Marybeth and All,
This is my first post to the Digest. It is a great resource--thanks!
Marybeth, I would like to receive your full break down of archeology
project lab and field records. I am devising a cataloging system for
Prince William County's archaeological collections and will find your
system for organizing records very useful. Please feel free to respond
to me off the list, if you like at [log in to unmask]
Heather A. Hembrey
Preservationist
Historic Preservation Division
Prince William County Government
17674 Main Street
Dumfries, VA 22026
Phone: (703) 792-5618 Fax: (703) 221-7504
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Marybeth Tomka
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 7:26 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MUSEUM-L] MUSEUM-L Digest - 20 Jul 2010 to 21 Jul 2010
(#2010-192)
Liz,
I have organized my associated documentation by the categories of field
records, lab records and administration. All but the administration is
separated by site as warranted -- that is, there are a large enough
amount of records to warrant different folders. I also then break down
the lab and field records into meaningful units: photographs, field
forms, daily journals, etc. and for the lab records, original
inventories, rehabbed inventories, final catalogue, analysis records,
etc. I can send you my full break down if you want it.
I agree that using archival series, subseries can be overkill but for
large projects you need the separation by site at the very least. and
not reorganizing the documents is useless -- as you know archaeologists
are notorious for leaving things jumbled!
Ah, the joys of an archaeological repository!
Regards,
Marybeth
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list on behalf of MUSEUM-L automatic digest
system
Sent: Wed 7/21/2010 11:00 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: MUSEUM-L Digest - 20 Jul 2010 to 21 Jul 2010 (#2010-192)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:55:09 -0700
From: "Clevenger, Liz" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Archaeological Collections: associated documentation
methodology question
Hello fellow Museum-Lers -
This query is for those who curate or otherwise manage archaeological
collections that include associated documentation, and in particular,
for those who have cataloged or otherwise developed formal metadata for
associated documentation. We are beginning to digitize our hard copy
documents and create catalog records to facilitate access to them.
Various sources suggest treating associated documentation as archival
collections, which would mean (1) not reorganizing the documents in any
fashion unless you have archival training (and none of us do) and (2)
developing a metadata structure that employs a fairly extensive
hierarchy (series--subseries--sub-subseries--file unit etc) for
organizing the documents.
I am curious to hear if this archival approach to organization is taken
by others who curate associated documentation, particularly in
archaeological repositories, or whether the real life situation varies.
In my experience, associated documents (especially from older projects)
are often not in any particularly sensible order and could benefit
greatly from gentle reorganization. And, in my assumption, an extensive
hierarchy for describing project documents is potentially overkill.
I welcome any advice or experiences people are willing to share. Please
feel free to contact me off-list at
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>.
Thanks in advance -
aloha
~Liz
Liz N. Clevenger, MA, RPA
Curator of Archaeology
(415) 561-5086
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Presidio Archaeology Lab |
www.presidio.gov/history/archaeology<http://www.presidio.gov/history/arc
haeology> | (415) 561-ARCH info | (415) 561-5089 fax
The Presidio Trust | P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, CA 94129
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message
to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read
"Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:15:25 -0700
From: David Harvey <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Archaeological Collections: associated documentation
methodology question
Liz,
In my experience in working with and researching archaeological
collections
it would be appropriate to organize all the associated documentation by
site, just as you would with a group of artifacts. Any papers or photos
that
are not identifiable by site would then be left for more research and
organization.
Cheers!
Dave
David Harvey
Senior Conservator and Museum Consultant
Los Angeles, CA
MindingTheMuseum.com
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message
to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read
"Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
