Hello - I have recently become the collections manager for a museum with
tens of thousands of objects (both cultural and natural history).  The
earliest collections records go back to 1914 when the museum started.  The
various numbering systems also go back that far though the most recent (and
ornate) incarnation was brought to life in the 1960s.  None of the records
are computerized.  Many objects are not numbered or even properly
accessioned.

I want to start properly accessioning objects into the collections (so I
can clear a space on my worktable!) but want to begin this process with a
numbering system that will withstand all (or at least most) of the demands
for flexibility that past, present and future cataloguing may require.
Sometime in the next few years we hope to secure the funding to support a
computerized database and the staff to process collections items and
records.  I need a system that will survive the next few uncomputerized
years and that will convert easily to a non-customized database package
when the time comes.

My question is this: when creating unique object numbers is it industry
standard to encode the number with year, donor, object-within-donation or
is it also acceptable to assign sequentially unique numbers that have no
other embedded meaning beyond their unique status and ability to link to
associated records?  And, are there off-the-shelf database systems that can
handle either type of number-sequence?  I can see advantages to both types
of numbering but would like to know what others in the field think.

(Background:  The byzantine numbering system already in place is divided
into culture groups (denoted by an arbitrary 2 letter prefix, e.g. 'AA' for
Korea), and various numbers, some of which record the year it was
catalogued and some don't. (AA 65.1 could be the first Korean artifact
registered in 1965 - AA 363 could be anything).  The beginnings and ends of
particular number-sequences are virtually impossible to determine without
extensive research.  Objects are also assigned function codes (e.g. 'daily
garb' 2.1 or 'toys and games' 5.2 etc.) and then stored within their
culture groups and function codes.  This physical layout is the only means
for searching within the collections.  The card catalogue cannot be
searched unless you know the number already.  Searches by donor are almost
impossible, searches by year of accession are possible but difficult,
searches by object type are conducted in a shelf-by-shelf scan, and
searches within cultural group are also done physically.)

Thank you in advance for any advice you might be able to offer,
Lindsey Richardson
Collections Manager
The Children's Museum
300 Congress Street
Boston, MA  02210

=========================================================
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).