The term archives has many meanings; it encompasses a complex array of institutional, political, social, and cultural aspects. Archivists think about archival materials in terms of what they acquire, arrange, describe, preserve, and make accessible, but many think in more abstract ways.
The topics of history and cultural memory reflect the fundamental questions of archival identity: who archivists are and what they do. Archivists often use the metaphors of culture and memory to make the profession more understandable to others.
Memory Defined
All documents arise from the act of memorializing something—be it recording or sharing information—and the fact that people create and retain records.
Memory may be described in three ways:
A place where information is stored or from which ideas are recalled. Memories can be retrieved, reshaped by others, and distributed.
A thing or object that can be measured or managed.
An activity akin to a technology, machine, or performance that fixes items for later recall. As such, memory is a construction and a work in progress.
All three categories reflect the multifaceted definition of archives as a repository, as its holdings of the repository, and as the work archivists do. The usefulness of memory recalled by archives is shaped by both the quality of the documents as credible evidence, and the transparency of the context in which people create them.
Archivists also emphasize the importance of authenticity. Without quality and openness, archival collections lack a foundation on which to build. The assumption is that history is a pursuit of the truth so that history is written to memorialize that truth.
When archives develop collecting policies and appraise potential additions to their holdings, they’re assessing the quality of documents as evidence. When archivists arrange and describe collections, they increasingly aim at transparency, recognizing the stamp archivists inevitably put on collections.
Cultural Memory
Memory is complex and exists on several levels. It can be personal: who we are and what shapes us. It can be at the group level, that is, shared experiences that shape communities and the members of those communities. Culture also shapes memory. Memory fades if it’s not supported by something that preserves it.
As humans, we often look to things as representations of something else. For example, finding aids are commonly referred to as “archival representations” as they constitute surrogates for the collections.
These collections are themselves representations of the people, places, and events they document. In that respect, they have symbolic significance beyond research value.
The Impact of Technology
The impact of technology on history and cultural memory is still being investigated. Think, for instance, about how we view information through machine interfaces. On a technical level, the interface is the translation of the computer’s binary code to text and symbols that people understand. On a human level, the interface is how the archives presents the information and provides access to users. If users are approaching archives primarily or initially through websites, the interface becomes the intermediary between the user and the archives. Archivists may contextualize documents in the finding aid, but the way those finding aids are presented on the website has a consequence for the user’s sense-making.
The Myth of Objectivity
Archival records hold just a sliver of the documentary record and cultural memory. As George Orwell wrote in 1984, “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” In the context of appraisal and acquisition, archivists make decisions about what to save. Accountability and transparency come into play during these decisions.
Archives are powerful institutions that control the past and have a myth of impartiality, neutrality, and objectivity, and thus have power over memory and identity—and history.
The blog was originally published on Lucidea's blog.
Many archives exist within environments of chronic underfunding. Community archives, small historical societies, or lone arrangers may work with little more than donated materials, a handful of volunteers, and minimal budgets.
However, these institutions remain vital, safeguarding the histories of communities often absent from mainstream narratives. Scarcity shapes their reality, yet it can still allow meaningful work.
Humanity produces more digital content than at any other point in history. Every click, message, and post contributes to an expanding universe of data that represents the cultural memory of our time. At the center of this transformation stand archivists, the professionals uniquely trained to ensure that memories survive in the future. However, even as the scale of the challenge grows, their voices risk being sidelined in public conversations about digital preservation.
In recent years, the concept of “slow librarianship” has emerged as a thoughtful response to the accelerating pace and pressures placed upon library professionals. Drawing inspiration from the broader slow movement, it emphasizes care, reflection, ethics, and people-centered work over speed and efficiency.
The archival profession is characterized by dedication to public memory, cultural preservation, and service. However, beneath this noble mission lies a troubling reality: the increasing reliance on gig and contract labor.
Written documents have long occupied a privileged position in archives as the most authoritative memory source. However, this excludes vast repositories of knowledge that reside outside the written word, especially within Indigenous communities, where memory is often preserved and transmitted through oral traditions, performance, storytelling, ceremony, and embodied practices.
Archival description is often treated as a neutral or technical task: summarizing contents, assigning subject headings, and organizing metadata for retrieval. However, description is actually far from neutral. It shapes how users interpret records, which narratives are centered, and whose voices are made visible or erased.
As the archival profession reckons with the legacies of colonialism, more institutions and practitioners are turning toward Indigenous and decolonial approaches that reframe traditional archival practice. Central to this shift is recognizing cultural protocols and community-defined rules governing how knowledge is created, shared, accessed, and preserved. Cultural protocols are foundational to ethical, respectful, and reciprocal relationships between archives and Indigenous communities.
In recent decades, Indigenous communities and archivists have challenged the dominant frameworks that have long shaped archival practice. Traditionally, Western archival models have prioritized state authority, institutional control, and the presumption of neutrality. These models often fail to reflect Indigenous worldviews, community needs, or the rights of Indigenous peoples over their records and heritage.
As archival practice shifts to meet the challenges of the digital age, the ethical use of born-digital materials has become one of the most pressing concerns for archivists. These materials—emails, websites, text messages, digital photographs, spreadsheets, social media posts, and more—are created and stored digitally from their inception.
The fundamental principles of archival preservation focus on the agents of deterioration, preventive conservation, and essential preservation strategies applied in archival settings.
The monetary appraisal of archives and manuscripts is a critical yet underexplored intersection of library science and financial valuation. This article addresses the persistent knowledge gap between archival assessment and fiscal valuation and provides an overview of the monetary appraisal process in the United States. It focuses on concluding the fair market value (FMV) of noncash charitable contributions, a process governed by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). By documenting practices and terminology, the article serves as a resource for archivists navigating the complexities of donor relations and institutional stewardship. It advocates for increased fiscal literacy within the archival profession, suggesting that an integrated understanding of market dynamics and stewardship costs is essential for the care and financial substantiation of collections.
Proper archival storage is one of the most critical aspects of archival preservation. In addition to housing collections in a dedicated archival storage room, using suitable storage materials and enclosures helps protect archival collections from environmental damage, physical wear, and chemical deterioration.
One of the core challenges archivists face is determining the appropriate description level for materials in their collections. From broad collection-level overviews to granular item-level details, descriptive hierarchies play a crucial role in conveying the context and structure of archival materials.
Description is a cornerstone of archival practice, providing the means for users and archivists to understand, access, and interpret materials.
Mixed-media archives, which contain physical and digital records, present unique challenges for archival arrangement. These collections require archivists to develop strategies that address the different needs of physical and digital materials while maintaining the collection’s coherence and accessibility.
Digital records have introduced new challenges to traditional archival arrangement practices. While the principles of original order and provenance remain relevant, the nature of digital materials requires archivists to adapt these principles to new formats and technologies.
Archival arrangement organizes and structures archival materials to ensure efficient management, access, and preservation.
Redaction in archival work—obscuring or removing sensitive information from records—has become a central concern in contemporary archival ethics. As archives increasingly acquire born-digital records and digitize historical collections for online access, archivists must grapple with data privacy, access, transparency, and potential harm.
Archives have traditionally focused on preserving historical records, ensuring access, and maintaining the integrity of collections. However, in the digital age, the moral responsibilities of archivists have grown more complex.
Archives have long been viewed as bastions of memory, preservation, and historical accountability. However, archivists must confront ethical questions in an era of digital surveillance, data harvesting, and global information flows.
As archival institutions evolve from custodians of information to facilitators of memory and meaning-making, emotional engagement has become a vital, though often overlooked, dimension of archival design.
Archival reading rooms have long been the centerpiece of public access to collections. They are where researchers engage with historical documents, where discovery becomes tangible, and where the institutional identity of an archives is most visibly embodied.
Archival discovery tools, such as catalogs, finding aids, search interfaces, and digital repositories, are often the first point of contact between users and collections. These tools serve as maps and compasses, guiding users through vast and often complex holdings.
Design thinking has become a widely adopted approach in fields ranging from technology to education, prized for emphasizing empathy, experimentation, and iterative problem-solving. For archives, traditionally shaped around internal workflows and professional conventions, design thinking presents an opportunity to reimagine outreach and engagement strategies from users’ perspectives.
As the archival profession embraces a broader commitment to accessibility and equity, it must consider how design choices affect neurodivergent archives users.
Transcription is a powerful tool in the effort to make archives more accessible. It transforms handwritten, printed, and audiovisual materials into searchable, readable, and usable text, extending the reach of archival collections to users who might otherwise face barriers to access.
As archives increasingly move into the digital realm, ensuring online accessibility has become a fundamental responsibility. For users who are blind, have low vision, or experience cognitive or motor disabilities, screen readers serve as a vital gateway to digital content. These tools translate onscreen text and interface elements into synthesized speech or Braille, allowing users to navigate websites, databases, and catalogs without relying on visual cues. However, for screen readers to function effectively, digital environments must be designed with intentionality and care. In archival settings, this may be overlooked.
Archives embody the principles of access, stewardship, and service. However, for some users, physical and digital archives remain challenging to navigate, use, or even enter. Barriers to archival access are often unintentional, stemming from outdated facilities, inaccessible technologies, or limited awareness of diverse user needs.
Reference services play a pivotal role in the archival field, acting as a bridge between users and the wealth of information in archival collections.
Well-resourced institutions have developed archival best practices, including comprehensive finding aids, climate-controlled storage, and digital preservation systems. For small or resource-constrained archives, these standards can feel out of reach. The danger is that the profession’s ideals may discourage institutions from taking action, leaving records vulnerable. The solution lies in paring down practices and procedures without abandoning principles.