Preface

Nearly thirty years ago I commenced my interest in the history of archival administration, archival

repositories, and the archival profession. My first excursions in archival history were very practical, intended to help

me gain a better understanding of this new (for me) field and the records I was working with at the time. Like many

other Americans before me, I was searching for a usable past, one providing a rock on which I could ground a

personal foundation for understanding my own work. 1 Just as I would immerse myself into learning about the

holdings of the particular archives I was working in, I also endeavored to make myself knowledgeable about the

origins and subsequent evolution of the repository caring for these records. The result, for me at least, has been a

duality of interests in the history of the archival profession and its institutions along with that of records, recordkeeping

systems, and records technologies. Moving from the repository to the classroom has only enhanced these interests as I

teach about records, recordkeeping systems, and the people and organizations creating and caring for them. The

responsibility for explaining archives necessitates understanding them, and a historical knowledge of them is critical.

Unfortunately, it seems, and as this volume attests to, American archivists have not embraced such

notions (at least this seems the case judging by scholarly publications on historical topics and themes), perhaps because

of other practical matters. In the early 1970s I thought that I would do considerably more research in this area, but I

was constantly diverted by other professional duties, first as a working archivist and then as an archival educator.

Somehow I have managed to develop one collection of essays featuring historical perspectives on American archives,

mostly written in the 1990s, but this is far less than I ever intended to do. 2 My own diversions might also suggest

why other archivists have ignored these topics; my own historical writings, and those of many others in the discipline,

often generated from very practical challenges and issues. In effect, this present volume represents a reaching back into

past archival research, an activity surprising me as perhaps it might others, but one I hope will inspire others to do

likewise. We need enhanced attention about the origins and historical dimensions of archives so that archivists, the

users of archives, and the public comprehend their nature and their importance.

Where am I coming from in this volume? From the early 1970s into the mid-1980s, I researched and

wrote a series of articles dealing with certain aspects of Maryland's archival history. At the outset I never intended to

write a full history of Maryland 's interest in its older records. Moreover, I had pretty much given up on this area of

research when I departed from Maryland in 1983, never to return to work or reside there. However, I have been

thinking of these essays for the past few years, prompted by a nagging awareness of my own discipline's lack of

interest in its own past and the increasing interest by other disciplines in archives. In the mid-1990s, asked to write a

conference paper considering the development of archives and historical societies in the Middle Atlantic states in the

period 1789-1860, I discovered little substantive new research had been done on this topic since I had last looked a

decade before. 3A few years later, asked to prepare another essay evaluating the state of American archival

history, I found that the best and most interesting research on the development of recordkeeping systems and archives

was being done by individuals working far outside the field. 4My interest in the essays I had written on Maryland

archival history was renewed, because they really were not out-dated and drawn together into a single volume

provided only the second history of state archival development since the first had been done (on North Carolina)

almost a half-century before by H. G. Jones. 5And, I remain concerned that much historical research seemingly

about archives was really about many other matters far from a traditional notion of archives (postmodern musings

about texts, information, memory, nostalgia, nationalism, community and other matters valuable in their own right but

not always really about archives or adding to our understanding about archives). 6

Regardless of the matter of how much historical research about archives is being done, it is nevertheless

true that most American archivists continue to cluster around a state identity. The establishment of state government

archives or state historical societies with government archival responsibilities provided a focal point and leadership for

most working archivists from their beginning in 1901. Even the much earlier foundations of private historical societies

usually emphasized the states' earlier histories. This perspective has been reinforced considerably, with statewide

historical records assessments and planning in the 1980s and 1990s and reinvigorated (although unevenly so) by State

Historical Records Advisory Boards. This represents a shifting away from national leadership within the field to state

and regional identities, although surprisingly this new interest has not supported the research and publication on state

archival history. In my own work on one state assessment and planning project, I immersed myself first in the history of

archives in that state believing that such knowledge provided a critical context for understanding current issues and

challenges (much like organizational memory is essential to assisting that organization dealing with its present concerns).

7For whatever reasons, the American archival profession continues to suffer from a lack of historical interest,

despite all those who have entered into the discipline from history. Historians might suggest that this reflects the quality

of historians opting to become archivists. While others would suggest that the educational preparation of historians

might be the fault (reflecting an education far removed from the archives and the records found there).

My original intention was to expand on these earlier essays to bring the story of Maryland 's archives up

to the present. I decided against this, due to a variety of factors including time but also the need to capture the

complexities of Maryland 's archival development in the past few decades. Suffice it to say that new approaches and

significant developments in Maryland 's archives have continued, including cooperative partnerships, 8 statewide

planning, 9 innovative efforts to generate new historical documentation, 10 creative collaborative uses of archival

records with other documentation, 11 and the establishment of new kinds of institutional archives. 12Archives

and historical manuscripts continue to build off of a rich and varied tradition in Maryland , much like that of other

states. In the years since the Second World War, long after the establishment of the larger archival programs like the

Maryland Historical Society and the Maryland Hall of Records, other repositories were founded. Starting in the 1960s

the University of Maryland at College Park began to acquire and build a major labor archives. 13In this same

decade, mirroring developments across the profession and the nation, academic archives began to grow, such as with

the founding of an institutional archives at Towson State University in 1971, 14 while other academic institutions

with a longer history, such as the Johns Hopkins University, 15 have considerably expanded the scope of their

holdings and commitment to archival and historical manuscripts work. In 1978 the Alan Mason Chesney Medical

Archives of The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions was formerly opened, quickly earning a place as one of the

leading medical archives in America . 16Business archives have also proliferated, such as the Hays T. Watkins

Research Library at the B&O Railroad Museum, Inc., established in 1991 and holding “B&O Railroad business

records, manuscript collections, maps, mechanical and engineering drawings, trade catalogues, periodicals,

microforms, paper ephemera, as well as video tapes and motion picture films.” 17Specialized collecting

repositories, focused on the business history of Maryland , have also emerged in more recent years, such as the

Baltimore Museum of Industry's Research Center holding records such as the corporate archives of Baltimore Gas &

Electric Company and those of the Esskay Corporation, a meatpacking and processing company. 18Some local

governments have also established small, working archives, such as has happened in Montgomery County. 19All in

all, the history of the past half-century of archival development in Maryland remains a story, complex and rich in its

own right, needing to be told by someone else more involved with such developments. Recent controversies, such as

the lawsuit for access to the sitting Governor's records and problems with access to local public records, may have

something to do with the general nature and historical evolution of Maryland's records and archival repositories but

they may also be reflections of the more common characteristics of modern records. 20

What this volume intends to do is to examine the origins of the primary archival programs in the state –

the Maryland Historical Society, Maryland Hall of Records (now State Archives), and Baltimore City Archives, each

representing an archetypical repository found in other states. The origins of these more recent archival programs rest

on the foundation of these much older and still key archival programs and repositories. None of these institutions were

the earliest of their kind nor can they be considered models, although the Baltimore City Archives was one of the

pioneering municipal archives even though it has had a checkered history (and it appears to be defunct as a viable

entity). Together, their origins represent the development of the foundation of Maryland 's archival foundation, created

by the mid-twentieth century and reflecting three centuries of archival activities and angst. The nature of these kinds of

archival repositories – private, state government, and local government – generally represent what has developed in

other states. The faltering of the municipal archives even reflects the struggles of these kinds of across the nation and

may have less to do with any peculiar characteristics of Maryland or Baltimore . The only missing element, at least for

full treatment, in this volume is the establishment and development of university archives. Typical of the nature of these

academic repositories, only faint stirrings of these organizations were evident in the period examined here (although

institutions like The Johns Hopkins University began to acquire historical manuscripts collections in the period

described here).

My own work has been described as a sort of Progressive archival historiography, whereby I detect a

continuing improvement in archival development. That m y work on the history of the field has been seen as seminal

by some is evident in a major essay seeking to analyze the state of research, although the review was critical about

many aspects of my work. 21 Even so the essay ended by referring back to some of the main themes of my work:

“A few years ago, Cox offered a challenge to the profession. ‘It is vital,' he suggested, ‘that we know as much as

possible about the development of the profession to aid our continued self-study, reevaluation, and progress, especially

in time of unusual stress and change. We need to direct the historian's perspective not only to the records under our

care but to our profession as well.' Archivists have been exposed to much description and little analysis, much thinking

and writing that reinforce our a priori assumptions and little critical self-analysis about the costs and implications of

social and professional change. Believing that archivists' shared hopes for the future as a profession can only be

realized if they understand their past, the author repeats Cox's challenge.” 22This present volume is part of my

continuing challenge to the archival community, as well as to others who might have interests in how the nation builds

and refines its most substantial part of public memory – its documentary heritage. I am not studying the history of

archives as a disinterested spectator, but as one who has spent his career working as an archivist and teaching others

to become archivists. At the same time, it is perhaps true that any scholar who uses or who has used archives and

historical manuscripts cannot be a disinterested commentator, especially as the historical profession has been immersed

in controversies of its own. Historian Richard Evans notes, for example, the “prevalence of historical controversy,

endemic in the profession for decades, has long since disabused historians of the idea that the truth lies buried in the

documents and that once the historian has unearthed it, no one ever need perform the same operation again”; Evans

continues, “whatever the means they use, historians still have to engage in the basic Rankean spadework of

investigating the provenance of documents, of inquiring about the motives of those who wrote them, the circumstances

in which they written, and the ways in which they relate to other documents on the same subject.” 23This book is an

effort to examine something Evans does not discuss – how archival collections are formed to begin with and why it is

they have what they have when the historians and other researcher arrive at the repository.

The first chapter of this volume introduces the general topic of American archival history, establishing a

context for the importance of state histories. This chapter is a revised version of "American Archival History: Its

Development, Needs, and Opportunities," American Archivist 46 (Winter 1983): 31-41. Unfortunately, despite the

essay being nearly twenty years old, there was little need to revise it with inclusions of important new research and

writing on American archival. Instead, I have made references to writings with implications for archival history, but

generally written outside of the field. Individuals interested in my views on this should consult "The Failure or Future of

American Archival History: A Somewhat Unorthodox View," Libraries & Culture 35 (Winter 2000): 141-154, also

included in my Closing an Era: Historical Perspectives on Modern Archives and Records Management (Westport,

Conn : Greenwood Press, 2000). While there is a diversity of research and writing about this topic, it is very uneven

and certainly not at all comprehensive.

The second chapter considers the efforts to manage public records from the colonial era up to the

founding of the Maryland Historical Society. There was a preservation impulse among Marylanders long before the

creation of the first archival repository. This chapter brings together previously unpublished materials with one of my

earliest essays, " Public Records in Colonial Maryland," American Archivist 37 (April 1974): 263-75. It is a familiar

story of intermittent interest in the records and their maintenance, generally marked by long periods of neglect or

obsessing about their neglect. Controversies about access to government records, their storage, indexing and copying,

and other similar issues sometimes seem vaguely familiar with our own contemporary concerns about the preservation

of electronic records, although the scale of challenges and intensity of concerns are much different because of the

modern news media.

The next chapter tells the story of the Maryland Historical Society, emphasizing its role as a surrogate

state government archives, a mission it carried out for a century with mixed results. This chapter draws on a number of

previously published essays, including "A History of the Calvert Papers, MS. 174," Maryland Historical Magazine 68

(Fall 1973): 309-22; "The Historical Development of the Manuscripts Division of the Maryland Historical Society,"

Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Winter 1974): 409-17; and "The Origins of American Religious Archives: Ethan

Allen, Pioneer Church Historian and Archivist of Maryland," Journal of the Canadian Church Historical Society 29

(October 1987): 48-63. Private historical societies like Maryland's seem quaint by modern standards of archival work

and standards, but it is absolutely the case that without them – with whatever odd mixes of elitism, antiquarianism, and

other characteristics they possessed – many of the oldest records might have disappeared or been more endangered

than they were. These institutions reflected their own peculiar personalities, but they served essential roles in the efforts

to deal with our earliest documentary heritage.

The fourth chapter concentrates on the journey of creation of the Maryland Hall of Records, now the

Maryland State Archives, and the establishment of another, ultimately less successful government records program, the

Baltimore City Archives. This chapter draws on “A Century of Frustration: The Movement for a State Archives in

Maryland, 1811-1935,” Maryland Historical Magazine 78 (Summer 1983): 106-117 (this essay is also drawn upon in

chapter three); "The Plight of American Municipal Archives: Baltimore, 1729-1979," American Archivist 42 (July

1979): 281-92; and "The Need for Comprehensive Records Programs in Local Government: Learning by Mistakes in

Baltimore, 1947-82," Provenance (Fall 1983): 14-34. The chapter aims to compare the somewhat parallel, but very

different, stories of these two government programs.

The final brief essay summarizes lessons learned from this analysis of Maryland archives, as well as

drawing on some other work to determine just how typical (or untypical) Maryland is in the development of American

archives.

An aspect of archival development that this study does not analyze is that of personal recordkeeping.

This is an area beginning to receive more attention, deservedly so. These studies include analyzes of personal diary

writing, 24 the nature of correspondence, 25 the role of individuals in maintaining unofficial records, 26 the

role of personal improvement manuals on recordkeeping, 27 the role of personal information collecting on

recordkeeping, 28 and the impact of new technologies on personal recordkeeping 29 - - to name a few potential

and emerging areas of research. It would be interesting to examine how personal recordkeeping related to, or even at

times affected, the origins of archives and historical manuscripts repositories in a state like Maryland (but this is a topic

for another study). Individuals who became historians and collectors may also have worked harder than most to ensure

that their own papers were well managed and would ultimately be placed in an archives someday. The entire nature of

antiquarians, archivists and collecting is another story deserving more serious scholarly reflection. 30

As will be seen in this volume, the history of Maryland 's archival development is not a neatly defined

story of success. What emerged after several centuries was the establishment of some key archival programs and the

beginnings of a community of archivists and manuscripts curators. The formation of a broader range of repositories or

the cohering of an archival community around stronger professional themes is not within the chronological scope of the

study here.

My present connection to Maryland 's archivists is remote. However, the contour of this book was

developed during my working years in that state prior to my departure in 1983. The past two decades, especially my

teaching responsibilities since 1988, has led to a reshaping of the text and interpretation of the subject. My primary

thanks in the early stages of this book are owed to the late Walter Rundell, Jr. and Edward Papenfuse who continues

to work as Maryland 's State Archivist. The reworking of this volume is largely due to my continuing discussions with

colleagues like James M. O'Toole, Barbara Craig, Terry Cook, Tom Nesmith, Margaret Hedstrom, and others who

continue to have an interest in the history of the North American archival profession.

Richard J. Cox
Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania
July 2001

1 This led to one essay wrestling with this perspective, "On the Value of Archival History in the United States," Libraries & Culture 23 (Spring 1988): 135-51, reprinted in my American Archival Analysis: The Recent Development of the Archival Profession in the United States (Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, 1990).

2 Closing an Era: Historical Perspectives on Modern Archives and Records Management (New York : Greenwood Press, 2000).

3 This resulted in "Other Atlantic States: Delaware , Florida , Georgia , Maryland , New Jersey , and South Carolina," in H.G. Jones, ed., Historical Consciousness in the Early Republic : The Origins of State Historical Societies and Collections, 1791-1861 (Chapel Hill: North Caroliniana Society, Inc. and North Carolina Collection, 1995), pp. 102-124.

4 "The Failure or Future of American Archival History: A Somewhat Unorthodox View," Libraries & Culture 35 (Winter 2000): 141-154.

5H. G. Jones, For History's Sake: The Preservation and Publication of North Carolina History 1663-1903 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1966).

6 Terry Cook's analysis of postmodernism on archival theory is a valuable summary, revealing the positive contributions, but it is nevertheless interesting to me that it generally requires an archivist (as Cook is) well-versed in records and archives to sort through the implications of postmodernistic scholarship for understanding archives and records without losing one's way about what archives and records represent. See Terry Cook, “Archival Science and Postmodernism: New Foundations for Old Concepts,” Archival Science 1, no. 1 (2001): 3-24.

7 Principal author, Assessing Alabama's Archives: A Plan for the Preservation of the State's Historical Records (Montgomery: Alabama Historical Records Advisory Board, 1985) and "Alabama's Archival Heritage, 1850-1985," Alabama Review 40 (October 1987): 284-307.

8Jan Blodgett, “Developing Cooperative Archives to Meet the Needs of Small Institutions,” Resource Sharing and Information Networks 11, nos. 1 and 2 (1996): 59-65, describing a partnership between the St. Mary's College of Maryland and the St. Mary's County Records Center .

9Maryland 's State Historical Records Advisory Board prepared a “records assessment and reporting project to evaluate how institutions care for and provide access to the State's historical records. Those assessments, with recommendations, were published as Maryland's Record Heritage: Assessing Needs and Opportunities (1991),” according to information found on its Web site ( http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/msa/mdmanual/26excom/html/26nat.html ).

10Linda Shopes, “The Baltimore Neighborhood Heritage Project: Oral History and Community Involvement,” Radical History Review 25 (1981): 27-44.

11Mark P. Leone, “The Relationship Between Archaeological Data and the Documentary Record: 18 th Century Gardens in Annapolis , Maryland ,” Historical Archaelogy 22, no. 1 (1988): 29-35.

12Nancy McCall and Lisa Mix, “Scholarly Returns: Patterns of Research in a Medical Archives,” Archivaria 41 (Spring 1997): 158-187, discussing the use of records at the Alan Mason Chesney Archives at the Johns Hopkins University .

13 Lauren Brown, Anne Foster, and Timothy Mahoney, “Treasures of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America,” Labor's Heritage 9. no. 1 (1997): 46-59; Lauren Brown, “Labor Union History and Archives: The University of Maryland at College Park Libraries,” Labor History 31, nos.1/2 (1990): 113-116.

14 For information on the Towson State University Archives, refer to http://saber.towson.edu/~cooklib/archives/archive3.html , accessed October 19, 2000 .

15 The Hopkins mission is as follows: “The Special Collections Department of the Milton S. Eisenhower Library collects manuscripts that document four areas of research: the history of science, higher education, literature and politics. In general, we collect personal papers of individuals, although records of organizations are added to the collection on occasion. We usually limit our collecting to the papers of individuals who in some way have had a connection with The Johns Hopkins University but may occasionally accept the papers of non-Hopkins individuals.” For additional information about this institution, see http://archives.mse.jhu.edu:8000/ , accessed October 19, 2000 .

16 Nancy McCall and Harold Kanarek, “The Alan Mason Chesney Archives of the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 56, no. 1 (1982): 88-92.

17 Described as part of the B&O Railroad Museum website at http://www.borail.org/archives.html , accessed October 19, 2000 .

18A description of this repository is available at http://www.thebmi.org/CENTER2.HTM , accessed October 19, 2000 .

19 For information about the Montgomery County Archives, refer to its website at http://www.montgomeryarchives.org/archives1.html , accessed October 19, 2000 .

20 Tom Stuckey, “Court Rules Governor Must Share His Records,” Baltimore Sun , 12 September 2000; Mark Ribbing and Rafael Alvarez, “Blame Set in Records Denial”; Timothy B. Wheeler, “Test Finds Public Records Kept from Public”; Rafael Alvarez, “Public Records Turn Private,” all accessed from the SunSpot , an online news service about Maryland, on August 31, September 1, and September 5, 2000. These stories are very typical of recent reports from other states about poor access to public records and a common lack of knowledge about records legislation.

21 Luke J. Gilliland-Swetland, “The Provenance of a Profession: The Permanence of the Public Archives and Historical Manuscripts Traditions in American Archival History,” American Archivist 54 (Spring 1991): p. 163 fn 6. This essay was republished recently in Randall C. Jimerson, ed., American Archival Studies: Readings in Theory and Practice ( Chicago : Society of American Archivists, 2000), pp. 123-141.

22Gilliland-Swetland, “Provenance of a Profession,” p. 175.

23 Richard J. Evans, In Defense of History (New York: W.W. Norton, 1999), pp. 2, 16-17.

24 Suzanne L. Bunkers and Cynthia A. Huff, eds., Inscribing the Daily: Critical Essays on Women's Diaries (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1996); Alexandra Johnson, The Hidden Writer: Diaries and the Creative Life (New York: Anchor Book, Doubleday, 1998).

25 William Merrill Decker, Epistolary Practices: Letter Writing in America Before Telecommunications (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998).

26 Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, A Midwife's Tale: The Life of Martha Ballard, Based on Her Diary, 1785-1812 (New York: Vintage Books, 1990).

27 Judy Hilkey, Character is Capital: Success Manuals and Manhood in Gilded Age America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1997).

28 Anne L. Bower, ed., Recipes for Reading : Community Cookbooks, Stories, Histories (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1997).

29 Stuart Sherman, Telling Time: Clocks, Diaries, and English Diurnal Form 1660-1785 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996).

30 I have explored this a bit in my "The Archivist and Collecting," Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science , forthcoming, and "The Archivist and Collecting: A Review Essay," American Archivist 59 (Fall 1996): 496-512. These essays are being used in another of my books, tentatively entitled Forming Archives: Rethinking Archival Appraisal .