>I am a new subscriber to this list service. Was wondering if anyone out
>there was also from a small, local history museum?
>
>I am currently writing a Collections Manual. We have only about 500 items,
>focusing on farmlife, textiles, schools, community, etc. Am having trouble,
>however, in coming up with a good classification system. In an AASLH
>leaflet, they suggest a serial format such as
>1 blah blah
>   11 blah blah
>   12 blah blah
>
>etc. on down to six numbers. This seems like the best format, but am
>wondering how detailed to get, what are the different varieties of objects,
>etc. Does anyone from a similar museum have a classification system that
>seems to work for them that they could E-mail me?? Thanks
>
>Angela Trigg, Director, Gwinnett History Museum in Lawrenceville, Ga.
>(metro-Atlanta) E-mail address: [log in to unmask]
 
I recently catalogued the very small collection of a local history museum
(777 items), using the NPS guidelines for classification as a general
outline. Even with a small collection, it becomes immediatly apparent that
any classification system requires the cataloguer to impose an artificial
order on information that is in reality quite amorphous. Is that quilt with
historical text stitched-in a textile or document? Both of course, but the
classification system probably requires a choice.
 
Personally, I tended to approach this dilemma with extended periods of
ratiocination, to convince myself that any choice I made was the best
available. It soon became apparent however, that I was spending far too much
time thinking about it, and far too little time cataloguing.
 
I arrived at the conclusion that, because I was using a computer to
construct this catalog, classification was not _really_ that important. I
certainly didn't do away with it, but I no longer agonized over decisions of
when to split and when to lump. When I had trouble deciding between two
classes, I simply mentioned that fact in the description. Since a computer
database can be searched using any text string, a search for a particular
class will return both the items actually so classified, and those
cross-referenced with that class as an alternate classification. So long as
the description is as complete as possible, you have in a sense a separate
classification for each adjective you have used in that description.
 
   Andrew J. Morris
   [log in to unmask]