MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 21 Jul 1995 08:11:07 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (46 lines)
Let me add a note to Sandra's . . .

We too had to go to the year of accession rather than the year of
(possible) acquirment.  We keep up this system by keeping up with the
current year.  In other words, this year is JM95.nnn, and last was
JM94.nnn . . . . make sence?  The year we started this process was
1976, so the majority of our objects have a JM76.nnn number.  We too
keep the relevent data on acquisition and donors on the data base.  When
the 1976 inventory was done (I wasn't there then), the owner went from
room to room and started counting . . .so, the first item in the first
room was JM76.1 (and if there were "parts" to this piece, they received
an "A", "B", "C" after the last number).  Until we get a decent software
package this numbering system isn't terribly used-friendly, cause you
have to remember which room the item ORIGINALLY lived in, but I made a
master list when I came on board in '86, and can usually find the item
without too much difficulty (hummmm?).  Having a decent software package
with the ability to sort by subject, location and ac# would be a BIG
help.

Good luck!

Lee Langston-Harrison, Curator
James Monroe Museum
Fredericksburg, VA 22401

[log in to unmask]

>
> Your situation is very similar to the one we are currently dealing with.  At
> the Old Governor's Mansion, an Historic House Museum our collections were
> gathered over many years, in some ways very similar to your position.  I am
> currently accessioning the entire collection in proper format.  We  are
> using 1995 for our date as well, without an "x", regardless of the date of
> acquisition.  This simplifies matters, and of course relevant information on
> date of acquisition and source is included in the database and hardcopy.
> This method is a necessity in our situation, having  approximately 10,000
> objects to complete in a year.  I also find it is a good starting point, as
> further acquisitions in future years will carry the date for that year (now
> that we are getting our act together and will accession objects as they come i
n)
> *********************
> Ms Sandra Mason
> Director, Old Governor's Mansion
> [log in to unmask]
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2