskatchewan. The 2nd edition of Brian’s co-authored book on the history of the Cypress Hills of Saskatchewan and Alberta is being published in 2007. He has published articles and delivered conference papers on Canadian Aboriginal peoples including “Horse Stealing and the Borderline: The N.W.M.P. and the Control of Indian Movement, 1874-1900.” His current research interest focuses on relationship between Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples and Canadian archives. Brian is married and has two children. 相似文献
4.
Jari Lybeck 《Archival Science》2003,3(2):97-116
In the Scandinavian countries, archival education and training are provided by a great number of actors. There are no traditional
archives schools in the sense of the école de chartes but all the other forms of education and training are available. Archival
science has a strong presence in universities especially in Sweden, Finland and Norway. A typically Scandinavian characteristic
is the prominent role of the National Archives Services as providers of archival education and training. In Finland the National
Archives Service has two comprehensive programmes, resulting in formal degrees, for people working in archival duties in the
administration or in the private sector. Another markedly Scandinavian characteristic is that records management has a prominent
role in educational and training programmes. Also archival associations and foundations are mong the actors in the field of
education and training in Scandinavia. The Norwegian “Arkivakademiet” and the Finnish Association of Business Archivists are
good examples of this. 相似文献
5.
Brien Brothman 《Archival Science》2010,10(2):141-189
In 1924, Canadian Dominion Archivist Arthur Doughty (1860–1936) characterized archives as “the gift of one generation to another.”
This essay takes these words seriously. It sets aside the common habit of thinking of archival work in terms of “keeping”
and “preserving” and experiments with—re-imagines—archives as a form of gift giving. However, as a growing body of scholarship
across numerous disciplines is discovering, gift giving is a complex social act. Thus, construing archives as a form of gift
opens up new avenues of critical inquiry into archives’ unique temporal consciousness and its importance to accounts of the
establishment and unmaking of any social order. This article explores the nature of archival consciousness and its place in
social theory. 相似文献
6.
Donato Tamblé 《Archival Science》1987,1(1):83-100
Archival theory in Italy has a long tradition, going back as far as the second half of the nineteenth century, and with roots
in the 17th and 18th centuries. Central theme in the theory is themetodo storico, the principle of provenance, for the first time expressed in the late 19th century by Bonaini and Bongi. In the following
decades archivists like Casanova and Cencetti were among the leading authors. Elio Lodolini assigned himself the task to synthesize
ideas and notions, within a clear distinctions between records (registratura) and archives. One of the overall characteristics
of the rich Italian literature is the stressing of the cultural value of archives.
I have twice treated before the theme of archival theory in Italy from the fifties up to the nineties. The first time on the
occasion of the 25th anniversary of theScuola speciale per Archivisti e Bibliotecari dell'Università degli Studi “La Sapienza” di Roma in 1989, when there was an international round table on archival science in the State Archives of Rome. My essay,Italian archival science today, has been published in the proceedings of the meeting (cfr. Donato Tamblé,L'archivistica in Italia oggi, inStudi sull'archivistica, by Roma: Elio Lodolini, 1992). Some years later, in 1993, I published a book on contemporary Italian archival theory (Donato
Tamblé,La teoria archivistica italiana contemporanea (1950–1990). Profilo storico-critico (Roma, 1993) which was the sequel to the volume of Elio Lodolini on Italian archival history — (Lineamenti di storia dell'archivistica italiana (Roma, 1991). The purpose of my book was that of locating and identifying the scientific object of archival science as it
developed and was clarified in the thinking and in the lucubration of the contemporary Italian Archivists. 相似文献
7.
Donato Tamblé 《Archival Science》2001,1(1):83-100
Archival theory in Italy has a long tradition, going back as far as the second half of the nineteenth century, and with roots
in the 17th and 18th centuries. Central theme in the theory is themetodo storico, the principle of provenance, for the first time expressed in the late 19th century by Bonaini and Bongi. In the following
decades archivists like Casanova and Cencetti were among the leading authors. Elio Lodolini assigned himself the task to synthesize
ideas and notions, within a clear distinctions between records (registratura) and archives. One of the overall characteristics
of the rich Italian literature is the stressing of the cultural value of archives.
I have twice treated before the theme of archival theory in Italy from the fifties up to the nineties. The first time on the
occasion of the 25th anniversary of theScuola speciale per Archivisti e Bibliotecari dell'Università degli Studi “La Sapienza” di Roma in 1989, when there was an international round table on archival science in the State Archives of Rome. My essay,Italian archival science today, has been published in the proceedings of the meeting (cfr. Donato Tamblé,L'archivistica in Italia oggi, inStudi sull'archivistica, by Roma: Elio Lodolini, 1992). Some years later, in 1993, I published a book on contemporary Italian archival theory (Donato
Tamblé,La teoria archivistica italiana contemporanea (1950–1990). Profilo storico-critico (Roma, 1993) which was the sequel to the volume of Elio Lodolini on Italian archival history — (Lineamenti di storia dell'archivistica italiana (Roma, 1991). The purpose of my book was that of locating and identifying the scientific object of archival science as it
developed and was clarified in the thinking and in the lucubration of the contemporary Italian Archivists. 相似文献
8.
The archival sliver: Power, memory, and archives in South Africa 总被引：3，自引：3，他引：0
Verne Harris 《Archival Science》2002,2(1-2):63-86
Far from being a simple reflection of reality, archives are constructed windows into personal and collective processes. They
at once express and are instruments of prevailing relations of power. Verne Harris makes these arguments through an account
of archives and archivists in the context of South Africa's transition from apartheid to democracy. The account is deliberately
shaped around three themes — race, power, and public records. While he concedes that the constructedness of memory and the
dimension of power are most obvious in the extreme circumstances of oppression and rapid transition to democracy, he argues
that these are realities informing archives in all circumstances. He makes an appeal to archivists to enchant their work by
engaging these realities and by turning always towards the call of and for justice.
This essay draws heavily on four articles published previously by me: “Towards a Culture of Transparency: Public Rights of
Access to Official Records in South Africa”,American Archivist 57.4 (1994); “Redefining Archives in South Africa: Public Archives and Society in Transition, 1990–1996”,Archivaria 42 (1996); “Transforming Discourse and Legislation: A Perspective on South Africa's New National Archives Act”,ACARM Newsletter 18 (1996); and “Claiming Less, Delivering More: A Critique of Positivist Formulations on Archives in South Africa”,Archivaria 44 (1997). I am grateful to Ethel Kriger (National Archives of South Africa) and Tim Nuttall (University of Natal) for offering
sometimes tough comment on an early draft of the essay. I remain, of course, fully responsible for the final text. I presented
a version of it in the “Refiguring the Archive” seminar series, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, October 1998.
That version was published in revised form in Carolyn Hamilton et al.,Refiguring the Archive (Cape Town: David Philip, 2002). 相似文献
9.
Eric Ketelaar 《Archival Science》2007,7(4):343-357
Around 1800 the “paradigm of patrimony” recognized archives as cultural and national patrimony. That paradigm was, however,
not a new revolutionary invention. It had been fostered by a “patrimony consciousness” which had developed in the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries. The value of archives as a patrimony to future generations was acknowledged first in the private
sphere by families and then by cities—communities of memory becoming communities of archives.
Eric Ketelaar is Professor of Archivistics in the Department of Mediastudies of the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Amsterdam. He is Honorary Professor at Monash University, Melbourne (Faculty of Information Technology). He engages with the social history of archives by researching the history of recordkeeping and the use of records and archives, resulting in articles on thirteenth century Dordrecht, sixteenth century Leiden, the eighteenth century Court of Holland, Dutch public administration 1795–1950, and record creation in the context of systematic management in Dutch enterprise, 1870–1940. He is particularly interested in the relationship between recordkeeping and organizational, professional, and national cultures, past and present. This led him further to study the role of records and archives in times of oppression, war, liberation, and reconciliation. 相似文献
| Eric KetelaarEmail: |
Eric Ketelaar is Professor of Archivistics in the Department of Mediastudies of the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Amsterdam. He is Honorary Professor at Monash University, Melbourne (Faculty of Information Technology). He engages with the social history of archives by researching the history of recordkeeping and the use of records and archives, resulting in articles on thirteenth century Dordrecht, sixteenth century Leiden, the eighteenth century Court of Holland, Dutch public administration 1795–1950, and record creation in the context of systematic management in Dutch enterprise, 1870–1940. He is particularly interested in the relationship between recordkeeping and organizational, professional, and national cultures, past and present. This led him further to study the role of records and archives in times of oppression, war, liberation, and reconciliation. 相似文献
10.
《图书馆管理杂志》2013,53(2-3):155-166
Archivists during the past decade have been greatly concerned with archival education and professional development and the proper context of archives training programs: History, Library Science, or independent Archival Science degree programs. Library schools offer the most reasonable possibilities because of their move toward new information technology and management strategies and a broadening of the older library-centered core. If their curricula can accommodate the differences between libraries and archives and alter their dominant focus on the book and traditional library procedures such as cataloging, then archival concerns can be divergent professional vantage points, alternative strategies and multi-disciplinary discussion about common issues such as the organization of information, shared problems and policy implementation. Archivists are at a crossroads, with choices to remain separate and exclusive or to work for alliances and cooperation. Technological developments make the latter choice imperative. 相似文献