Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T02:48:52.129Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Making Archaeological Collections Available for Research: Recommendations for Repositories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 August 2019

Julia A. King Open the ORCID record for Julia A. King [Opens in a new window]  and
Patricia Samford
Julia A. King*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, St. Mary's College of Maryland, St. Mary's City, MD 20686, USA
Patricia Samford
Affiliation:
Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory, 10515 Mackall Road, St. Leonard, MD 20685, USA (patricia.samford@maryland.gov)
*
(jking@smcm.edu, corresponding author)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Archaeological collections repositories have two principal aims: preserving collections while also making them accessible. This accessibility is critical for the growing number of researchers turning to collections to study the past. This article describes steps that repositories can take to enhance access to collections in their custody, based on the experience of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory, the state's public archaeological curation facility. These steps include the identification of stakeholders—archaeologists, Native American tribes, and stakeholder communities; creation of a detailed and prioritized collection inventory including artifacts and records; development of finding aids; reconstruction of provenience systems; and exploration of the digital delivery of collection information. For repositories ill equipped to hold archaeological collections, consideration should be given to transferring the collection to one with the appropriate resources and expertise.

Los repositorios de colecciones arqueológicas tienen dos objetivos principales: preservar las colecciones y al mismo tiempo hacerlas accesibles. Esta accesibilidad es crucial para el aumento de la cantidad de investigadores que están recurriendo a las colecciones para estudiar el pasado. Este artículo describe las pasos que los repositorios pueden dar para mejorar el acceso a las colecciones en su custodia. Estos pasos están basados en las experiencias del Laboratorio de conservación arqueológica de Maryland, el centro público de conservación arqueológica del estado, para hacer sus colecciones lo más accesibles posible. Estos pasos implican el reconocimiento de las partes interesadas incluyendo arqueólogos, tribus indígenas estadounidenses y las comunidades interesadas; la creación de un inventario detallado y jerarquizado de la colección que incluya los objetos y los expedientes, el desarrollo de los instrumentos de búsqueda, la reconstrucción de los sistemas de procedencia y la exploración de la difusión digital de la información de las colecciones. Para aquellos repositorios que no están adecuadamente preparados para albergar colecciones arqueológicas, se debe considerar la posibilidad de trasladar la colección al repositorio con los recursos y los conocimientos adecuados.

Keywords

legacy collectionsarchaeological repositoriesresearch in archaeological collectionscolecciones de legadosrepositorios de colecciones arqueológicasinvestigación en colecciones arqueológicas
Type
How to Series
Information
Advances in Archaeological Practice , Volume 7 , Special Issue 3: Archaeological Collections Care: Current Topics and Innovative Trends in the Repository , August 2019 , pp. 311 - 316
Copyright
Copyright 2019 © Society for American Archaeology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES CITED

Allen, Rebecca, and Ford, Ben (editors) 2019 New Life for Archaeological Collections. Society for Historical Archaeology Series in Material Culture Series. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google Scholar
Buck, Rebecca A., and Gilmore, Jean Allman (editors) 2010 Museum Registration Methods. 5th ed. AAM Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Childs, S. Terry, and Benden, Danielle M. 2017 A Checklist for Sustainable Management of Archaeological Collections. Advances in Archaeological Practice 5:12–25.Google Scholar
Childs, S. Terry, and Warner, Mark S. (editors) 2019 Using and Curating Archaeological Collections. SAA Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Faniel, Ixchel, Kansa, Eric, Kansa, Sarah Whitcher, Barrera-Gómez, Jose, and Yakel, Elizabeth 2013 The Challenges of Digging Data: A Study of Context in Archaeological Data Reuse. Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, pp. 295–304. ACM, New York.Google Scholar
Frank, Rebecca D., Yakel, Elizabeth, and Faniel, Ixchel M. 2015 Destruction/Reconstruction: Preservation of Archaeological and Zoological Research Data. Archival Science 15(2):141–167.Google Scholar
King, Julia A. 2009 The Challenges of Dissemination: Accessing Archaeological Data and Interpretations. In Archaeology and Cultural Resource Management: Visions for the Future, edited by Sebastian, Lynne and Lipe, William D., pp. 141–167. School for Advanced Research Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.Google Scholar
King, Julia A. 2016 Comparative Colonialism and Collections-Based Archaeological Research: Dig Less, Catalog More. Museum Worlds 4(1):4–17.Google Scholar
King, Julia A. 2019 Doing Research with Archaeological Collections. In Using and Curating Archaeological Collections, edited by Childs, S. Terry and Warner, Mark S., pp. 3–14. SAA Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Kipp, Angela 2016 Managing Previously Unmanaged Collections: A Practical Guide for Museums. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland.Google Scholar
Lyman, R. Lee 2012 A Historical Sketch on the Concepts of Archaeological Association, Context, and Provenience. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 19:207–240.Google Scholar
Malaro, Marie C., and DeAngelis, Ildiko P. 2012 A Legal Primer on Managing Museum Collections. 3rd ed. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Palmer, David 2011 Archaeology of Jim Crow Era African American Life on Louisiana's Sugar Plantations. In The Materiality of Freedom: Archaeologies of Post-Emancipation Life, edited by Barnes, Jodi, pp. 139–143. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia.Google Scholar
Reibel, Daniel 2018 Registration Methods for the Small Museum. 5th ed. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland.Google Scholar
Sheehan, Beth 2015 Comparing Digital Archaeological Repositories: tDAR versus Open Context. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian 34(4):173–213.Google Scholar
Silberman, Neil Asher 2015 Is Every Sherd Sacred? Moving beyond the Cult of Object-Centred Authenticity. Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies 3(1):61–63.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Lynne P. 1993 Managing Archeological Resources from the Museum Perspective. Technical Brief #13. Archeology Program, National Park Service, Washington, DC. Electronic document, http://www.nps.gov/archeology/pubs/techbr/tch13A.htm, accessed September 12, 2016.Google Scholar
Voss, Barbara L. 2012 Curation as Research: A Case Study in Orphaned and Underreported Archaeological Collections. Archaeological Dialogues 19:145–169.Google Scholar
White, Esther C., and Breen, Eleanor 2012 A Survey of Archaeological Repositories in Virginia. Council of Virginia Archaeologists. Electronic document, http://cova-inc.org/resources/COVAcollectionsSurvey.pdf, accessed October 31, 2018.Google Scholar