Context(s) of the Archive

Both historical and archival theorists use the concept of “context,” but with significantly different referents. Historical context generally refers to circumstances surrounding events or actors of interest, and can range from the local details of events to global trends. Archival context, in contrast, was rigorously defined during the emergence of canonical Western archival theory in the 19th century, and refers to assemblages of records created by an actor – individual or institutional – while conducting its business, which must be preserved according to the canons of provenance and respect des fonds. This paper argues that archival context itself has a history, however, and that the canonical version associated with modernity and a capitalist political economy was preceded in Europe by a particularist, pertinence-based understanding of archival context that emerged from the political economy of privilege in late medieval and early modern Europe. Moreover, a post-modern understanding of archival context embodied in the model of the records continuum is emerging today, in connection with a political economy of commodified information. The essay offers both historical cases and comparative considerations to illuminate this trajectory. Close attention to context in historical and archival theories, which look at how archival thinking and historical thinking were entwined over this entire trajectory, provides a fresh perspective for understanding both past deep structures and current tendencies. The goal of scholarship is both to make meaning out of the evidence around us in disciplinary ways, but also to reflect on the conditions of that meaning-making: the limitations, the questions unasked, the patterns not perceived. Looking at archival regimes as a historian – given that historians today are profoundly dependent on archives – can add a recursive and dynamic perspective on long-standing models of transformative change.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Boletim do Arquivo da Universidade de Coimbra
Published
2025-04-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14195/2182-7974_38_1_4
Primary Topic
Digital and Traditional Archives Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Context(s) of the Archive

Randolph C. Head
Boletim do Arquivo da Universidade de Coimbra
Digital and Traditional Archives Management
article

Context(s) of the Archive

Randolph C. Head
article en

Abstract

Both historical and archival theorists use the concept of “context,” but with significantly different referents. Historical context generally refers to circumstances surrounding events or actors of interest, and can range from the local details of events to global trends. Archival context, in contrast, was rigorously defined during the emergence of canonical Western archival theory in the 19th century, and refers to assemblages of records created by an actor – individual or institutional – while conducting its business, which must be preserved according to the canons of provenance and respect des fonds. This paper argues that archival context itself has a history, however, and that the canonical version associated with modernity and a capitalist political economy was preceded in Europe by a particularist, pertinence-based understanding of archival context that emerged from the political economy of privilege in late medieval and early modern Europe. Moreover, a post-modern understanding of archival context embodied in the model of the records continuum is emerging today, in connection with a political economy of commodified information. The essay offers both historical cases and comparative considerations to illuminate this trajectory. Close attention to context in historical and archival theories, which look at how archival thinking and historical thinking were entwined over this entire trajectory, provides a fresh perspective for understanding both past deep structures and current tendencies. The goal of scholarship is both to make meaning out of the evidence around us in disciplinary ways, but also to reflect on the conditions of that meaning-making: the limitations, the questions unasked, the patterns not perceived. Looking at archival regimes as a historian – given that historians today are profoundly dependent on archives – can add a recursive and dynamic perspective on long-standing models of transformative change.

Boletim do Arquivo da Universidade de CoimbraVol. 38(1)
University of California, Riverside (US)
Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
Openalex Percentile: Top 91%
Digital and Traditional Archives Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.