What do you think?
Rate this book
Processing the Past: Contesting Authority in History and the Archives
Processing the Past explores the dramatic changes taking place in historical understanding and archival management, and hence the relations between historians and archivists. Written by an archivist and a historian, it shows how these changes have been brought on by new historical thinking, new conceptions of archives, changing notions of historical authority, modifications in archival practices, and new information technologies. The book takes an "archival turn" by situating archives as subjects rather than places of study, and examining the increasingly problematic relationships between historical and archival work.
By showing how nineteenth- and early twentieth-century historians and archivists in Europe and North America came to occupy the same conceptual and methodological space, the book sets the background to these changes. In the past, authoritative history was based on authoritative archives and mutual understandings of scientific research. These connections changed as historians began to ask questions not easily answered by traditional documentation, and archivists began to confront an unmanageable increase in the amount of material they processed and the challenges of new electronic technologies.
The authors contend that historians and archivists have divided into two entirely separate professions with distinct conceptual frameworks, training, and purposes, as well as different understandings of the authorities that govern their work. Processing the Past moves toward bridging this divide by speaking in one voice to these very different audiences. Blouin and Rosenberg conclude by raising the worrisome question of what future historical archives might be like if historical scholars and archivists no longer understand each other, and indeed, whether their now different notions of what is archival and historical will ever again be joined.
By showing how nineteenth- and early twentieth-century historians and archivists in Europe and North America came to occupy the same conceptual and methodological space, the book sets the background to these changes. In the past, authoritative history was based on authoritative archives and mutual understandings of scientific research. These connections changed as historians began to ask questions not easily answered by traditional documentation, and archivists began to confront an unmanageable increase in the amount of material they processed and the challenges of new electronic technologies.
The authors contend that historians and archivists have divided into two entirely separate professions with distinct conceptual frameworks, training, and purposes, as well as different understandings of the authorities that govern their work. Processing the Past moves toward bridging this divide by speaking in one voice to these very different audiences. Blouin and Rosenberg conclude by raising the worrisome question of what future historical archives might be like if historical scholars and archivists no longer understand each other, and indeed, whether their now different notions of what is archival and historical will ever again be joined.
272 pages, Hardcover
First published January 19, 2011
5 people are currently reading
101 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
September 20, 2020
Very interesting and educating, but not really a "fun" read in any way... and sometimes less enjoyable too. But still, a good book for my current course.
April 12, 2021
More of a reference. Bought at an archiving conference and never read. Great info (and notes) on the East German Stasi. Last few chapters also commendable for close reading (Contested Archives, Archival Politics, and Archives and the Cyberinfrastructure). Most policy makers don't really get the significance of archives (which may be for the best!). Happy I bought the book and wish I hadn't waited three years to crack it open.
September 6, 2025
A really foundational read for me in my archives graduate seminar. This book did a great job at explaining quite basically what archives do, the history behind them, and how their authority has changed over the decades.
January 5, 2018
I had to read this for class and thought it was interesting and informative. I was not a hard read and I actually understood what was being said.
June 20, 2019
Heavy going. Had to read this for a class, and it was a good exercise and learning to read critically.
June 14, 2025
By coincidence, this book came to the top of my to-read pile just days before the current (2025) U.S. Executive branch began pulling its crazy s*1! regarding the National Archives (https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/07/politi... + https://apnews.com/article/trump-nati...) and national history (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdj... + https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2025/0...). As I read the first chapters, I felt like the administration really needed to read this and learn about the importance and non-political background of an archive.
But I digress. The book is a look at the history of archives -- incl. their non-political nature, focus, and evolution -- in different countries, as well as movements that rethought history or began looking at history differently -- such as the women's movement and civil rights -- and how sometimes those are woven together. Later chapters also talk about digital archives and archiving electronic records (and which electronic records deserve to be archived).
But I digress. The book is a look at the history of archives -- incl. their non-political nature, focus, and evolution -- in different countries, as well as movements that rethought history or began looking at history differently -- such as the women's movement and civil rights -- and how sometimes those are woven together. Later chapters also talk about digital archives and archiving electronic records (and which electronic records deserve to be archived).
June 11, 2013
This book gives an overview of the changes over the last century in the ways historians and archivists see their respective roles. The authors describe an 'archival' divide between the increasingly technology-focused archivists and the changing research interests of modern historians. I found the historical theory parts quite informative.
I'm not entirely convinced that this divide exists in the way the authors describe it: most archivists do talk to the researchers who use their materials, after all, and have to understand their topics of research in order to direct them to collections of relevance.
The book ends with a plea for historians to be able to annotate archival finding aids with comments on the material's usefulness for various types of research. This capability is starting to happen in some systems, but I have some doubts about the general willingness of historians to actually spend time doing this sort of annotation.
I'm not entirely convinced that this divide exists in the way the authors describe it: most archivists do talk to the researchers who use their materials, after all, and have to understand their topics of research in order to direct them to collections of relevance.
The book ends with a plea for historians to be able to annotate archival finding aids with comments on the material's usefulness for various types of research. This capability is starting to happen in some systems, but I have some doubts about the general willingness of historians to actually spend time doing this sort of annotation.
January 23, 2015
Tedious oft times and very wordy. Sometimes it was confusing so I had to reread portions many times. HOWEVER, going through the history of archives and processing archives, going over the divide between historians and archivists and the challenges of today for both (i.e. technology) can also be ways to bridge the gap, the main themes, were interesting and pertinent for today and the future. Any historian, archivist or someone in or wanting to be in a related field will do well to read this and better understand the archiving world.
October 23, 2012
Philosophical & Practical.
November 3, 2013
Overly highfalutin. The subject matter is incredibly interesting and useful to people in the archives field. However, it is almost impossible to read because of how inaccessible the writing is.
January 18, 2013
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews