Abstract
The archival bond is the embodiment of the relationships shared amongst records generated in the course of the same activity, by the same creator. It has been one of the key governing principles of the archival profession since its inception. At the heart of this concept is the notion that records only acquire meaning and identity in the context of the aggregation they originally belong to. This interpretation has been guided by an analog worldview of archives in which creators, activities, and fonds are easily delimited constructs. With the digitalization of recordkeeping, these boundaries are meshed in favor of more fluid processes that prioritize the flow and recombination of information across several systems and classification schemes. This article attempts to revisit the concept of archival bond under the light of the current information paradigm with the goals of examining its fundamental notions, discussing its application and limitations. The methodology is qualitative and relies on documentary research. A literature review on the archival bond is conducted through the consultation of Web of Science and Scopus databases. As an expansion of the archival bond, a novel concept of informational bond is suggested as an attempt to more accurately capture the context of digital information and to reinforce the trustworthiness of archival representations.
References
Bailey, J. 2013. “Disrespect des fonds: Rethinking arrangement and description in born-digital archives.” Archive Journal 3.Search in Google Scholar
Bautier, R. H. 1970. “Les Archives.” In Manuel d’Archivistique. Paris: Direction des Archives de France.Search in Google Scholar
Bearman, D. 1996. “Item Level Control and Electronic Recordkeeping.” Archives and Museum Informatics 10 (3): 195–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02802369.Search in Google Scholar
Bellotto, H. L. 2015. “A Diplomática como chave da teoria arquivística.” Archeion Online 3 (2): 4–13.Search in Google Scholar
Bellotto, H. L. 2018. “Concepto de especie documental como antecedente al tipo en la teoría archivística.” Boletín ANABAD 68 (3–4): 446–55.Search in Google Scholar
Bittencourt, P. R. 2022. “Seguindo rastros e encontrando vestígios: Um mapeamento da teoria das três idades dos arquivos.” Boletim Do Arquivo Da Universidade de Coimbra 35 (1): 161–88. https://doi.org/10.14195/2182-7974_35_1_6.Search in Google Scholar
Born, L. 1941. “Baldassare Bonifacio and his essay de archivis.” American Archivist 4 (4): 221–37. https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.4.4.36u35457n6g45825.Search in Google Scholar
Casanova, E. 1928. Archivistica. Grafiche Lazzeri.Search in Google Scholar
Cencetti, G. 1970. “Il Fondamento Teorico Della Dottrina Archivistica.” In Scritti Archivistici, edited by A. Lombardo. Roma: Il Centro di Ricerca Editore.Search in Google Scholar
Cook, M. 1986. The Management of Information from Archives. Brookfield: Gower Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Cook, T. 2001. “Archival Science and Postmodernism: New Formulations for Old Concepts.” Archival Science 1: 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02435636.Search in Google Scholar
Cook, T. 2007. “Electronic Records, Paper Minds: The Revolution in Information Management and Archives in the Post-custodial and Post-modernist Era.” Archives & Social Studies: A Journal of Interdisciplinary Research 1: 399–443.Search in Google Scholar
Duranti, L. 1997. “The Archival Bond.” Archives and Museum Informatics 11 (3): 213–8. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009025127463.10.1023/A:1009025127463Search in Google Scholar
Duranti, L. 2015. “Archival Bond.” In Encyclopedia of Archival Science, edited by L. Duranti, and P. Franks, 28–9. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar
Duranti, L., and T. Eastwood. 1995. “Protecting Electronic Evidence: A Progress Report on Research Study and its Methodology.” Archivi and computer 3: 213–50.Search in Google Scholar
Duranti, L., and H. MacNeil. 1996. “The Protection of the Integrity of Electronic Records: An Overview of the UBC-MAS Research Project.” Archivaria 42: 46–67.Search in Google Scholar
Duranti, L., and K. Thibodeau. 2006. “The Concept of Record in Interactive, Experiential and Dynamic Environments: The View of InterPARES.” Archival Science 6 (1): 13–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-006-9021-7.Search in Google Scholar
Eastwood, T. 1994. “What is Archival Theory and Why is it Important?” Archivaria 1 (37): 122–30. https://doi.org/10.1590/198053142851.Search in Google Scholar
Fear, K., and D. R. Donaldson. 2012. “Provenance and Credibility in Scientific Data Repositories.” Archival Science 12 (3): 319–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-012-9172-7.Search in Google Scholar
Feather, J., and P. Sturges, eds. 2004. International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Gilliland, A. 2016. “Setting the Stage.” In Introduction to Metadata, 3rd ed., edited by M. Baca, 1–20. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute.Search in Google Scholar
Guimarães, J. A. C., and N. B. Tognoli. 2015. “Provenance as a Domain Analysis Approach in Archival Knowledge Organization.” Knowledge Organization 42 (8): 562–9. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2015-8-562.Search in Google Scholar
Hofman, D. L. 2017. “Legally Speaking: Smart Contracts, Archival Bonds, and Linked Data in the Blockchain.” In 2017 26th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks, ICCCN 2017, 4–7.10.1109/ICCCN.2017.8038515Search in Google Scholar
Hohmann, P. 2016. “On Impartiality and Interrelatedness: Reactions to Jenkinsonian Appraisal in the Twentieth Century.” American Archivist 79 (1): 14–25. https://doi.org/10.17723/0360-9081.79.1.14.Search in Google Scholar
Jenkinson, H. 1937. A Manual of Archival Administration. Percy, Lund, Humphries & Co.Search in Google Scholar
Jones, M. 2018. “From Catalogues to Contextual Networks: Reconfiguring Collection Documentation in Museums.” Archives and Records 39 (1): 4–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2017.1407750.Search in Google Scholar
Lemieux, V., and M. Sporny. 2017. “Preserving the Archival Bond in Distributed Ledgers: A Data Model and Syntax.” In 26th International World Wide Web Conference 2017, WWW 2017 Companion, 1437–43.10.1145/3041021.3053896Search in Google Scholar
Lodolini, E. 1998. Archivistica. Principi e Problemi, 8th ed. Milano: Franco Angeli.Search in Google Scholar
MacNeil, H. 2000. Trusting Records: Legal, Historical and Diplomatic Perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-94-015-9375-5Search in Google Scholar
McKemmish, S. 2002. “Placing Records Continuum Theory and Practice.” Archival Science 1: 333–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02438901.Search in Google Scholar
Moyano Collado, J. 2013. “La descripción archivística. De los instrumentos de descripción hacia la web semántica.” Anales de Documentación 16 (2). https://doi.org/10.6018/analesdoc.16.2.171841.Search in Google Scholar
Nesmith, T. 2015. “The Principle of Provenance Today.” In Encyclopedia or Archival Science, edited by L. Duranti and P. Franks, 286–8. Lanham: Rowmman & Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar
Niu, J. 2015. “Archival Intellectual Control in the Digital Age.” Journal of Archival Organization 12 (3–4): 186–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332748.2015.1154747.Search in Google Scholar
Pacheco, A. 2022. Arquivos digitais: metadados e autenticidade. Lisboa: Edições Colibri.Search in Google Scholar
Pryterch, R. (Compil.). 2005. Harrod’s Librarians’ Glossary, 10th ed. London: Ashgate.Search in Google Scholar
Reed, B. 1997. “Electronic Records Management in Australia.” Records Management Journal 7 (3): 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb027111.Search in Google Scholar
Rodrigues, A. C. 2010. “Natureza do documento de arquivo: vínculo e estrutura.” In Documento: gênese e contextos de uso, 175–92. EdUFF. http://ppgci.uff.br/wp-content/uploads/sites/86/2019/11/PPGCI-ISEI-livro1.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Silva, C. G. da. 2021. “Investigação Documental.” In Manual de Investigação Qualitativa: Conceção, Análise e Aplicações, 103–23. Pactor.Search in Google Scholar
Sousa, R. de. 2022. “O leito de Procusto e os instrumentos de classificação de documentos de arquivo: Análise do código de classificação de documentos de arquivo das atividades-meio do Arquivo Nacional.” Em Questão 28 (1): 64–89. https://doi.org/10.19132/1808-5245281.64-89.Search in Google Scholar
Sousa, R. de, and R. de Araújo Júnior. 2013. “A classificação e a taxonomia como instrumentos efetivos para a recuperação da informação arquivística.” Ciência da Informação 42 (1): 131–44.Search in Google Scholar
Stančić, H., and V. Bralić. 2021. “Digital Archives Relying on Blockchain: Overcoming the Limitations of Data Immutability.” Computers 10 (8). https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10080091.Search in Google Scholar
Thibodeau, K. 2019a. “Computational Archival Practice: Towards A Theory for Archival Engineering.” In Proceedings – 2018 IEEE International Conference on Big Data, Big Data 2018, 2753–60.10.1109/BigData.2018.8622174Search in Google Scholar
Thibodeau, K. 2019b. “The Construction of the Past: Towards a Theory for Knowing the Past.” Information 10 (11): 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/info10110332.Search in Google Scholar
Tognoli, N. B., A. C. Rodrigues, and J. A. Chaves Guimarães. 2019. “Archival Knowledge: Conceptual Frameworks for Recent Terminology in the KO Domain.” Knowledge Organization 46 (7): 522–9. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2019-7-522.Search in Google Scholar
Upward, F. 1996. “Structuring the Records Continuum: Part One. Postcustodial Principles and Properties.” Archives and Manuscripts 24 (2).Search in Google Scholar
Upward, F. 1997. “Structuring the Records Continuum: Part Two. Structuration, Theory and Recordskeeping.” Archives and Manuscripts 25 (1).Search in Google Scholar
Zeng, M. L., and J. Qin. 2016. Metadata (2°). London: Facet Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Zhang, J., and Y. B. Xia. 2012. “Original Order in Digital Archives.” Archivaria 74: 167–93.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- From the Editor
- Articles
- From the Archival Bond to the Informational Bond
- Video Mapping Technologies as Spatial Augmented Reality in the Artistic Process
- Covid-19 Pandemic and Digital Public Awareness Platforms: Strategies, Solutions, and Tools of Communication and e-Government Data Management
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- From the Editor
- Articles
- From the Archival Bond to the Informational Bond
- Video Mapping Technologies as Spatial Augmented Reality in the Artistic Process
- Covid-19 Pandemic and Digital Public Awareness Platforms: Strategies, Solutions, and Tools of Communication and e-Government Data Management