Skip to main content
Log in

Questioning autonomy: an alternative perspective on the principles which govern archival description

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archival Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article employs lenses of the history of systems thinking and elements of cybernetic thought to develop an alternative perspective on the principles (respect des fonds, provenance and original order) which govern the practice of archival description. It seeks to focus attention on the idea of autonomy and the questioning of this idea that rests within the practice and to demonstrate how this questioning ultimately resolves into a concern with epistemology and with the question of how we can describe the world around us without any point of reference external to ourselves. This article will also suggest an alternative perspective on the principles which govern archival description, namely that they should be seen as an injunction to account for the point of view in points of view. Moreover, that such principles should be seen as governing archival description, not in the sense of directing archivists how to describe archives, but rather in the sense of being an archival expression of the check that governs, the epistemological question inherent in, all our descriptions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baecker D (2006) The form of the firm. Organization 13(1):109–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunn J (2011) Multiple narratives, multiple perspectives: Observing archival description. PhD Thesis, UCL. http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1322455/. Accessed 19 July 2012

  • Duchein M (1983) Theoretical principles and practical problems of respect des fonds in archival science. Archivaria 16:64–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Duranti L (1993) Origin and development of the concept of archival description. Archivaria 35:47–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastwood T (2000) Putting the parts of the whole together: systematic arrangement of archives. Archivaria 50:93–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer G (1973) Letting the archival dust settle: some remarks on the record group concept. J Soc Arch 4(8):640–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franchi S, Güzeldere G and Minch E (1995) Interview with Heinz von Foerster” Stanf Humanit Rev 4: n. pag

  • Heylighen F and Joslyn C (2001) Cybernetics and second order cybernetics. In Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology, vol 4, 3rd edn. Academic Press, New York

  • Horsman P (1993) Taming the elephant: an orthodox approach to the principle of provenance. In: Abukhanfusa K, Sydbeck S (eds) The principle of provenance: report from the First Stockholm Conference on Archival Theory and the Principle of Provenance 2–3 September 1993. Swedish National Archives, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Horsman P (2002) The last dance of the phoenix, or the de-discovery of the archival fonds. Archivaria 54:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley C (1995a) Ambient functions—abandoned children to zoos. Archivaria 40:21–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley C (1995b) Problems with provenance. Arch Manuscr 23(2):234–259. Also available at: http://www.infotech.monash.edu.au/research/groups/rcrg/publications/provenance.html. Accessed 12 July 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley C (2005) Parallel provenance (If these are your records, where are your stories?). Records Continuum Research Group, Monash University. http://infotech.monash.edu/research/groups/rcrg/publications/parallel-provenance-combined.pdf. Accessed 10 October 2011

  • Jenkinson H (1922) A manual of archive administration including the problems of war archives and archive making. Humphrey Milford, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann N (1995) Social systems. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann N (2006) System as difference. Organization 13(1):37–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacNeil H (2005) Picking our text: archival description, authenticity and the archivist as editor. Am Arch 68:264–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Maturana H, Varela F (1980) Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living. D Reidel Publishing Co, Dordrecht. Boston studies in the philosophy of science 42

  • Maturana H, Varela F (1998) The tree of knowledge: the biological roots of human understanding. Shambhala, Boston and London

    Google Scholar 

  • McKemmish S (1994) Are records ever actual? In: McKemmish S, Piggott M (eds) The records continuum: Ian Maclean and Australian Archives first fifty years. Ancora Press in association with Australian Archives, Clayton, pp 187–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Meehan J (2009) Making the leap from parts to whole: evidence and inference in archival arrangement and description. Am Arch 72:72–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar L (2002) The death of the fonds and the resurrection of provenance: archival context in space and time. Archivaria 53:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller S, Feith JA, Fruin R (2003) Manual for the arrangement and description of archives; translation of the second edition by Arthur H. Leavitt. With New Introductions by Peter Horsman, Eric Ketelaar, Theo Thomassen and Marjorie Rabe Barritt. Society of American Archivists, Chicago, Leavitt

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxford English Dictionary (2011) Cybernetics. Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com/Accessed 12 October 2011

  • Scott P (1966) The record group concept: a case for abandonment. Am Arch 29:493–504

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidl D, Becker KH (2006) Organisations as distinction generating and processing systems: Niklas Luhmann’s contribution to organization studies. Organization 13(1):9–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith C (1986) A case for abandonment of ‘respect’. Arch Manuscr 14(2):154–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer-Brown G (1969) Laws of form. George Allen and Unwin Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Varela F (1979) Principles of biological autonomy. North Holland, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bertalanffy L (1950) An outline of general system theory. Br J Philos Sci 1:134–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Foerster H (2003) Understanding understanding: essays on cybernetics and cognition. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener N (1948) Cybernetics or control and communication in the animal and the machine. The Technology Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakel E (2003) Archival representation. Arch Sci 3:1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to thank the Arts and Humanities Research Council (UK) for funding the research upon which this article is based, all the participants in that research and Alexandra Eveleigh, Dr Andrew Flinn, Dr Elizabeth Shepherd, Geoffrey Yeo, the editors and all the anonymous peer reviewers for their comments and advice on drafts of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jenny Bunn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bunn, J. Questioning autonomy: an alternative perspective on the principles which govern archival description. Arch Sci 14, 3–15 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-013-9200-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-013-9200-2

Keywords

Navigation