Introduction

Barbara L. Craig
History is a powerful form of memory because it synthesizes individual
experience with a larger community. As either a shared or contested
view about what has been, history taps into the past through the tangible
written memorials that survive from earlier timesbooks, objects, and
archives of records and papers. It is the multiplicity of types of sources
that strengthens the historian's credibility and arguments. One part
of that rich mix of sources originates with individual people whose in-
teractions and communicative practices in documentary form may be
either windows through which we see or mirrors that reflect and refract.
Personal papers survive from antiquity and will certainly continue to be
made in the future, as the growth of blogs attests. Personal materials are
indispensable to a balance in history, but what do we know about these
sources and their histories? Why were some forms of recording favored?
Why did new forms emerge? Who made and kept records and why?
At the first International Conference on the History of Records and
Archives (I-CHORA), held in Toronto in 2003, participants from many
countries agreed that the history of records and record practices and the
history of their repositories were rich areas that embraced the interests
of scholars as diverse as social historians, cultural theorists, communi-
cation and media specialists, archivists, librarians, and other scholarly
curatorial professions.' The excitement generated at I-CHORA 1 has
proved to be more than a frisson of the moment: three subsequent con-
ferences have delved into selected issues in greater detail, and further
conferences have been mooted.^
Each conference has aimed to draw international researchers into a
multidisciplinary dialogue focusing on documentary practices defined as
broadly and comprehensively as possible. Practices in the creation and
management of records, as the varied forms of records themselves, have
a complex history that is largely unknown because relevant research has
been done by different disciplines, each with its own special slant on a
topic. Themes that bridge lines established by method, sociohistorical
Ulirnrirs f the Culluml Rfcortl, Vol. 44. No. 1. 2009
2009 by lhe University of Texas l're.ss. I'.O. Box 7819. Austin, TX 7871S-781H
2 L8cCR/Introduction
periods, or well-developed disciplinary tracks have yet to take firm hold.
The studies that are in print are scattered among disciplines; neverthe-
less, they are remarkably rich, suggesting many areas of shared interests
that cross disciplinary boundaries.' The I-CHORA conferences are the
first steps along the road to more regular communication and discussion
among interested groups. Each of the four international conferences has
endeavored to elevate this metahistory of sources to center stage in the
hope of jump-starting a multidisciplinary dialogue among researchers
working within this area.''
I-CHORA 3, held in Boston at the Massachusetts Historical Society,
27-29 September 2007, featured the theme of personal papers.* Personal
papers are not simply containers for personal exchanges and narrative,
or embodiments of agreements, contracts, and business communications,
or flights of imaginative fancy and personal doodling; they also reflect
social norms and customs, partake in the communication technologies
of their time, and collectively embody an unfolding history of social
practices and interactions. Their value to us as ways of accessing the
past and as trustworthy evidence for history is enhanced, refined, and
expanded by the critical study of the sources themselves. The organizing
committee recognized the complexity of this topic but nonetheless was
convinced that the area of personal documentary practices promised to
attract scholars from areas as diverse as gender studies, literary criticism,
and social history.^ A considerable body of literature in these areas shares
common ground by being based on personal materials. These either are
used as sources of evidence or comprise the theoretical frame that directs
the research. Diaries, for example, have been used to provide evidence
about experiences, ideas, and social norms from a time in the past.
Additionally, diaries and diary habits have been the topic of research.
Organizing committee members hoped that by promoting the theme
of personal papers and welcoming the multiple viewpoints, sociohistori-
cal eras, and interests that these papers touch, they would encourage a
broader sharing of ideas than has been possible in small interest groups
assembled at discipline-specific or professional conferences.
Twenty-six papers were accepted for the conference from the thirty-
eight proposals received.' These were organized into eight sessions focus-
ing on topics such as forms and genres of personal records making and
personal record keeping, inventing and reinventing a life, and legal and
ethical issues associated with personal records.* A final wrap-up session
allowed presenters, session chairs, and attendees to discuss issues raised
by the conference and its theme and afforded an opportunity for more
general reflection on the relationship of personal papers to the notion of
identity and to their multiple roles in scholarship as sources for literary
criticism, biography, and gender studies.
Following the conference, all presenters were invited to submit revised
and expanded texts for publication consideration through the normal
process of a blind peer review. This special issue o Libraries sf the Cultural
Record contains eight of the conference papers, extended and revised by
the authors in the light of the discussions at the conference and with a
view to their publication in the journal. Each author explores a differ-
ent aspect of the genre of personal records, emphasizing the historical
context that shaped them and linking them, where possible, to specific
contexts of contemporary habits, personal tastes, markets for writing ma-
terials, and available technologies. The topics covered in the I-CHORA 3
conference and those represented in this issue were international in scope
and spanned about eight hundred years. Personal papers undoubtedly
are valuable as a balance to the directions privileged in organizational
and public materials. They link us directly to people and their families,
social classes, and personal preoccupations. These features make them
valuable as sources of community and personal lives."
The documentary practices of the individuals discussed in these ar-
ticles are highly personal: this quality makes each body of documents
unique to an individual. The close, even intimate connection between
a person and his or her documents, including a variety of materials
accumulated and kept for some form of reference as well as unique
personal documents such as letters, diaries, memoirs, and drawings, is
the golden thread that is most prized by the person's immediate fam-
ily, by his or her social or professional communities, and ultimately by
scholars from many disciplines. It is the richness of things "personal"
that makes them so valuable to us as information and as community and
social heritage. Paradoxically, the elevation of that which is unique to
a privileged position, especially by collectors and special repositories,
tends to foil attempts to identify features that are shared among papers
and collections. This emphasis on the unique can frustrate efforts to
identify common social or historical foundations that would open the
way to illuminating comparisons.
Papers and records of some kind are part of everyone's personal
baggage; however, the commonplace sense of what constitutes personal
materials is difficult if not impossible to convert into an agreed-upon
definition that captures their lasting essence. The prevailing models of
analysis of unpublished records emphasize their roles as by-products
of organizational and institutional activities. This emphasis draws
our attention to the attendant structures of procedure, standards of
4 h8cCR/Introduction
performance and behavior, and corporate classification. An organization
aims to mask the individuality of its officers in favor of a persistent and
common corporate identity and persona that buttress its legal status and
preserve corporate authority. In organizations the corporate bond rather
than personal independence is privileged in records. By contrast, it is the
personal aspect of private papers that is valued by users; personal papers
retain a clear, direct, and unique connection to their author or writer.
Materials that are made and kept by individuals have the indelible stamp
of their maker. This visible quality of originality in a person's documents,
coupled with contents that are often private in nature, establishes an
aura of personal authority around such materials. All these features are
valued by people, by family, and by scholars. Personal papers with their
attendant eccentricities not only proclaim that the past was different but
also are a tangible connection to a past time.
The final wrap-up session of I-CHORA 3 exposed additional avenues
for work just touched upon by the conference. Indeed, despite the
intensity of the sessions, one three-day conference and its proceed-
ings could only begin sketching the ground for further exploration.
Participants agreed that the very notion of "private papers" is far more
complex than many had thought. Some commented upon the frustra-
tions of trying to codify personal papers and practices to craft compre-
hensive definitions. Although several sessions explored the distinctions
between what is public and private, it was clear that no fixed line can be
drawn because the boundary is always shifting. Motivations in the past
for making, keeping, and using documents are sufficiently complex to
resist abstracting commonalities. While participants easily agreed that a
recurring motivation was one of memory and memorialization, the idea
of memory brings its own complicationsthere are personal memory,
public memory, community memory, and social memory. Personal pa-
pers have a role in each one.
Participants felt themselves on firmer ground when discussing the
ideas and meanings of genres of records and the persistent uses for
each type. Forms and genres provide a stable foundation that enables
us to examine many contexts in seeking evidence of motivation and
possible origins of practices and materials. Many remarked on the need
to explore more closely the technologies that are employed in produc-
ing personal records. Many areas of research were suggested: the costs
of commercial products, including blank books, forms, and paper; the
relationship between documentary habits and leisure time; the role of a
climate of expectations from family, friends, and colleagues; the impact
of education; community habits of reading and knowledge acquisition;
the effects of communication structures; and the nature of a person's
facility with language, ideas, and images.
The notion of documents as a form of property is not easily described
or fixed. Its various stages of development seem to be another fruitful
area for research, especially in relationship to third-party acquisitions,
valuation practices, the meaning of public and private over time, the
consideration of legal and moral rights, and the definition of person-
hood. Some participants pointed to the key fact that what one recorded,
collected, and kept was clearly implicated in the psychology of identity,
affecting a person's sense of place in the world and his or her under-
standing of self. Individual or group case studies seem to have poten-
tial for developing grounded theories and models of records making,
especially in a single cultural context.
While there was general agreement on the desirability of conferences
and publications on records and archives that welcome many disciplines,
different methods of research, and multiple philosophies about evidence,
knowledge, and meaning, there were few concrete proposals for new ways
to stimulate sharing and cross-fertilization. Academic boundaries and
reward systems tend to isolate scholars in disciplinary fiefs, and in this
situation it is doubly difficult to encourage sharing. Participants agreed,
however, that the strategic placement of libraries and archives as the lo-
cus of research for many types of scholars clearly points to a future role
for a proactive repository as the catalyst for pursuing muitidisciplinary
perspectives through conferences and publications such as I-CHORA.
It seemed unlikely to the participants that there is one magic key that
will unlock the doors barring interdisciplinary sharing. However, more
international conferences on themes that attract more than one disci-
pline promise to be an open yet stable structure to promote diversity.
Participants were convinced that exploring the histories of genres
and practices is helpful to curators in understanding these materials. It
was observed repeatedly that contemporary issues are better addressed
when professionals read records as information artifacts that achieve
their meaning within overlapping and concurrent contexts. The practi-
cal use of record-keeping histories is especially pertinent to practitioners
who appraise collections for acquisition and have the responsibility for
describing them. Their job is to make connections among materials
across space and time. As a result, they need to contextualize records
within their immediate environment as well as within the broader socio-
historical framework that shaped them. Greater knowledge ofthe history
of a record or a genre would support better professional codification,
classification, and descriptive practices in repositories.
6 h8cCR/ Introduction
Participants comment ed that a better underst andi ng of motiva-
tions is essential for coming to grips with emerging practices that are
shaped by digital communication technologies. Rather than becoming
less important, history and its research are emerging as essential for
success in dealing with records in the future. Will digital technologies
encourage change in forms of communication and personal practices,
or will there be cross-fertilization between the analog and the digital?
To answer these questions participants urged exploratory research into
the relationship of new forms to those of the past.
This need for greater depth and nuance in conceiving and writing
records history is progressively more evident as machines increasingly
mediate recording practices. Digital formats, easily communicated
through electronic networks, are swept up in faster cycles of innovation
and change. An effect of such a highly competitive market is a digital
past that is quickly unreadable and lost. Many of the larger questions
raised by computers underscore our need to understand the history of
personal communication practices and the experience of earlier gen-
erations in dealing with their own situations. Documents and personal
papers have contents, but they also have histories that are inextricably
linked to their origins and to their roles in the affairs of people and
communities. Exploring perspectives on these links is not only desirable
but enriched by being pursued and shared among interested groups
through interdisciplinary programs such as the International Confer-
ences on the History of Records and Archives.
Notes
1. Eleven papers presented to that conference were published in Archivara
60 (Fall 2005). The introductory essay situates the conference and explores
aspects of its themes, including the nature of records and documents (eleven
papers); the nature of record keeping (sixteen papers); and sources, methods,
theories, and philosophies for research in the nature of records and record
keeping (seven papers). See Barbara L. Craig et al., "Exploring Perspectives
and Themes for Histories of Records and Archives: The Eirst International
Conference on the History of Records and Archives (I-CHORA)," Archivara
60 (Fall 2005): 1-11.
2. I-CHORA 2, held in Amsterdam in 2005, focused on colonial records and
record-keeping practices. Selected papers were published in Archival Science 6,
nos. 3-4 (2007). I-CHORA 4 was held in Perth, Australia in 2008 on the theme
of indigenous ways of recording and memorializing.
3. We lack a full and comprehensive bibliography of work in the broad area
of records and archives history. The following tides are selected to demonstrate
the variety of research that is being done. Rosalind Thomas, Literacy and Orality
in Ancient Greece (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992); Suzanne L.
Bunkers and Cynthia A. Huff, Inscribing the Daily: Critical Essays in Women's Diaries
(Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 1996);Jochen Hellbeck, Revolution
on My Mind: Diary Writing under Stalin (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 2006); Tamara P. Thornton, Handiuriting in America: A Cultural History
(New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1996); and Ruth Morello and A. D.
Morrison, eds.. Ancient Letters: Classical and Late Antiquity Epistolography (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2007).
4. The organizing committees for these conferences are confident that records
and manuscripts history will prove to be as rewarding as the history of the book,
which has usefully linked many disciplines with interests in book themes such as
material histories, authorship studies, and readers and reading research.
5. The I-CHORA Web site at http://www3.fis.utoronto.ca/research/i-chora/
home.html includes the program as well as links to the earlier conferences. I-
CHORA 4 was held in Perth, Australia, in July 2008. Its Web site is to be found
at http://www.archivists.org.au/ichora/ICHORA4/index.html.
6. Organizing committee members were Brenda Lawson, Massachusetts
Historical Society; Barbara L. Craig, University of Toronto; Philip B. Eppard,
University at Albany, State University of New York; and Heather MacNeil, Uni-
versity of British Columbia. The Massachusetts Historical Society was a generous
host, providing staff to assist in organizing events, registering conference at-
tendees, supporting the needs of a three-day event, and managing the accounts.
I-CHORA 3 was largely funded by registration fees and by generous support
from the Gladys Krieble Delmas Foundation.
7. These papers were as follows: Eric Ketelaar, "The Genealogical Gaze: The
Dawn of Archives as Cultural Patrimony"; James O'Toole, "'These Stray Letters
of Mine': Forgery and Self-Creation in the Letters of William O'Connell"; Susan
Palmer, "Sir John Soane: Rewriting a Life"; Jennifer E. Steenshome, "History
and Memory in the Archives: The Jay Papers"; Tom Belton, "Explorations in
an Explorer's Field Note Taking"; Melissa Gottwald, "'Always Remember . . .':
Autograph Albums as Records of Social Interaction"; Ronald J. Zboray and
Mary Saracino Zboray, "Is It a Diary, a Commonplace Book, a Scrapbook, or a
Whatchamacallit? Or, Six Years' Exploration in New England's Manuscript Ar-
chives"; Rodney G. S. Garter, "Photography and Personal Mytholog)'";Jelka Melik
and Matejajeraj, "Significance of Private Historical Archives and the Slovenian
National Archive"; Rachel Mills, "Gommunicating Community: Russian and
Ganadian Mennonite Correspondence, 1850-1900"; Heather Dean, "Gourteous
Gorrespondence: Letters and Letter Writing Practices in Eighteenth-Gentury
England"; Natalie A. Dykstra, "Remember This: Flower Albums, Photography,
and Practices of Nineteenth-Gentury Memory-Keeping"; Ellen Gruber Garvey,
"Scrapbook Makers as Historiographers and Archivists, and the Question of
Survival"; Jennifer Douglas, "'Kepe Wysly Youre Wrytyngys . . .': The Fifteenth-
Gentury Letters of Margaret Paston"; Peter Horsman, "Documenting the Family:
Jacob Vriesendorp and His Family Archive"; Richard Lehane, "Documenting
Sites of Creating"; Jennifer Meehan, "'Everything in Its Right Place': Rethink-
ing the Idea of Original Order with Regards to Personal Records"; Margaret
Welch, "Records in Books: The Library of the Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
Family"; Amy Marshall Furness, "The Records of Gonceptual Artists: Gonceptual
Art Seen through an Archival Paradigm"; Heather Beattie, "Where Narratives
Meet: Archival Description, Provenance, and Women's Diaries"; Geoffrey Yeo,
8 L&:CR/Introduction .
"Where Lies the Fonds? Custodial History and the Description of Personal Re-
cords"; William Frame, "Personal Political Archives and Public Political Agendas:
The Collecting Policy of the British Library in Historical Perspective"; Daniel
German, "Personal Papers and Their Owners: Musing on Issues of Owner-
ship and Control over Private Papers Held in Archival Repositories"; Kenton
G. jaenig, "Ethical Issues in Processing Political and Diplomatic Papers: The
Thomas F. Stroock Papers"; Agnes E. M. Jonker, "No Privileged Past: Acquisition
Revisited"; Karl Magee, "Private Thoughts, Public Records? The Publication of
the Lindsay Anderson Diaries"; and Richard Holinger, "Trends in Diary Writing
in New England from the Seventeenth to the Early Twentieth Century."
8. Session chairs and commentators were Catherine Hobbs, Michael Cook,
Jeannette Bastian, Jim Burant, Elizabeth Yakel, Caroline Williams, and Joanna
Sassoon. James O'Toole chaired the wrapnup session, which included a commen-
tary from the chairs and general interventions from the conference attendees.
9. Discussions of the particular values of personal genres to history are pro-
vided by Catherine Hobbs, "The Character of Personal Archives: Reflection
on the Value of Records of Individuals," Archivaria52 (Fall 2001): 126-35; and
Sue McKemmish, "Evidence of Me," Archives and Manuscripts 24, no. 1 (1996):
28-45.