Spring 2005 — Springfield, Illinois — Vol. 85 No. 3

Table of Contents

Guidelines for Illinois Libraries Manuscripts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Primary Materials Used by Illinois State History Researchersby Jana Brubaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

The Collection of Palm-Leaf Manuscripts at Northern Illinois UniversityLibrariesby Rebecca A. Martin and Chalermsee Olson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Baby TALK Lapsits: Empowering Librarians for Early ChildhoodLeadershipby Claudia Quigg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

An Examination of John Franklin Jameson’s Role as a Great Leader in theEstablishment of the National Archives of the United Statesby Vincent P. Tinerella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

Illinois State Library Directory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

2005 Illinois State Library Advisory Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

For more information:Patrick McGuckin, Editor

Illinois State LibraryGwendolyn Brooks Building

300 S. Second St. • Springfield, IL 62701-1796217-558-4029 • 217-785-4326 (FAX) • pmcguckin@ilsos.net

Jesse WhiteSecretary of State & State Librarian

Printed by authority of the State of Illinois. June 2005 — LDA 104

Dear Friends,I am pleased to announce that,effective May 1, Anne Craig ofSpringfield is the new director ofthe Illinois State Library.

Anne has been employed with theState Library since 1989 andpreviously served as associatedirector, Library Automation andTechnology. She is innovative,personable, hard-working andproactive, and I am confident she will keep the State Librarystrong and responsive as director. One of Anne's greateststrengths is her knowledge and expertise about technology,and how libraries must use computers, automation andtechnology to better serve the needs of patrons. Though theState Library's primary mission is to serve as the library forstate government, Anne has helped the State Library becomea computer-age source for information that can be accessed byanyone.

During her tenure with the State Library, Anne has played arole in the development of such major initiatives as Find-it!Illinois, the State Library's statewide digital library, and theIllinois Digital Archives, which brings together historicaldigital images from a number of libraries into one convenientsite.

Anne will carry on the State Library's mission to develop andpromote libraries and provide librarians with training andcontinuing education opportunities that allow them to betterserve library users. She is committed to working with me tostrengthen our outstanding network of libraries in Illinoisand maintain those libraries as the best and most reliablesource of information available to citizens.

I offer my profound thanks to Jean Wilkins, who did anoutstanding job as director prior to her retirement lastDecember. Mike Ragen, who ably served as acting directorsince Jean’s retirement, will remain in his former position aschief deputy director.

I hope you will join Anne and I in our efforts to keeplibraries strong and vibrant in the future.

Jesse WhiteSecretary of State & State Librarian

Illinois Libraries is the official journal ofthe Illinois State Library. The purpose ofIllinois Libraries is to disseminate articlesof general interest to library staff andlibrary governing officials in Illinois whorepresent all types of libraries and libraryconsortia. Every effort is made to providea balanced treatment of library-relatedissues.

Articles are solicited that will address theinterests of the publication's audience.Individuals also are encouraged tosubmit unsolicited articles forconsideration. Articles are not limited toIllinois contributors, and guidelines formanuscript submission are availableupon request. Illinois Libraries will notcompensate authors for submitted orrequested articles. The editor and/ordirector of the Illinois State Library hasthe right to reject and/or edit articlesbefore printing. Edited manuscriptsand/or galley proofs cannot be sent toindividuals for approval.

Published articles do not necessarilyrepresent the views of the Illinois StateLibrary and the Office of the Secretary ofState.

Articles from Illinois Libraries may notbe reprinted without prior writtenpermission of the Illinois State Library.Reprint of an article shouldinclude a credit to Illinois Libraries. Forpermission, contact:Editor, Illinois LibrariesIllinois State LibraryGwendolyn Brooks Building300 S. Second St.Springfield, IL 62701-1796217-558-4029pmcguckin@ilsos.net

No advertisements are allowed in IllinoisLibraries. Forms and other tear-outsheets cannot be placed in IllinoisLibraries. Illinois Libraries is free ofcharge. Back issues, if available, also arefree.

ILLINOIS LIBRARIES (ISSN: 0019-2104; OCLC 1752654); Published by theIllinois State Library, Rm. 516,Springfield, IL 62701-1796.

Jesse WhiteSecretary of State & State Librarian

Anne CraigDirector, Illinois State Library

Patrick McGuckinEditor

The purpose of journals such as Illinois Libraries is to shareknowledge and information with others in the librarycommunity. Librarians are committed to continuingeducation, enhancing their skills and seeking out newinformation. Toward that end, the Illinois State Library andIllinois’ regional library systems are excited to play a part inthe expansion and upgrading of LibraryU, athttp://learning.libraryu.org/home/, the free Web-basedtraining and continuing education initiative. The upgradewas made possible by a grant the State Library received lastyear from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Thirty-three new course modules have been added to the Website, presenting a wide array of new learning opportunities formembers of the library community and the patrons theyserve. Best of all, this online training and continuingeducation is free and available through the Web anywhere,anytime.

Users may enroll in coursework in areas such as budgetingbasics, shelving, designing Web-based instruction, fundraising, community building, customer and informationservice, and library law. There are courses for administrators,librarians, trustees and the general public. Though most ofthe new coursework is designed to provide trainingopportunities for members of the library community, newmodules will be added in the future with a greater emphasison coursework for library patrons.

Users may access the new modules by self-registering for aLibraryU account, or by sampling courses anonymously.Those registering for a LibraryU account may track theirprogress through courses and receive a certificate ofcompletion after finishing a module.

Log on to LibraryU at the URL provided above. And asalways, please contact me if you have a story for IllinoisLibraries that may be of interest to the library community.

Patrick McGuckin, EditorIllinois Libraries

Articles for Illinois Libraries are solicitedto address the interests of the audience.Individuals also are encouraged tosubmit unsolicited articles forconsideration. Articles are not limited toIllinois contributors.

Length — Articles should be no less thanfive and no more than 20 double-spaced,typewritten pages on white 8 1/2” x 11”paper.

Style — For uniformity purposes, allmanuscripts should follow theAssociated Press Stylebook, if possible.

Graphics and Illustrations — All graphs,illustrations and photos must be cameraready. Original copies, apart from themanuscript, should be included for allgraphs and illustrations. THIS DOESNOT INCLUDE TABLES.

Author Information — The articleshould include a title and informationabout the author: author's name, positionand where position is held.

Footnotes — Footnotes should be listedat the end of the article instead of at thebottom of each page.

Editing — The editors reserve the rightto make minor copy-editing changes.

Acceptance of manuscripts — TheIllinois State Library reserves the right toaccept or reject articles.

Number of copies — Submit one originaland one photocopy of the manuscript aswell as one copy on a floppy disc (Wordor WordPerfect format).

Submit manuscripts to: Patrick McGuckin, EditorIllinois LibrariesIllinois State LibraryGwendolyn Brooks Building300 S. Second St.Springfield, IL 62701-1796217-558-4029217-785-4326 (FAX)pmcguckin@ilsos.net

4

Primary Materials Used by Illinois State History Researchersby Jana Brubaker

The author is a Catalog Librarian at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb.

Historians search for hidden treasure “… in letters, diaries, reminiscences, the rare book, theunpublished manuscript, old newspapers” (Levy, 1992, p. xii). Librarians and archivists strive toprovide patrons with access to such primary documents because they are the foundation of historicalresearch. However, collections of original archival materials are limited in most institutions. This studylooks at the degree to which these original materials are used by researchers. More specifically, throughcitation analysis, this study attempts to determine where Illinois history researchers find their primarymaterials. To this end, two questions were asked: What form of primary materials are Illinois historyresearchers using, and in what format are they using these materials? Form refers to the type ofmaterial (archival, newspaper, etc.). Format refers to physical manifestation of the source material(microfilm, paper, etc.). If researchers, for example, cite a newspaper article, did they look at theoriginal newspaper, or did they find the document online? The answers have implications fordeveloping collections and for providing access to meet the needs of researchers of Illinois history and,perhaps, historians in general.

LiteratureThe literature addressing state historical research is limited. A search revealed only one publishedarticle, “Materials Used in the Research of State History: a Citation Analysis of the 1986 TennesseeHistorical Quarterly” by Eileen Hitchcock (1989). Hitchcock conducted a study to find out what formsof materials were being used by Tennessee history researchers and the age of the material. She foundthat historians cited archival materials 37.4 percent of the time, monographs, 20.2 percent, serials 15.2percent, newspapers and government documents 12.1 percent each, and theses 3.0 percent of the time.Overall, primary source materials accounted for 61.6 percent of the citations.

One relevant thesis also emerged. Jeff Hurt (1975) completed a citation analysis of articles in theKansas Historical Quarterly. He analyzed the form of materials referenced in articles published from1969 to 1973 and found that newspapers were cited 58 percent of the time, distantly followed bymonographs (15 percent), government documents (11 percent), serials (10 percent), unpublishedmaterials (5 percent), and dissertations (1 percent).

While neither of these studies of state historical research specifically addresses the issue of format,there have been recent attempts to identify the format of primary materials used by historians ingeneral. A study by Suzanne Graham (2002) focused on the use of electronic resources by UnitedStates historians. Published in the Journal of the Association for History and Computing, this studyemployed both a survey of historians and a citation analysis of references in the publications ofprofessors in randomly selected history departments in the United States. Graham found that morethan 40 percent of respondents to her survey had never seen a digitized collection of primary sourcematerial. The citation analysis revealed that there were few references to online primary resources.

Similar results were reported by Margaret Stieg Dalton and Laurie Charnigo (2003) in their study ofwhich materials historians considered to be the most important and how they found these materials.Comprised of a random survey of 278 historians chosen from university history departments in theUnited States and a citation analysis of five books and five journals, this study provides informationabout what historians perceive to be important research material and what materials they cite in theirpublished research. In their analysis of primary resources used by historians, Dalton and Charnigoreported that, surprisingly, printed sources were more numerous than manuscript sources. They also

5

found that most historians in their study found electronic sources very helpful in locating secondarysources, and somewhat helpful in finding primary sources. While this study gathered information onhistorian’s attitudes toward and use of electronic materials, the study did not attempt to quantify thevarious formats of primary and secondary sources used by historians in their research.

MethodThis study analyzed the citations in articles published in the Journal of the Illinois State HistoricalSociety. This journal was selected as a representative source because the journal is one of the mosthighly regarded Illinois history journals, and contains contributions from both professional andamateur historians. Two articles were randomly selected from each issue of Volume 95 (2002) andVolume 96 (2003), the latest full volumes available at the time of this study. Each issue typicallycontains four articles; thus the sample represents approximately 50 percent of the articles in thisvolume. In total, 1,379 citations were examined.

Of these, 952 cited primary materials, defined as materials that were produced at the time of the eventor idea under study. The study assumed that the author actually consulted the source in the researchprocess. Each reference was counted no matter how many times the reference was repeated, assumingthat this suggested the relative importance of a source. Each of the 952 citations was counted in one offive form categories. These categories included the following:• Newspapers• Archival materials—Records of the past typically housed in archives. Also included in this category

are published monographs and web sites that contain reproductions of archival materials.• Journals/serials—Contemporary journal articles and telephone books.• Government documents• Other

Each of the first four categories was further broken down into the following formats:• Artifact (original document)• Microfilm• Paper (published material)• Electronic

FindingsNot surprisingly, primary materials represented 69 percent of the original 1,379 citations examined.Secondary materials accounted for 31 percent. The following table shows the form of the 952references to primary materials.

6

Categorizing the form of a citation was fairly straightforward. Determining the format was less clear.When historians cited a journal article, did they access it online or in paper format? Since it is possiblethat historians will cite the print version even though they actually found the article online, thenumbers may be skewed in ways that cannot be ascertained. When historians cite a newspaper, didthey look at the actual paper copy, or did they find it on microfilm? Citations for newspapers often giveno clue of their format since most style manuals do not require that information. For example, TheChicago Manual of Style, the documentation system required for articles submitted to The Journalof the Illinois State Historical Society, instructs users that “microform or other photographic processesused only to preserve printed material, such as newspaper files, are usually not mentioned as such in acitation. The source is treated as it would be in its original published version” (2003, p. 717).Therefore, the use of newspaper articles on microfilm cannot be measured accurately. The format ofnewspaper articles found in commercial online databases or news sites, however, should be noted,according to most style manuals. This information will therefore be more likely to be contained in thecitation.

The Chicago Manual of Style (2003) does not specifically instruct users on how to cite digitized archivalmaterials. These materials will very likely not be identifiable in the endnotes. If, however, the materialcomes from a multimedia web site, the user is instructed to include the URL. Some sites wherehistorical documents are found fall into this category. The following table shows categories of primarymaterials in this study broken down by format type. The “Other” category consisted of ten referencesto maps and interviews and was not analyzed for format.

Surprisingly, almost half of the archival-type material was found in published monographs. Thereferences to electronic resources in this category may be understated due to the difficulty ofidentifying these materials in citations as discussed above. A similar problem exists in determiningnewspaper formats, although a small number of references referred to the microfilm format.

ConclusionBecause neither the Hitchcock nor the Hurt citation analyses of state historical research looked at theformat of materials cited, comparisons with the findings in this study are not possible. A comparison ofthe forms used is problematic because this study was limited to primary sources, while the otherstudies included both primary and secondary sources. Broadly speaking, Hitchcock’s (1989) findingthat primary source materials accounted for 61.6 percent of the citations examined is relatively close tothe 69 percent finding in this study. The Stieg Dalton and Charnigo (2003) citation analysis ofhistorians with a variety of specializations found a lower percentage of 52.6. This would suggest thathistorians researching state history rely more heavily on primary materials, perhaps because secondarymaterials are less abundant in this field of study.

7

The Stieg Dalton and Charnigo (2003) citation analysis found that primary printed sources were morefrequently cited than manuscript sources. This study also found a surprisingly large number ofreferences to published primary materials. Only Suzanne Graham’s (2002) citation study and surveyanalyzed the format of materials used by historians, as this study did. Her finding that historians rarelyaccess either primary or secondary materials electronically is borne out by this study as well.

This study has significant implications for collection development, access, and education. First, whenconsidering what materials historical researchers require, no library can ignore primary sources. Thesematerials are at the heart of historians’ work, no matter what their field of study may be; however,while there is a tendency to equate primary resources with archival resources, this study shows thatthis is not the entire story. Although most libraries have limited access to original archival documents,many primary documents appear in published form and are easily obtainable. The importance of thisformat to researchers is reflected in this study.

The abundance of newspaper references found in this study (44.6 percent of primary sources) mayreflect the success of an initiative begun in 1982 by the National Endowment of the Humanities. NEHsought to microfilm and catalog newspapers published in the United States since the eighteenthcentury, making them much more accessible (Hedin & Mering, 1998) [1]. Soon the NEH will beginimplementation of the National Digital Newspaper Program, which will digitize historically significantnewspapers from all of the states and U.S. territories published between 1836 and 1923 (Cole, 2004).Because this study also found a small number of references to interviews and a map, those responsiblefor developing the history collection may want to consider adding recorded interviews and maps totheir resources.

While this study was unable to ascertain the full extent of Illinois history researchers’ use of digitizedprimary materials (because the documentation rules in the Chicago Manual of Style do not necessarilyrequire the relevant information), usage appears to be minimal. There are, however, a large number ofdigitized historical documents available through the Library of Congress web site and projects like theAbraham Lincoln Historical Digitization Project based at Northern Illinois University [2]. These canbecome an invaluable resource for historians who do not need to examine the original document, butare merely interested in the content. Many of these resources are freely available to all libraries. Theycan become part of the collection simply by cataloging web sites containing these materials to makethem accessible to researchers, and increasing users’ awareness of these materials.

Finally, historians’ reticence to use primary resources in electronic format must be addressed. SuzanneGraham (2002) found in the survey portion of her study of United States historians that 50 percent ofher sample did not believe that a digitized primary document is equivalent to the original. Their chiefconcern was the loss of contextual detail in digitized materials. These concerns are not withoutfoundation. Not only is the historian looking at an electronic representation of the document, but alsothe contents of many sites reflect the editorial judgments of their creators. Archival documentspublished in monographs, however, present similar contextual concerns. The fact that Illinois historyresearchers already rely heavily on these published materials suggests that they would find digitizedmaterials equally useful. With the growing availability of these materials, as well as microfilmreproductions and published primary documents, libraries have an opportunity to greatly expand thecollection of primary materials they can offer to local historians.

Notes1 The prevalence of newspapers in Jeffrey Hurt’s citation analysis of The Kansas Historical Quarterly may be explained

by the Kansas State Historical Society’s commitment to collecting state newspapers beginning in 1875. As a result,

8

Kansas has one of the most comprehensive collections of state newspapers in the nation. For a discussion of this issue,see Bobbie Athon (2000), “A Moment in Time: 125 Years Ago Publishers Began Collection Kansas History”. Retrieved: April 18, 2005 from http://kshs.org/features/feat1200.htm.

2 http://www.loc.gov/ ; http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/

ReferencesChicago Manual of Style (15th ed.) (2003), University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Cole, Bruce (2004), “The National Digital Newspaper Program”, OAH Newsletter, May2004. Retrieved: April 18, 2005, from http://www.oah.org/pubs/nl/2004may/cole.html.

Graham, Suzanne R. (2002), “Historians and Electronic Resources: Patterns and Use”, Journal of the Association for Historyand Computing, vol. V no. 2, September 2002. Retrieved: April 18, 2005, fromhttp://mcel.pacificu.edu/JAHC/JAHCV2/ARTICLES/graham/graham.html.

Hedin, Lise & Margaret Mering (1998), “Newspapers: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow”, The Serials Librarian, vol. 34 no. 3/4,pp. 307-312.

Hitchcock, Eloise, R. (1989), “Materials Used in the Research of State History: A Citation Analysis of the 1986 TennesseeHistorical Quarterly”, Collection Building, vol. 10 no. 1-2, pp. 52-54.

Hurt, Jeffry A. (1975), Characteristics of Kansas History Sources: A Citation Analysis of The Kansas Historical Quarterly,Emporia, Kansas. Emporia Kansas State College. (MA-thesis).

Levy, Jo Ann (1992), They Saw the Elephant: Women in the California Gold Rush, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Stieg Dalton, Margaret & Charnigo, Laurie (2004), “Historians and Their Information Sources”, College & ResearchLibraries, vol. 65, no. 5 (Sept. 2004), pp. 400-425.

9

The Collection of Palm-Leaf Manuscripts at Northern IllinoisUniversity Libraries

by Rebecca A. Martin and Chalermsee OlsonThe authors are Associate Professor, Head of Access Services, and Associate Professor,

Head of Cataloging at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb.

Northern Illinois University (NIU) is one of eleven National Resource Centers for Southeast AsianStudies located in the United States. Included within this program is the Burma Studies Group. NIULibraries has the fifth largest collection of Southeast Asian books and journals in the nation, housingthese materials in their Rare Books and Special Collections department. This collection is known as theDonn V. Hart Southeast Asia Collection. Among the rare items to be found there are a number of palm-leaf manuscripts in Thai, Burmese and Pali scripts, as well as two in Lao, which were donated by theBurma Studies Group. Most of the palm-leaf manuscripts at NIU range in age from approximately 1800to 1922 A.D., and two incomplete sets of manuscripts have an approximate date of 1500 A.D.Currently the library is in the process of thoroughly cataloging these manuscripts and preserving themin their original form. There are also plans to digitize them and make their contents available forresearch online.

History of the Palm-Leaf ManuscriptThe leaves of the manuscript are made from the leaves of the Palmyra or Talipot palm, which aretreated to make them more durable. They are then trimmed to make narrow, rectangular pieces.Throughout time, scribes have written upon these leaves with various kinds of instruments and inks.The leaves are then perforated and gathered into stacks or bundles that are bound together by means ofa cord and protected by wooden covers.

Palm-leaf manuscripts are believed to have originated in India and may date back to the sixth centuryB.C., though no precise date is known.1 John Guy points out that Buddhist tradition refers to a periodafter 483 B.C., when the Buddhist scriptures were being committed to writing. He adds that no palm-leaf manuscripts earlier than the tenth century A.D. has survived.2 In deference to tradition, palm-leafmanuscripts are still produced today in some places. The manuscripts deal with both religious andsecular topics; however, many scholars believe the manuscripts were carried from India to othercountries in Southeast Asia, such as Burma, Laos and Thailand. Movement may be due to the spread ofTheravada Buddhism and the transcription of the sacred scripts. Scholars refer to this Hindu-Buddhistinfluence on many aspects of Southeast Asian culture as the “Indianization” of the culture.3

Scholars from the Pali Text Society explain that Gautama Buddha spoke a language known as Magadhi;however, the language that has been attributed to the transcribed texts of Theravada Buddhism is calledPali. Furthermore, “The tradition recorded in the ancient Sinhalese chronicles states that theTheravadan canon was written down in the first century B.C.”4 No single script was ever developed forPali; instead, scribes from different regions used the scripts of their native languages.

The manuscripts have always been fragile and susceptible to the ravages of time, as well as factors suchas mold and insects. Experts with UNESCO and the “Memory of Asia” project estimate that there arehundreds of thousands of these manuscripts throughout the world, and that they are approachingimminent destruction. They contain valuable information that has never been transcribed.5 Themajority of surviving manuscripts date to the 18th and 19th centuries.6 As a comparison, paper cameinto existence in 12th century A.D. but did not begin to displace palm leaves as writing material untilthe 14th century. At that time, the folded paper manuscripts known as “parabaik,” began to appear.7

Nevertheless, palm leaf manuscripts continued to be produced throughout the 19th century.

10

Each region had a different way of preparing the palm leaves for use as writing material. Theseprocesses included drying, boiling, smoking and preserving the leaves with oils or plant extracts. Manydifferent kinds of materials were used; however, materials such as lemon-grass oil and turmeric areoften mentioned. The dried leaves were then trimmed to a uniform size--approximately fourcentimeters wide and between six to forty centimeters long. In the beginning, a metal stylus was usedto etch characters into the leaf. Then a special ink made of substances such as charcoal dust and resinsfrom fossilized roots was used to fill in the etching.8 Some scribes also wrote directly on the palm leafin ink.

Later, around the 14th century, scribes used methods such as applying a gilt and red lacquer to the leaf,and then writing on the lacquer.9 Space was left for illustrations, especially on the first and last pages.The characteristics of the palm leaves possibly helped shape the writing. J.P. Das believes the scriptbecame rounder because the incision of a long, straight line would have split the leaf.10 Das alsomentions that the scribe held the leaf in the left hand and used the stylus with the right hand. Hereasons that if the thumb of the left hand acts as a fulcrum on which the stylus moves, then thismovement can also cause the script to be curved.

A Website of the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) illustrates how Thai palm-leaf manuscripts were produced.11 The finished leaves were perforated on the left side and strungtogether with a cord. A book often consisted of 24 leaves. The script was read left to right, and afterreading the front of the leaf, readers flipped the leaf over to read the backside. They then continuedreading by pushing the leaves along the cord. The words of the script ran into each other with nospacing or punctuation. The covers of the manuscript were made of wood and were often decoratedwith drawings of figures from religious or mythical works. Sometimes the title appeared on the woodencovers.

A cloth was used to wrap the book, and this protected the book from the elements. In some placesthese cloths were made of fine materials, and there was a ritual aspect to the wrapping of the book thataccorded with religious symbolism. The silk ribbons that held the cloth covering in place often had apiece of ivory woven into the ribbon that contained the title of the book.12 The boxes and cabinets usedto store the manuscripts had panels that also depicted religious and mythological motifs. Many of themanuscripts were kept in monasteries in remote regions. Seen as a whole, the manuscripts are trulypart of a large cultural setting in which the leaves, the wooden covers, the ribbons, the storage boxes,and the monastery provide a wealth of information.

The Content of the ManuscriptsThe content of palm-leaf manuscripts ranged from religious and literary texts to mundane texts aboutindigenous medicine, agriculture, art, music, astrology, astronomy, yoga, and martial arts. With regardto Theravada Buddhism, the palm-leaf manuscript was and still is considered to be a sacred text.Monks transcribed the teachings of and about the Buddha into Pali, and originally, the main method ofpreserving them was to periodically recopy them by hand. Often the manuscripts were commissionedfor events such as the ordination of monks.13 Wealthy patrons would commission the work, which wasthen carried out by artistic scribes. Some of the manuscripts give the names of the commissioner andthe scribe, as well as the date, in the colophon.

A number of the manuscripts in the NIU collection are of the Pali canon and are from Burma. Thecanon is called the Tipitaka and is divided into three divisions, or pitakas: the Vinaya (monastic rules),the Sutta (discourses), and the Abhidamma (analysis of the teaching).14 Five of the palm-leafmanuscripts at NIU deal with the Kammavaca, which are texts from the Vinaya that relate to theordination of monks.

11

From the 14th century A. D. to the 17th century A. D., the Kammavaca texts were embellished inseveral ways.15 One was the use of a gilt and red lacquer ground. Later the script took on a square shapeand was inscribed in a thick, resinous black lacquer called “tamarind seed.” Gold leaf illustrationsbegan to appear in the margins and over the years came to include stylized shapes of flora, fauna andgeometrical objects. The wooden covers also became embellished with drawings and mosaics of glassand ivory. The NIU collection also includes two manuscripts from Laos that deal with Laotian poetryand folklore.

The Preservation of the ManuscriptsThe monks and scribes had developed several methods of preserving the manuscripts. Recopying themafter certain intervals of time was ritually prescribed. With regard to materials for preservation, peopleused substances that they found in their own region. There are a wide variety of substances mentionedin current literature. One preservation problem concerns the brittleness of the leaves and the need tokeep them pliant by using products such as citronella, camphor or lemon grass. However, the constantapplication of these lubricants may darken the leaves and make the script harder to read.

More recently, the leaves have been laminated.16 One method is to use silk or chiffon and a starch pasteor tissue and acrylic rubber adhesive. There is also a hot press method using cellulose acetate foils. Insome cases, the lacquer used to paint the leaves to give them a surface to write upon is flaking.Although some of the script has been lost due to the flaking, the intact leaves can be protected with acoating of polyvinyl acetate or soluble nylon. Another problem has been the loss of ink from theincisions. In these cases, more ink needs to be applied.

Some institutions worldwide have begun to digitize the manuscripts not only as a form of preservation,but also as a way of giving remote access to researchers who want to study them. There have beensome obstacles to these digitization efforts. For example, many of the manuscripts are found in remoteareas, and cost is a factor in transporting skilled workers, digitizing technology and supplies to thoseareas. Although the images of some materials can be captured on microfilm or with a sophisticateddigital camera, others, such as the Burmese manuscripts, require high-resolution scanning and image-enhancement software. Peter Skilling, who is with the Pali Text Society, has described their “minuteletters, crowded text and dark surface.”17 High-resolution scanning also helps when leaves must be keptin transparent foils for scanning or when the size of the leaves can only be handled through rotation inthe image-processing program.

Another concern is that a palm-leaf manuscript needs to be looked at in entirety--leaves, covers,binding ribbon and case all have inscriptions that need to be captured and preserved. Institutions thatdigitize these materials would like to index the documents and make them searchable in an electronicdatabase. However, Skilling points out that this is not always easy. For example, the script is continuousand does not observe spaces between words and punctuation stops. This creates a problem for theresearcher who must also interpret the language properly before indexing the words and phrases. Thereis also a need for a computer program that can input the data into non-Romanized scripts so thatmore people can understand the content.

In the Rare Books and Special Collections at NIU, each palm-leaf manuscript is being kept in a separateenclosed box in a climate-controlled environment. The manuscripts are currently in good condition,but are not generally available for viewing. The library has set up a preservation policy for the physicalmanuscripts as well as a digitization plan. Two of the manuscripts have been digitized.

Highlights of the Palm-Leaf Manuscripts at NIU—The CatalogAbout ninety pieces of palm-leaf manuscripts are housed in the Southeast Asia Special Collection,

12

located in Rare Books and Special Collections at Northern Illinois University Libraries. They are fromBurma, Thailand and Laos. Many manuscripts are gifts, such as the ones from Burma, which weremostly donated by the Burma Studies Group. Others from Thailand and Laos were acquired by theuniversity when professors in the Southeast Asia Studies field traveled to the region to do research.Many of the Burmese and Laotian manuscripts are dated from the nineteenth century. However, theones from Thailand are more current, with approximate dates from the early twentieth century.

The content of the texts is related to Buddhist doctrines, sermons, astrology, and herbal medicine. Alarge number of manuscripts from Burma are about the monastic code of discipline (Vinaya) and ritualtexts, such as ordination. Many from Thailand contain stories of various incarnations of the Buddha(Jataka tales), which monks have used for sermons. These fields were the focus of early formaleducation taught to young men by Buddhist monks at Buddhist temples. Buddhist monks also usedthese manuscripts for sermons on a regular basis. Astrology was and still is used by lay people in thesecountries for various occasions, such as travel, weddings, funerals, or even opening a new business, etc.The people consult with monks to find out which date is the best for certain occasions. Monks in theearly days were regarded as the most knowledgeable people, even in medical fields.

Many of the manuscripts are very old. The condition of certain pieces is fragile and incomplete. Mostwere written in Pali with their own language scripts such as Burmese or Thai. A vernacular languageused tended to be the early version, and the new generation of native speakers has a difficult timeunderstanding the manuscripts. Therefore, cataloging these materials has depended on the informationthat experts or scholars, such as Buddhist monks or vendors, have provided. Some titles are supplied bya cataloger when the title or cover page are not present. There are many valuable and interestingmanuscripts housed in the collection, and some are worth noting and highlighting.

Burma:Anga; Buddhabu Byanjikok; Krasapate sokra cane (Call number: BF1714.B8A5571875):This manuscript was written between 1875 AD-1895 AD, and is of palm leaf edged in red lacquer heldtogether between two black end boards. The manuscript contains astrology and a lunar calendar andwas used as a guide for making horoscopes and an aid for people to choose auspicious times forceremonies.

Kammavasa (Call number: BQ5220.K344 1800a):This manuscript was written in Pali using square-style Burmese script on thin lacquered copper plates.The plates are bound together with wooden covers decorated with figures in red and yellow colors,with content about ordination ceremonies for Buddhist monks.

Kammawasa (Call number: BQ5042.B93K346 1850):This manuscript was inscribed on thin and fragile ivory plates with black and gold square-styleBurmese scripts. The rare document is bound by red and gold decorated wooden boards and is aboutthe Buddhist code of disciplines for monks.

Parabuik (Call number: BQ1434.B9P364 1850):This manuscript contains black script on one side and color illustrations of figures from Jataka tales,the stories of various incarnations of the Buddha before his enlightenment. On the other side of thiscontinuous sheet of white paper, which is folded fanwise, is a Ramayana epic about supernaturalpowers.

Hkan kammawasa (Call number: BQ5042.B93H594 1925):This manuscript consists of seven copper plates, but two of them are missing. The manuscript was

13

incised in Pali with Burmese script. The information about the donors, the people who incised themanuscript, and the details about the content were provided for the cataloger. The text is divided intonine sections and is about the recitations monks made at their meetings. These recitations were part ofBuddhist rituals.

Shan Parabaik (Call number: BQ4415.S474 1940):A few manuscripts that Northern Illinois University owns are from a state in Burma known as Shan.This manuscript was written in Shan and Pali with Shan script. The black script was written on sheetsof white paper folded fanwise. The document is a prayer book consisting of three virtues and the fiveprecepts of Buddhism.

Vanna Vuttie Chappaccaya (Call number: QA115.V354 1875):These eighteen continuous pages were written in Burmese with white script on black paper foldedfanwise, and is one of a few manuscripts whose content is not related to Buddhism. The piece hasmathematical tables used for calculation.

Abhidhan Nissaya (Call number: PK1090.K924 1765):This is one of fourteen parabaik manuscripts, containing explanations from a Pali dictionary compiledby Kyaw Aung San Kha Sayadaw. The manuscript is one of the few very old manuscripts that has thecompiler’s or author’s name.

Thailand:Lanna Thai palm leaf manuscript (Call number: DS562.L366 1900za):This manuscript was written in Northern Thai (Lanna), and is a partial palm-leaf manuscript withedges decorated in red and gold. The lettering was done by making inscriptions on the leaves with astylus. The content is about the study of ancient writings.

Chali Kanha phisek putchawisatchana 2 thammat (Call number: BL1411.J3T3651943):This manuscript was printed on palm leaves and put into a portfolio, to be used by Buddhist monks forpreaching. The story is part of the Jataka tales in which Buddha gave his two children away in order todemonstrate the principles of sacrifice and detachment from worldly need or desire.

Narok thetsana: sadaeng khwamphitsadan khong narok (Call number: BL1475.H5P97 1954):These Thai scripts were printed on palm leaves. They were written by Pui Saengchai, who was aBuddhist monk. The manuscript portrays a detail of hell, used for sermons in a temple and meant toteach lay people not to commit bad deeds. The belief was that if you did good deeds, you would go toheaven. On the contrary, if you committed bad acts or bad karma, such as killing, you would go to hell.

Bunyakiriya watthu nithan sathok 10 kan (Call number: BL1445.T3P915 1961):A sermon that is very common in Thailand is about making merits. “Giving” without expectinganything in return is considered to be doing good deeds. Giving food to monks, donations to temples,and giving money and goods to the poor or beggars are normal scenes in Thais’ daily life. This sermonwas written in story telling-style by Pui Saengchai, a Buddhist monk. This Thai script was printed onpalm leaves.

Chaturong sannibat thetsana (Call number: BL1477.5.T36 1938):On Buddhist holidays, certain kinds of sermons are given. This manuscript was used for sermons onMakhabucha, a Buddhist holiday that usually takes place on a day when there is a full moon inFebruary. Light processions take place around the temples. The holiday is a day to remind Buddhists ofthe first sermon given by the Buddha in front of Buddhist monks. These Thai scripts are printed on

14

palm leaves written by Phra Sasanasophon (Chaem), a Buddhist monk.

Laos:There are four manuscripts from Laos. The content is about folklore, tales, legends, and epic poetry.These tales are still published as monographs in Laos. The letters are inscribed on leaves with a stylusand held between two, dark, wooden boards. These two Lao manuscripts have been digitized due totheir fragile condition: Lam Thao Khun Thung Khun Thuang (Call number: PL4251.L39L357 1890za)and Lam Nang Taeng On (Call number: PL4251.L39L356 1890za).

Access to the CollectionAccess to the collection of palm-leaf manuscripts is only by appointment through Rare Books andSpecial Collections at NIU libraries. Although two of the manuscripts have been digitized, they do nothave a Web address at this time. There is a plan to obtain grant money to translate these digitized Laomanuscripts into English. In addition, the Southeast Asia Collection has put in a grant proposal todigitize palm-leaf manuscripts that are located in Thailand.

Footnotes1 C. L. Prajapati, “Modern Techniques on Conservation of Palm-Leaf Manuscripts” in Palm-Leaf and Other Manuscripts

in Indian Languages: Proceedings of the National Seminar 11th, 12th and 13th January 1995 at Pondicherry University,organized jointly by Institute of Asian Studies and Pondicherry University; gen. ed. Shu Hikosaka, G. John Samuel; ed. A. Pandurangan, P. Maruthanayagam, by the Institute of Asian Studies, no. 42 (Madras: Institute of Asian Studies, 1996), 291.

2 John Guy, Palm-Leaf and Paper: Illustrated Manuscripts of India and Southeast Asia (Melbourne (Vic.): National Gallery of Victoria, 1982) 11.

3 Ibid., 25.4 Pali Text Society, The Pali Language and Litera t u re 22 October 2003, http://www. p a l i t ex t . d e m o n . c o . u k / s u b p a g e s / l a n _ l i t e. h t m .5 UNESCO, Memory of the World. Memory of Asia: Project to Preserve Palm-leaf Manuscripts of Asia 22 October 2003,

http://www.xlweb.com/heritage/asian/palmleaf.htm.6 Cornell University Library, Digital Imaging of Parabaik and Palm Leaf Manuscripts 22 October 2003,

http://www.library.cornell.edu/preservation/parabaik/pmain.htm7 Guy, 12.8 Sirancee Gunawardana, Palm Leaf Manuscripts of Sri Lanka ([Colombo? : s. n.], 1997) 379 Gandhara, History and Production Techniques of the Kammavaca 22 October 2003,

http://www.gandhara.com.au/kammavaca_info.html.10 J.P. Das, Joanna Williams, Palm-Leaf Miniatures: The Art of Raghunath Prusti of Orissa (New Delhi: Abhinav

Publications, 1991), 26.11 IFLA, 1999 Bangkok: Library Exhibition Sub-committee 22 October 2003, http://www. s w u . a c.th/hu/lic sci/ifla99/books.html12 Gandhara, http://www.gandhara.com.au/kammavaca_info.html.13 Guy, 61.14 Pali Text Society, http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/subpages/lan_lite.htm.15 Gandhara, http://www.gandhara.com.au/kammavaca_info.html16 Guy, 86.17 Peter Skilling, Preservation and Study of South East Asian Manuscripts: The Fragile Palm Leaves Project 22 October

2003, http://pnclink.org/annual/annual1999/1999pdf/skilling.pdf

BIBLIOGRAPHYCornell University Library. Digital Imaging of Parabaik and Palm Leaf Manuscripts. 22 October 2003,http://www.library.cornell.edu/preservation/parabaik/pmain.htm

Das, J. P. Chitra-Pothi: Illustrated Palm-Leaf Manuscripts from Orissa. New Delhi: Arnold-Heinemann, 1985.

Das, J. P. and Joanna Williams. Palm-Leaf Miniatures: The Art of Raghunath Prusti of Orissa. New Delhi: AbhinavPublications, 1991.Gandhara. History and Production Techniques of the Kammavaca. 22 October 2003,http://www.gandhara.com.au/kammavaca_info.html.

Gunawardana, Sirancee. Palm Leaf Manuscripts of Sri Lanka. [Colombo? : s. n.], 1997.

15

Guy, John. Palm-Leaf and Paper: Illustrated Manuscripts of India and Southeast Asia. Melbourne (Vic.): National Gallery ofVictoria, 1982.

IFLA, 1999 Bangkok: Library Exhibition Sub-committee 22 October 2003, http://www.swu.ac.th/hu/lic-sci/ifla99/books.html

Pali Text Society. The Pali Language and Literature. 22 October 2003,http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/subpages/lan_lite.htm.

Palm-Leaf and Other Manuscripts in Indian Languages: Proceedings of the National Seminar 11th, 12th and 13th January1995 at Pondicherry University, organized jointly by Institute of Asian Studies and Pondicherry University. Gen. ed. ShuHikosaka, G. John Samuel; ed. A. Pandurangan, P. Maruthanayagam, by the Institute of Asian Studies, no. 42. Madras :Institute of Asian Studies, 1996.

Skilling, Peter. Preservation and Study of South East Asian Manuscripts: The Fragile Palm Leaves Project. 22 October 2003,http://pnclink.org/annual/annual1999/1999pdf/skilling.pdf.

UNESCO. Memory of the World. Memory of Asia: Project to Preserve Palm-leaf Manuscripts of Asia. 22 October 2003,http://www.xlweb.com/heritage/asian/palmleaf.htm.

Williams, Joanna. The Two-Headed Deer: Illustrations of the Ramayana in Orissa. California Studies in the History of Art,no. 34. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996.

16

Baby TALK Lapsits: Empowering Librarians for Early Childhood Leadership

by Claudia QuiggThe author is Executive Director of Baby TALK in Decatur, Illinois.

“The more we are together, together, together,The more we are together, the happier we’ll be!”

These words from the familiar closing “Lapsit song” reflect the joy and encouragement that childrenand their parents experience at library Lapsits. The camaraderie parents enjoy with other parents, thefun children have playing with other toddlers, and the support whole families feel from an engagedprofessional all result in libraries increasingly finding themselves at the center of young families’ lives.

Lapsits are booming in Illinois libraries as librarians use this vehicle to establish relationships withyoung families. Traditionally an underserved population, children ages 0-3 are being brought tolibraries like never before. Library equipment such as strollers, infant seats and miniature tables andchairs speak the message that libraries are for babies, too. Families are welcomed whenever the librarydoors are opened, but scheduled Lapsits provide a focus for families’ early visits.

In response to this growing practice, Baby TALK provided “Lapsits, Libraries and Literacy” trainingsessions in four locations throughout the state of Illinois during March, 2004. These trainings, fundedby a Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) grant, were geared toward empowering librarians forearly childhood leadership in their communities. Participants received curriculum for Lapsitprogramming as well as background information on child development and strategies for supportingparents.

Many participants revealed that they were already holding programs for infants and toddlers in theirlibraries. Many of them were calling their programs “Lapsits,” but others were using program namessuch as “Book Buddies,” “Baby Book Times” and “Mother Goose Times.” Many of these librariansspoke passionately about their programming efforts and families they had served.

Baby TALK staff has been holding Lapsits at Decatur Public Library since soon after the programbegan in 1986. A follow-up to first meeting families in the hospitals after their babies were born, BabyTALK sees Lapsits as one way to follow families through the toddler years and to provide programmingdesigned to meet families’ needs. Baby TALK has also been training professionals about how to deliverprograms for families of infants and toddlers since 1989, now having trained professionals from 31states and Canada.

Parents are looking for professionals who are interested in their children and willing to shareinformation and expertise that can help their children develop. Parents come to their libraries hoping tofind good books and other resources as well as programs to enjoy with their children. But mostly theycome looking for the answers to two questions: How am I doing as a parent, and how is my childdoing?

This need in parents results in satisfaction with libraries that are accessible to them most days—notjust when they have scheduled appointments—and usually staffed by professionals who are trulyinterested in serving young families. Corrie Honnold brings daughters Emily and Natalie to Lapsits atDecatur Public Library on a regular basis. Corrie enjoys the looks on her children’s faces when theyrun up to greet “Miss Mary.” She says they enjoy the predictability of the Lapsit routine and that it is

17

really geared to their age group. It is her “time out” with her daughters. She feels it is an excellentprogram and loves that it is free.

Corrie has appreciated the opportunity for social interaction, for both children and parents. “There isone other mom, in particular, who I watch for each time. It is so comforting to talk to her and to hearthat her children are presenting her with the same challenges as mine.” Corrie has watched herchildren blossom socially as they venture out with this early social experience.

Corrie believes in reading to her children, and the earlier the better. As they leave the library, theycheck out books and CDs each time, listening to the CDs in the car on the way home and reading thebooks the minute they get there.

Libraries serve everyone. There is no stigma attached to receiving services from the library. Parents canfeel free to visit when they need support and affirmation, not just books. Because of this wideavailability, libraries who choose to can become the “early childhood anchors” for their communities.And yet serving this population has its challenges—especially when it comes to offering structuredprogramming.

The Challenges“How do you know they’re even listening when they’re cruising all over the room?”Toddlers explore the room or peer out from under mom’s arms, checking out the social scene. Fewtoddlers sit quietly or give full facial attention to the leader. Librarians who are accustomed to workingwith older children may struggle with how to manage the activity levels of toddlers who are learning towalk and are compelled to practice their walking skills throughout Lapsit sessions. These librariansinsist the word “Lapsit” is a misnomer; little actual sitting really takes place at all!

“How do you keep parents from talking to each other instead of playing with their kids?”Far removed from structured story times, Lapsits teem with the life concerns of parents raising veryyoung children. Between verses of “The Wheels on the Bus,” parents confide about struggles withsleeping, feeding, and discipline. Parents look forward to seeing familiar faces of friends they have metat the library. These social relationships grow as parents become invested in each other with everyshared Lapsit experience. These parents, some who refer to each other as “co-workers” in the task ofraising children, depend on these regular sessions for their own social needs and affirmation of theirparenting skills.

So imagine the conflict: Librarians have spent hours preparing an interactive activity for children andparents to participate in together. Parents have been looking forward to seeing friends they have metpreviously to bring them up-to-date on their child rearing issues and other details of their lives. TheLapsit begins and the librarian finds herself singing solo to a bunch of toddlers while moms seemoblivious to the program plan.

What’s a librarian to do? Should we give up on parent-child interaction in favor of providing a coffeeklatsch for parents? This question was raised at the LSTA-funded Baby TALK trainings. SeasonedLapsit providers made several excellent suggestions for dealing with this phenomenon:• Provide an intentional time for parents and children to play and visit prior to or following the

program. Honor their need for social contact, and then be very direct about saying, “Now is the time in the Lapsit when we want parents to give their undivided attention to their own little ones.”

• Have children sit on their parents’ laps facing the parent rather than facing out. The librarian can demonstrate with a doll on his or her lap. When children and parents are face to face, they are morelikely to engage.

18

• Finally, value the important contribution the library is making to families’ lives in providing such meaningful social contact. Families will return if their needs are being met, and through those repeated visits, they will surely gain from the resources of the library.

“You don’t think they’re paying attention, and then one week the child will come in and know thesongs and fingerplays and participate fully!” Librarian Jane Kauzlaric is a “believer” after givingLapsits a try. Jane went through Baby TALK training in 1999 and then began working with families oftoddlers. Before that she had been offering preschool story times. She went back to school to earn herMasters in Library Science at the University of Illinois, and decided to stress emergent literacy in herwork there. “I’m so enthusiastic now! I’m amazed how moms bring their babies and attend religiously.The children advance so quickly—they develop before my eyes.”

Jane believes that the structured setting enhances what parents do at home. She attended Baby TALK’s“Lapsit, Library and Literacy Program” training in 2004. In addition to participating in the training,she reported on all that she had learned in her practice and extended her thanks for the encouragementto try to go a little deeper with young families. Jane and other children’s staff at the Black Road Branchof the Joliet Public Library are now offering eleven Lapsits every week, and large numbers of familiesare attending.

The BenefitsWhat difference does it make to serve families of infants and toddlers in the library? Prior to Lapsitsbeing held at Decatur Public Library, a survey of citizens in Decatur included the question, “Does yourlibrary offer materials for children under age three?” An overwhelming 95 percent of respondersanswered “no.” While the library has always welcomed young families, Lapsits have helped to “get theword out” about services the library offers for toddlers. Lapsit programs are included on the librarycalendar. Families begin to hear that the library intends to serve even the youngest members of thecommunity. Many libraries have found that Lapsit programs increase circulation and the numbers ofyoung families visiting libraries.

An annual review of kindergarten test scores in Decatur has revealed yet another benefit. All childrenwho have received Baby TALK services show a statistical advantage on the Peabody Picture VocabularyTest—a test of receptive language given to all children entering kindergarten. But children who haveparticipated in Lapsits (or Baby TALK Times with a similar format) show the highest average scores(see chart below.) This subgroup scores a full stanine above the rest. Was the twice-monthly half hourprogram responsible? Probably not. But results are likely related to the support parents receive whenthey come to the library and the resources they take away with them when they leave.

19

(Chart from a study by Janice B. Mandernach, Ph.D., 2002)

Baby TALK Lapsit TrainingAs a result of requests from librarians who were unable to attend a three-day Baby TALK Professionaldevelopment seminar, Baby TALK now offers a one-day training program designed for librarians andother literacy professionals. “Lapsits, Libraries and Literacy Programs” covers the backgroundinformation that guides Baby TALK’s approach and philosophy, and then focuses on programs thatpromote literacy. Curricula for Lapsits, Family Literacy Programs, Family Fun Times, developmentalnewsletters, and topical parenting issue handouts are all included in the training materials. The firstfour of these training sessions were funded by the LSTA grants described above, but they are nowoffered several times each year to other interested professionals. For more information about BabyTALK training, visit the Baby Talk web site at www.babytalk.org or contact Marcy at 217.475.2234.

20

An Examination of John Franklin Jameson’s Role as a Great Leader in the Establishment of the National Archives of the United States

by Vincent P. TinerellaThe author is Assistant Professor/Coordinator of Electronic Reference Services, University Libraries,

Founders Memorial Library, Northern Illinois University in DeKalb

Introduction“Men make history and not the other way around. In periods where there is no leadership, society stands still.Progress occurs when courageous, skillful leaders seize the opportunity to change things for the better.”-- Harry Truman

After two decades of struggle, the cornerstone for John Russel Pope’s Corinthian-style NationalArchives Building was finally laid at the Center Market in Washington, D.C., on February 20, 1933.Two provocative historiographical questions come to mind when examining the long battle in theUnited States to establish a central archival repository of national significance. First, consider anentertaining debate that has occupied philosophers of history and intellectual historians for twocenturies: Can the actions of a single person determine the outcome of history? Specifically, in thiscase, would generations of Americans have been assured that our rich documentary heritage would bemaintained in one of the world’s finest, independent, scholarly institutions, staffed by first-ratehistorical and archival professionals, without the vision, pragmatic tenacity, and indefatigable spirit ofthe “Father of the National Archives,” J. Franklin Jameson? In short, what difference can an individualmake, and what difference, if any, did Jameson make? Second, in a nation with a notable, extensive,public-records tradition, why was a long fight necessary in the first place? Why was the United Statesamong the last developed nations to establish a permanent, centralized national archives for its publicrecords and documentary treasures?

The Debate: Can an Individual Determine History?Since ancient times, great leaders have been idealized for their achievements. Perhaps the foremostadvocate of the efficacy of leaders and great men was the nineteenth-century British historian ThomasCarlyle, who in Past and Present, used the strong and wise rule of a medieval abbot named Samson ashis model, writing: “For the heavens unwearying in their bounty, do send other souls into this world…the born champions, strong men, and liberatory Samsons of this poor world.” 1 Carlyle devoted most ofhis professional life to studying those he considered to be ideal men, producing an exhaustive collectionof the writings and speeches of his greatest English example of the heroic leader, Oliver Cromwell; amassive six-volume biography of Prussia’s Frederick the Great; and his most famous work on thesubject, On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History. For Carlyle, leaders, unlike ordinary people,were to be revered for their strength, because it was heroes and great men who ultimatelydetermined a nation’s fate.

Like Carlyle, the distinguished British philosopher, John Stuart Mill, saw the actions of great people asthe primary catalyst in determining the direction of history. “The influence of remarkable individualsis decisive…in most states of society it is the existence of great men which decides whether there shallbe any progress,” Mill declared in his essay, The Individual in History. “Few will doubt, he argued, that“had there been no Socrates, no Plato and no Aristotle, there would have been no philosophy for thenext two thousand years, nor in all probability then; and that if there had been no Christ and no St.Paul, there would have been no Christianity.”2 Mill saw society’s exceptional individuals as activeparticipants in history’s development, determining the course of events and influencing historicaloutcomes by their leadership and foresight: “Eminent men do not merely see the coming of the lightfrom the hill-top; they mount on the hilltop and evoke it.” If great individuals did not act, “if no one

21

had ever ascended tither,” there would be no great deeds, “the light in many cases might never hadrisen upon the plain at all.” Remarkable people make history.3

The ubiquitous Jameson battled tirelessly to win and maintain support for a national archives amongevery important group he thought could help him. Tenacious, pragmatic, politically astute, optimisticbeyond reason, Jameson wrote voluminously in support of his cause, recruiting an impressive array ofbackers who pressured presidents and Congress through five administrations and every legislativesession from 1906 until 1926, until the first meaningful appropriation for a building was passed byCongress: the Public Building Act. Jameson served as the archival movement’s preeminent leader fornearly thirty years, suffering one frustrating defeat after another, often when success seemed certain.Undaunted, Jameson never wavered from his determination to see the establishment of an nationalarchives building, even while less prudent leaders offered a variety of unsuitable or temporaryexpedients, because the sagacious Jameson manifestly understood the symbiotic relationship that existsbetween records and the repository where they are held.

Is it safe to assume that without Jameson’s untiring effort, our nation’s documentary history andarchival profession would have developed differently? Conceivably not. Georg Hegel, in his great work,The Philosophy of History, argued that the individual was powerless to determine events or alter thecourse of history. While a few exceptional people became “world historical individuals” who achievedsuccess by “possessing an insight into the requirements of the time,” these individuals were practicaland political, driven by personal ambition, who had “no consciousness of the general idea they wereunfolding while prosecuting their own private aims.” “World historical individuals” were able toaccomplish great things because they had the ability to recognize “the wave of the future” and conformtheir purposes to “the march of events.”4

Mortimer Adler, in his History essay for the Great Ideas eloquently interpreted Leo Tolstoy’s similarposition. Quoting from Tolstoy’s great work, War and Peace, Adler wrote:

Tolstoy also regards the leadership of great men as illusory. To believe in the efficacy of heroes and great men, he thinks, is‘to commit the fallacy of the man who watching the movements of a herd of cattle and paying no attention to the varyingquality of the pasturage in different parts of the field, or to the driving of the herdsman, attributes the direction the herdtakes to the action of the animal that happens to be at its head.’ Great men are only celebrated puppets pushed ahead on themoving front of history. The motion of history derives its force and direction from the innumerable nameless men whocompromise the human mass. The act of the individual counts little.5

History, according to Tolstoy, was a complex union of freedom of choice and inevitability, and likeHegel, he believed that great leaders could not make or determine history. An individual attempting toobstruct history’s path, even an extraordinary person, would simply be shoved aside by history’s forceand direction. Perhaps then, it was a combination of historical forces beyond Jameson’s control, ofwhich he was merely one contributing factor among many, that determined the shape of America’sdocumentary history and archival profession?

John Franklin JamesonMost people are unaware of the contributions F. Franklin Jameson has made to historical scholarship.Jameson’s contemporary, Professor A. B. Hart, writing in 1930, illustrates Jameson’s influence:

I often think how much the country and the future country owes to your skilled and indefatigably patient historical labors.You have been a sort of crankshaft for (I will not say the cranks) the historical forces of the country. Leave out what James[sic] Franklin Jameson has done in the development of the study and teaching and writing of History, and there would be abottomless chasm.6

22

An educator and historian, Jameson was born in 1859 in Somerville, Massachusetts, the son ofMariette Thompson and John Jameson, a schoolteacher and lawyer. A bright boy and voracious reader,Jameson was educated at the Roxbury Latin School, and was set to attend Harvard University, until hisfather moved his family to Amherst, Massachusetts, where the elder Jameson eventually became thevillage postmaster. Jameson, meanwhile, was diverted from Harvard to Amherst College where, in1879, he graduated as class valedictorian.

For the next four years Jameson lived at home and earned his way as an unhappy high school teacher,until he was recruited as a graduate student at Johns Hopkins University. Jameson spent the next eightyears at Hopkins, receiving the first doctorate in history awarded by the school. Appointed to theposition of instructor in 1883, Jameson was promoted to associate professor the next year, taughtWoodrow Wilson history and political science in Hopkins’ new “seminary” system, and helpedestablish the American Historical Association (AHA). In the spring of 1889, Jameson married SaraElizabeth Elwell, a schoolteacher. Later, the couple had two children.

Although Jameson was developing a reputation as a scholar at Hopkins, by 1887 he was not yetsufficiently distinguished to be offered a permanent appointment in the history department, and hemoved to Brown University in the spring, accepting a professorship of history. Jameson stayed until1901, when he left Brown to assume the chair of the History Department at the University of Chicago.Jameson relinquished this position in 1905 to become the Director of the Department of HistoricalResearch at the Carnegie Institution in Washington, D.C., thanks to the famous philanthropist’s $10million endowment to fund an institute of scientific research. The idea of an office of historicalresearch was inspired by a suggestion from the renowned University of Wisconsin historian, FrederickJackson Turner (of “frontier thesis” fame) who was Jameson’s student at Hopkins, and credited hisformer professor for inspiring him in the formation of his seminal work. As his associate at the AHA,Turner became one of Jameson’s ardent supporters in the long fight for a national archives.

Jameson left Carnegie in 1928, after he learned that he would be forced to take a mandatory-ageretirement. Jameson subsequently took the post as the Director of the newly created ManuscriptsDivision of the Library of Congress, a position he held for the rest of his life. Among Jameson’s othernotable achievements were his position as the founder and editor of the American Historical Reviewand editor of the Journal of the American Historical Association; his influential role as the Chairman ofthe Committee of Management in the publication of the Dictionary of American Biography; and hisreputation for scholarly accomplishment with publications like The History of Historical Writing in theAmericas (1891) and The American Revolution Considered as a Social Movement (1926).7

The State of American ArchivesJameson, who had studied European manuscript collections, first became interested in the need for apermanent archival repository in 1895, when he submitted a proposal to the Executive Council of theAHA outlining a systematic collection, organization, and selective publication scheme of sourcematerials in American history. Because of these efforts, the Council appointed Jameson to the post ofchairman of the organization’s first standing committee, the Historical Manuscripts Committee. Thegroup’s work quickly accentuated the difference between private papers and public documents, and by1899 had established a separate Public Archives Commission (PAC) The PAC, in turn, enlisted thecooperation of state advisors who were charged with surveying state archival collections. Consequently,the initial resolution for a hall of records was passed on December 30, 1901, and represented the firstattempt by the AHA to influence the federal legislature in establishing a national archives comparableto those found in Europe. Jameson, moreover, persuaded Carnegie’s Department of Historical Researchto sponsor the first survey of federal archives, which resulted in the publication of the Guide to theArchives of the United States (1904) by Jameson’s lifelong friend and ally, Waldo G. Leland, and Claude

23

H. Van Tyne. Increasing agitation from the expanding historical community eventually broughtgovernmental action in 1903, when Congress approved a small appropriation for the purchase of athree-acre site in Washington for the purpose of constructing a national archival repository. 8

The responsibility of maintaining government documents at this time belonged to the cabinet officersof each federal department who generally stored their records wherever space could be found,warehouse-fashion, without any systemic classification or retrieval scheme. By as early as 1906,however, the concept of a professional and scholarly institution of national significance, staffed byprofessionally trained archivists and historians, was beginning to supplant the prevalent hall of records,where individual departments maintained their own records. The idea for sponsoring legislation wasformulated jointly by the scholarly Republican Senator from Massachusetts, Henry Cabot Lodge, andthe New England genealogist, Lathrop Washington, who along with Congressmen Miles Poindexter andMorris Sheppard became Jameson’s staunch allies. Lodge, who once taught American history atHarvard, took the initiative with his sponsorship of the Lodge Bill of 1906, which represented awatershed between the concept of a hall of records and a national archival repository. The billunfortunately stalled in Congress, but it would have created a Board of Record Commissioners whowould have been given legal custody of all public records more than eighty-years old. Other landmarkprovisions would have allowed the commission to purchase historical manuscript collections held inprivate hands, and granted the states the right to transfer public records to a newly built records officebuilding in the nation’s capitol.9

Indisputably, the country desperately needed a central, fireproof archives. Without a proper repository,millions of documents were lost annually due to fires and poor storage conditions. As early as 1810, acongressional committee appointed to look into the shape of American archives observed that earlyrecords were “in a state of great disorder and exposure; and in a situation neither safe nor convenientnor honorable to the nation.”10 Some of the problems with record storage prevalent at that time weredescribed in an AHA resolution in 1911: Government records were scattered in a hundred differentdepositories without order and at great expense; many documents were being stored in attics and sub-basements in crowded and deplorable conditions; access was difficult because there were fewinventories; valuable holdings were unwittingly discarded as “useless”; and all government recordseverywhere were in peril of being destroyed en masse by fire. Americans were reminded of the dangerwhen one fire at the New York State Library destroyed much of the state’s archives.11

Gaillard Hunt, then head of the Manuscripts Division of the Library of Congress, declared that theUnited States was the only nation in the world that made no provision for its archives. Comparing thestate of European and American archives, Hunt observed that most European governments had madespecial provisions for the collection and preservation of their records and manuscripts. Many hadcentral depositories headed by trained archivists with research rooms with established rules andadequate inventories of their holdings.12 Around this time, The Nation ran an editorial lamenting theignominious state of American archives, comparing their pitiful condition to that of their Europeancounterparts, and criticizing the lack of accessibility to government records, particularly those held atthe War Department. The Nation’s reporter pointedly remarked that twenty years had passed sinceCongress was first asked to build a storehouse for the country’s archives, and had procured a site forthis purpose, but had simply dropped the matter.13 Even America’s most precious documents were inperil. Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby, chagrined at the state of record storage as late as 1919,complained:

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are in an antiquated little metal safe…It is very old and it is hardlyprotection against a prying meddler, to say nothing…of fire, and it seems appalling to think that it is up there, in a littleoffice chest, unsecurely locked, with no protection whatever. The original treaties of the United States and the original

24

statutes…are stored in a subbasement. It seems to me that it is wrong…14

“Where else than in Washington are abandoned car-barns deemed proper housing for records not onlyindispensable to the historian, but often vitally necessary to the conduct of official business,” asked oneappalled observer.15

America’s Public-Records TraditionExtraordinarily, a nation based on a written constitution and devoted to the rule of law had neglectedits documentary heritage for more than a century and a half. Archives and archival administration, asthey are understood today, date from the French Revolution, with the establishment of the ArchivesNationales in 1789, and launched with the implicit acknowledgement that the state was responsible forthe care of the nation’s documentary heritage. From the nation’s inception, the United States has had anoted public-records tradition, in which the guardianship of the nation’s documents has beenestablished as the responsibility of the state, as well as the corollary principle that the people have theright to inspect records kept by the government. Freelance writer Rosa Pendelton Chiles, writing forthe Review of Reviews in 1911, delivered a classic statement describing the government’s responsibilityconcerning archives: “One of the chief functions of any government is to preserve its archives; it is inthe business of government for that purpose. Handling the people’s affairs, it can only fully protecttheir interests and its own integrity by carefully guarding its records.”16

James O’Toole persuasively makes this argument, writing: “So important a role did Americans ascribeto impartially, public held, and openly available records that they even emphasized them in their mostfundamental political testaments. The long indictment of King George III in the Declaration ofIndependence contained the charge that he had maliciously called together legislative bodies at placesdistant from the depository of their public records.” Furthermore, O’Toole noted the Constitutionmandated the “explicit requirement” that Congress keep a journal in order that the public couldoversee the legislature’s activities. Aware of the significance of preserving for posterity a record of thebody’s proceedings, the First Continental Congress chose a secretary to the Congress at their very firstmeeting; after the country was organized in 1789, careful arrangements were made to house thoserecords at the State Department.17

Distinguished historian and writer Daniel Boorstin makes a similar observation. Referring to theproposed Constitution immediately after the Convention, October, 1788, he writes: “Of about eightynewspapers publishing in the colonies at the time, by October 6 – only twenty days after theconvention had adjourned – at least fifty-five had printed the full text…By the end of October, thenumber of separate printings…came to more than one-hundred fifty…” Considering the length of thedocument, the cost of printing, the scarcity of paper, and the small size of the presses, the rapiddissemination of such a technical document demonstrated an impressive public spirit. Even moresignificant, Boorstin notes, was that the number of printed copies of the proposed Constitutionrepresented the beginning of the “opening of society in which all had a right to know and judge thepublic’s business.”18 New Englander Richard Bartlett perhaps most eloquently characterized thegovernment’s responsibility concerning archives, writing:

“To provide for the safe and perfect keeping of the Public Archives, is so obviously one of the first and most imperativeduties of the legislature, that no argument could make it plainer to a reflecting mind…Everything that can be procured bymoney, sinks into insignificance in comparison with the original records…”19

How, then, did the country allow venerable records and priceless documentary treasures to languish inthe alarming conditions described in the AHA resolution of 1911?

25

The most important causes include a simple lack of leadership and vision; congressional sloth andlegislative foot-dragging; bureaucratic inertia; mistrust and partisan and philosophical differencesamong legislators; the decentralized nature of American institutions and the reluctance of governmentdepartment heads to relinquish control; the considerable cost; support for other solutions likerenovating older buildings; squabbles over a permanent location (the site acquired in 1903 had longsince been diverted to other uses); other pressing issues of national importance, particularly the war inEurope; lack of presidential support; the need for other public buildings, especially post offices; and alack of voter pressure and general disinterest. Between the years 1810 and 1903, for example, Congressonly enacted two statutes concerning the safeguarding of the nation’s public records: the Act of 1810,establishing a few fireproof storage rooms, and the Act of 1903 which procured a building site for anarchives, despite persistent agitation from government executives, the frequent loss of valuableholdings, and an increasing influx of government records, particularly after the Civil War.20

Most significantly, there existed no formal or organized-historical lobby until the establishment of theAHA, and therefore little pressure from outside the government to enact measures regarding a nationalarchival repository. Until Jameson persuaded the AHA to spearhead the movement for theestablishment of a national archives, only a handful of interested, but politically ineffectual citizens,expressed concern over the state of American record keeping. They were primarily a few governmentofficials and historical scholars. Congress, ignoring the problem’s magnitude, regularly turned attentionto other matters. Without a vocal grassroots constituency, voter pressure, or obvious political benefit orquid pro quo, Congress did not act; nothing forced Congress to do anything more than giving theproblem occasional lip service. Jameson, writing to Calvin Coolidge, made this point, remarking: “Nomember of Congress feels that it is a vital matter to him personally. No large body of voters is deeplyexcited on the subject.”21-

Jameson Leads the FightAfter 1911, Jameson turned his attention to recruiting the support of President William Howard Taft.Convinced of the importance of a national repository, the president delivered a message to Congressearly in 1912, alerting the legislature of the necessity of erecting a proper archival building. A fewmonths later, Taft issued an executive order directing government department heads to report fromtheir field offices outside Washington on the extent, condition, accessibility, and historical value oftheir archival holdings. Sensing victory, Jameson pushed hard, corresponding with hundreds ofsupporters throughout the country. He exhorted them to petition Congress for an archives building.Congress was flooded with letters and petitions urging legislators to appropriate funds for this purpose.In response, Congress formed a committee to investigate the archival problem, and invited Jameson tospeak. Congressional proponents of a nationwide public buildings bill took advantage of the agitation tosweeten the deal with the inclusion of the construction of a national archives building as part of theirproposed legislation. Shortly thereafter, the Public Buildings Act (1913) was passed and signed into lawby President Taft on March 4, 1913, the last act of his administration. The bill, in part, provided for anational archives building of 3 million cubic feet, expansible to 8.9 million cubic feet, to be built in thenation’s capitol, the cost of which was not to exceed $1,500,000, and appropriated $5,000 forpreliminary plans.22

Unfortunately for Jameson and his supporters, a congressional authorization means little without anappropriation. Before Congress could consider the matter, the United States was drawn into World WarI, and afterwards preoccupied with post-war adjustments, delaying the archival movement’s apparentvictory for more than a decade. Still dogged, Jameson continued to solicit support and persuadelegislators during the war years, notably appealing to his former student, Woodrow Wilson. Jamesonwas rebuffed seemingly out-of-hand by the distracted president, who ostensibly based his rejection onlegislative grounds. Replying to Jameson, Wilson wrote: “…There is absolutely no use proposing it at a

26

short session of Congress…I hope we can turn to it at some future Congress…I know that you willunderstand…”23 In fact, Jameson was crushed and apparently never spoke to Wilson about the matteragain. Expressing his disappointment to a colleague, Jameson complained: “I think Republicans are alittle more interested in things like good filing systems than the Democrats are, because they comelargely from Urban centres and less largely from Squashville and Podunk.”24 In Wilson’s defense heand the nation were thoroughly absorbed in foreign affairs -- the war effort, the Paris Peace Conference,the Senate fight over the terms of the ensuing peace treaty, and the battle for the League of Nations.Not until 1920, after the election of Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, did the archivalmovement regain its momentum.25

The principal source of this resurgence was the return home of thousands of servicemen, and theformation of the American Legion, which injected the archival movement with some much-neededclout. Led by the group’s National Historian, Eben Putman, concern over the preservation andprotection of member war records provided the motivation for the American Legion to flex their newpolitical muscles by lending unbridled support for an archival repository. At the group’s third annualconvention held in Kansas City, Missouri, in October 1921, the Legion passed a series of resolutionscalling for a legislative appropriation for an archives building. The Legion put Congress on notice in adamning report describing the government’s mishandling of records by war-related departments. TheLegion’s report left little doubt where the organization stood on the matter:

This very brief summary of the character of our latest War records and their places of deposit, made during the pastsummer …to indicate the woefully inadequate method of storing the records and protecting them…Unquestionably themass of useful national archives has more than doubled since 1917, at which time there was no adequate housing provisionsfor their preservation and protection. The memorials of a nation…of incalculable value, which if destroyed can never berestored, are in no other progressive civilized country so poorly protected, the menaces to their safety so lightly regarded bythe nation’s legislators, as in our own country.26

Early in 1923, the Hearst newspaper chain lent Jameson its support, and in August, Vice PresidentCalvin Coolidge assumed the presidency after the sudden death of Warren G. Harding. With thepresidency, Coolidge inherited a post-war economic depression that he was determined to subdue byholding down government spending and reducing the wartime debt. The new president was in favor ofan archival building and was committed to addressing the need for public buildings generally, but wasconcerned about an archival building’s cost. Jameson, aware of the importance of having the presidentas an ally, appealed to Coolidge directly, urging him to seize a leading role and reminding him of theincreasing interest of the American Legion and the support of his executive department heads, whohad been emphasizing the need for an archival repository since 1879: “If the archival movement is tobe advanced, it needs a strong push from the Executive himself,” Jameson wrote.27

It was, in fact, the combined support of the president and the Congress for a massive public buildingsprogram designed to beautify the center of Washington (in which an archival building would beincluded) that led to the first meaningful congressional appropriation for an archives building.Coolidge’s first three budget messages urged Congress to take action, but the legislature resisted untilthe program was expanded to include millions of dollars for post offices and similar buildings invarious congressmen’s home districts. Motivated by the proposed nationwide distribution of federalmoney, Congress promptly acted. On January, 4, 1926, both the Senate and the House introducedlegislation for a general building program authorizing $150 million for this purpose. Congress hastilypassed H.R. 6559 and referred this proposed legislation to the Senate Committee on Public Buildingsand Grounds. The bill was reported favorably, debated, amended, and passed on February 22. Thepresident signed the bill on May 25, 1926, and it became Public Law 281. The measure did not specifyindividual building projects, but left the contractual power to the discretion of the Secretary of theTreasury. On June 29, 1926 the appropriation bill was passed by the House and on July 1 by the

27

Senate. Two days later the president signed the bill and it became law. Included in the act was thefollowing clause:

Washington, District of Columbia, Archives Building: Toward the construction of an extensible archives building and theacquisition of a site by purchase, condemnation, or otherwise, $1,000,000; and the Secretary of the Treasury is authorizedto enter into contracts for the entire estimated cost of such building, including stacks, and site, not to exceed $6,900,000. 28

While still much work lay ahead -- acquiring a site, building plans drawn and approved, anorganization established, and so forth -- H.R. 6559 essentially fulfilled Jameson’s long struggle for theestablishment of a national archives building.

The United States might have neglected public record keeping for too long, but the nation quicklyestablished a world-class archival institution, rivaling any in the world.Jameson worked diligently for the next eight years, ensuring that the new organization was headed bya trained archivist, (rather than a political appointment) and staffed by professional historians, settingthe precedent and shaping the American archival profession for the years ahead. Originally tied to theFederal Triangle concept, and requiring $12 million to complete, the National Archives and RecordsAdministration (NARA) has since grown to a nationwide network of facilities in eighteen states,including thirteen record management centers, fifteen regional record centers, and twenty-sevenresearch centers, of which the most prominent is the National Archives Building.29

Jameson’s Influence in the Archival MovementHow important a role did Jameson play in the establishment of the National Archives? While externalpressure would have eventually forced the country into addressing the nation’s public-records problemswith the establishment of a central repository, it is unlikely that our National Archives would havedeveloped into the magnificent world-class institution it has become without Jameson's expertise,passion, and persistence, especially in so short a period of time. Without Jameson's insistence onthe establishment of a national archives, government administrators would have been more likely toinitiate separate records management programs, preserving and maintaining documents exclusive totheir own needs, rather than creating an archival organization serving a broader historicalconstituency. The pragmatic Jameson understood that record management programs could servehistorical purposes as well. As a result, Jameson directed the archival movement to switch to the moreeffective tactic of accentuating the practical administrative benefits of the establishment of a centrallylocated national archives, rather than continuing to emphasize its historical necessity. He also sought toprotect the interests of historians by insisting that the new organization be staffed by competent andtrained professionals. Thus, Jameson’s wisdom and leadership allowed the National Archives todevelop as an independent, scholarly institution, administered and staffed by archivists, librarians, andhistorians.30

Jameson tirelessly recruited loyal and important allies and convinced them to exert their influence forthe archival cause, including congressman, senators, and presidents. Jameson, the undisputedpreeminent leader of the archival movement, held together and gave direction to the incongruouscoalition consisting of the AHA, the American Legion, and the Hearst newspaper chain, and gave theseindependently powerful forces the cohesiveness and focus to effectively exert their political power.Jameson’s steadfast effort and lobbying expertise ensured that the archival issue was presented beforeevery legislative session between 1906 and 1926, and kept the proposed archives on the mind of everypresident from Roosevelt to Coolidge. Jameson recruited and maintained support from publichistorians, archivists, librarians, members of historical societies, directors, legislators, governmentofficials and many others. He kept these fragmented forces organized, and exhorted them to demand anational, centrally located records repository organized as a national archives, not a hall of records,

28

with its own building, containing sufficient space and adequate inventories of its holdings. Perhaps hisfriend and ally W. G. Leland, summed up Jameson’s contributions to the establishment of a nationalarchives most succinctly when he declared: “It was well said of him that he had no predecessor andthat he had no successor.”31 The first Archivist of the United States, R.D.W. Conner, speaking ofJameson’s influence in the archival movement and his dedication to the protection of records, declaredin 1934:

It was he who guided those efforts during most of that long period; it was he who kept them alive when others despaired;and it was he who finally brought them to fruition. Working through others, he never thought of claiming credit for himself,but we know that if any one person can rightfully be called the Founder of the National Archives, John Franklin Jamesonwas the person.32

ConclusionJameson knew that his victory was incomplete if he failed to protect the interests of archivists, and sohe labored for another eight long years after the passage of H.R. 6559, spearheading the drive to passthe National Archives Act (1934) while the National Archives Building was under construction. Withthe bill’s successful passage, the Act established an agency with the authority to administer the recordsof all three branches of government. The agency would secure the orderly care, maintenance,preservation, and destruction of the government’s records, and require that these documents beadministered by a trained group of professionals, allying fears that the new building would be packedwith housekeeping records and canceled checks and administered by political appointees andincompetents. Jameson worked diligently with the legislature to create an independent agency – theNational Archives of the United States – headed by an Archivist of the United States, to be appointedby the President, by and with the advice of the Senate. The immediate custody and control of theNational Archives was placed in the hands of the Archivist, and a National Archives Council wascreated, consisting of the chairmen of the Senate and House Committees on the Library, the Librarianof Congress, the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, and the Archivist of the United States.

Finally, after nearly three long decades of struggle, our nation’s documentary heritage would be secure,preserved and protected in a first-rate, independent, scholarly institution. The nation’s archivalprofession would be protected, as well, developing in due time into an association composed of thefinest archival and historical scholars in the world. This was John Franklin Jameson’s dream, and thearchives is his legacy as a truly remarkable individual and the archival movement’s greatest leader.

NOTES1 Thomas Carlyle, Past and Present (Chicago: The Henneberry Company, 1843), 406.2 John Stuart Mill, The Individual in History, in Philosophies of History: FromEnlightenment to Postmodernity, eds, Robert

M. Burns and Hugh Rayment–Pickard (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2000), 124.3 Ibid.4 Georg Hegel, The Philosophy of History, Great Books of the Western World, Vol. 43, Hegel (Chicago: University of

Chicago Press, 1992), 192-193.5 Mortimer Adler, ed., The Syntopicon: An Index to the Great Ideas (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1992), 546-547.6 Elizabeth Donnan and Leo F. Stock, eds., An Historian’s World: Selections from the Correspondence of John Franklin

Jameson, (Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, Independence Square, 1956), 17.7 Ibid., 1-6.8 Victor Gondos, Jr., J. Franklin Jameson and the Birth of the National Archives 1906-1926 (Penn: University of

Pennsylvania Press, 1981), 11-12. H.G. Jones, The Records of a Nation: Their Management, Preservation, and Use (NewYork: Atheneum, 1969), 6-8.

9 Gondos, 15-17.10 Jones, 5.11 Gondos, 30-31.12 Ibid., 67.13 Ibid., 31.14 Ibid., 90.

29

15 Ibid., 44.16 Ibid.17 James O’Toole, Understanding Archives and Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1990), 30.18 Daniel Boorstin, Cleopatra’s Nose (New York: Scribner’s, 1994), 68.19 Jones, 5.20 Gondos, 175.21 Ibid., 153.22 Ibid., 57.23 Ibid., 78.24 Ibid.25 August Hecksher, Woodrow Wilson: A Biography (New York: Scribner’s, 1994), 67-70.26 Gondos, 111.27 Ibid., 154.28 Ibid., 166.29 U.S. National Records and Archives Administration, Available from: http://www.archives.gov (accessed Nov 1, 2003).30 Susan Grigg, Review of J. Franklin Jameson and the Birth of the National Archives 1906-1926, in Reviews in America

History, v11n1 (March, 1983), 99-103. Nicholas Burckel, Review of J. Franklin Jameson and the Birth of the National Archives 1906-1926, in The American Historical Review, v87n2 (Apr., 1982), 552-553.

31 Donnan and Stock, 17.32 Ibid.

30

Illinois State Library Directory

Craig, Anne . . . . . . . . . .Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .acraig@ilsos.net . . . . . . . . .217-785-5607

Ragen, Mike . . . . . . . . . .Chief Deputy Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .mragen@ilsos.net . . . . . . .217-524-4200

Bartolini, Laurie . . . . . .OCLC Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lbartolini@ilsos.net . . . . . .217-785-5606

Bierma, Lynn . . . . . . . . .OCLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lbierma@ilsos.net . . . . . . .217-524-5866

Bloomberg, Kathleen L. .Associate Director of Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .kbloomberg@ilsos.net . . . .217-785-0052

Booth, Arlyn . . . . . . . . .Map Librarian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .abooth@ilsos.net . . . . . . . .217-558-4140

Brown, Vandella . . . . . . .Diversity Program Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vbrown@ilsos.net . . . . . . .217-785-9075

Bullen, Andrew . . . . . . .Coordinator, Info. Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .a b u l l e n @ f i n d i t . s o s . s t a t e. i l . u s 773-291-0005

Clay, Lisa . . . . . . . . . . . .Contract Administrator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lclay@ilsos.net . . . . . . . . . .217-785-6924

Colletti, Cyndy . . . . . . . .Literacy Program Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ccolletti@ilsos.net . . . . . . .217-785-6921

Collins, Margaret . . . . . .Patent and Trademark Consultant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .mcollins@ilsos.net . . . . . . .217-782-1881

Downing, Mary . . . . . . .Consultant, Specialized Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .mdowning@ilsos.net . . . . .217-782-5506

Egan, Karen . . . . . . . . . .Consultant, Youth Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .kegan@ilsos.net . . . . . . . . .217-782-7749

Frankenfeld, Connie . . .Digital Programs Librarian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .cfrankenfeld@ilsos.net . . .217-782-5432

Kelley, H. Neil . . . . . . . .Consultant, Trustees Education And Systems . . . . . . . . . .nkelley@ilsos.net . . . . . . . .217-782-1891

Krah, Nancy . . . . . . . . . .Commodities & Printing Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .nkrah@ilsos.net . . . . . . . . .217-782-5870

Matheis, Bonnie . . . . . . .Center for the Book/Mortenson Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . .bmatheis@ilsos.net . . . . . .217-558-2065

McCaslin, Michael . . . . .State Library Consultant, Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .mccaslin@ilsos.net . . . . . . .312-814-2913

McCormick, Greg . . . . . .Deputy Director of Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .gmccormick@ilsos.net . . . .217-782-3504

McGuckin, Patrick . . . . .Mgr., Library Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .pmcguckin@ilsos.net . . . . .217-558-4029

Natale, Joe . . . . . . . . . . .Fund Resource Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .jnatale@ilsos.net . . . . . . . .217-558-4185

Norris, Patricia . . . . . . . .A s s o c. Director for Library Deve l o p m e n t / G rants and Pro g ra m s .pnorris@ilsos.net . . . . . . . .217-524-5867

Redemer, Blaine . . . . . . .Head of Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .bredemer@ilsos.net . . . . . .217-782-5430

Ruda, Sharon . . . . . . . . .Assoc. Director, Talking Book and Braille Service . . . . . . .sruda@ilsos.net . . . . . . . . .217-782-9435

Schriar, Suzanne . . . . . .Coordinator, Digital Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .sschriar@ilsos.net . . . . . . .217-785-1532

Scott, Alyce . . . . . . . . . .Digital Imaging Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ascott@ilsos.net . . . . . . . . .217-558-2064

Selbert, Daphne . . . . . . .Head of Technical Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .dselbert@ilsos.net . . . . . . .217-782-2573

Strohm, Vicki . . . . . . . . .Webmaster/Network Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vstrohm@ilsos.net . . . . . . .217-785-0363

Urbanek, Jeanne . . . . . .Program Development Specialist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .jurbanek@ilsos.net . . . . . .217-524-0050

31

2005 Illinois State Library Advisory Committee

Name Term Expires

Barbara Aron, Winnetka-Northfield Public Library District, Winnetka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2006

Yvonne Beechler Bergendorf, Wood Dale Public Library District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2006

Nancy Buikema, River Bend Community Unit School District #2, Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Patricia Burg, Illinois State Museum, Springfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Barbara Burroughs, Chillicothe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2005

Gail Bush, Dominican University, River Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2006

Alice Calabrese, Chicago Library System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Kang Moy Chiu, Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006

Lynda Clemmons, Harrisburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Mary Dempsey, Chicago Public Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

John Dittmer, Bowen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2006

Kay Langston, Triton College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2006

Allen Lanham, Booth Library, Eastern Illinois University, Charleston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Barry Levine, Homer Glen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Carol Little, Auburn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Susan Lucco, Lewis and Clark Library System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Barbara Lund, Lisle Senior High School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2006

Robert McKay, Prairie Area Library System, Coal Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Rev. Gary Wilson, Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005

Arthur P. Young, Founders Memorial Library, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2005