SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Bilgi Ve Belge Araştırmaları / 2025 / Sayı: 24

Research Practices Conducted Inside Archives and the Historical Formation of Reference Services in England, France, and Germany

Arşivlerde Yürütülen Araştırma Uygulamaları ve İngiltere, Fransa ve Almanya’da Referans Hizmetlerinin Tarihsel Oluşumu

İshak Keskin(İSTANBUL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1611-1330
Muhammet Hanefi Kutluoğlu(İSTANBUL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1161-3374
Pages
36–63
Publication Date
2025-12-23
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, the study argues that the modern archival paradigm was not defined solely by the formal legal regimes governing access.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The period between 1845 and 1914 is widely regarded as a critical threshold in the history of European archival practice.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The findings demonstrate that the reading room emerged across all three countries as a “disciplinary technology” that standardised the production of knowledge.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, the study argues that the modern archival paradigm was not defined solely by the formal legal regimes governing access.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Avrupa · Arşivcilik tarihi · araştırma pratikleri

Abstract

The period between 1845 and 1914 is widely regarded as a critical threshold in the history of European archival practice. During these decades, the spatial configuration of archives, the organisational logic of reading rooms, and the dynamics between users and archivists underwent substantial transformation. These developments contributed directly to the institutionalisation of modern research practices. The aim of this research was to clarify how three distinct archival traditions informed research practices within archival environments. The French model of public access (the expansion of bureaucratic apparatuses), the German system of bureaucratic memory (positivist historiographical doctrine), and the English researchcommunity-oriented tradition (disciplinary professionalization) are examined within a comparative analytical framework. Methodologically, the study is based on comparative historical analysis and is designed as a case study relying on document review and analysis. The spatial organisation of archival institutions, access protocols, and modes of archivist–user interaction are analysed through a systematic engagement with relevant scholarly and institutional literature. The findings demonstrate that the reading room emerged across all three countries as a “disciplinary technology” that standardised the production of knowledge. In conclusion, the study argues that the modern archival paradigm was not defined solely by the formal legal regimes governing access.

Özet

1845-1914 dönemi, Avrupa arşivcilik tarihinde arşiv mekânının, okuma salonu düzeneklerinin ve kullanıcı-arşivci ilişkilerinin dönüştüğü bir eşiktir. Bu dönüşüm, modern araştırma pratiklerinin kurumsallaşmasına doğrudan etki etmiştir. Araştırmanın amacı, üç farklı arşiv geleneğinin arşivdeki araştırma pratiklerine nasıl yön verdiğini ortaya koymaktır. Fransız kamusallaşma modeli (bürokratik aygıtların yapısal genişlemesi), Alman bürokratik hafıza düzeni (pozitivist tarih yazımı doktrininin yükselişi) ve İngiliz araştırma topluluğu odaklı model (disiplinin kurumsal-profesyonel güçlenmesi) bu bağlamda karşılaştırılmaktadır. Çalışma, karşılaştırmalı tarihsel analiz yöntemine dayanmaktadır; doküman incelemesine ve analizine dayalı bir durum çalışması olarak kurgulanmıştır. Arşiv kurumlarının mekânsal örgütlenmesi, erişim protokolleri ve arşivci-kullanıcı etkileşimleri üzerine mevcut literatür analitik bir çerçevede değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, üç ülkede de okuma salonunun bilgi üretimini standartlaştıran bir “disiplin teknolojisi” olarak ortaya çıktığını göstermektedir. Sonuç olarak çalışma, modern arşivcilik paradigmasının yalnızca hukuki erişim rejimleri üzerinden şekillenmediğini ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Keskin, İ., Kutluoğlu, M. H. (2025). Research Practices Conducted Inside Archives and the Historical Formation of Reference Services in England, France, and Germany. Bilgi Ve Belge Araştırmaları, Sayı: 24, 36–63. https://doi.org/10.26650/bba.2025.24.1832179

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (54)

  1. Birdsall, W. (1975). The two sides of the desk: the archivist and the historian, 1909-1935. The American Archivist, 38(2), 159-173. google scholar
  2. BLouin, F. X., ve Rosenberg, W.G. (2006). Archives, documentation, and institutions of social memory: Essays from the Sawyer Seminar. University of Michigan Press. google scholar
  3. Cook, T. (1997). What is past is proLogue: a history of archival ideas since 1898, and the future paradigm shift. Archivaria, 43, 17-63. google scholar
  4. Cook, T. (2013). Evidence, memory, identity, and community: Four shifting archival paradigms. Archival Science, 13(2-3), 95-120. google scholar
  5. Cook, T., ve Schwartz, J. M. (2002). Archives, records, and power: From (postmodern) theory to (archival) performance. Archival Science 2(3-4), 171-185. google scholar
  6. Delsalle, P. (2018). A history of archival practice, (M. Procter, Trans. and rev.), RoutLedge. google scholar
  7. De Vivo, F. (2010). Ordering the archive in early modern Venice (1400-1650). Archival Science, 10(3), 231-248. google scholar
  8. Derrida, J. (1996). Archive fever: A Freudian impression (E. Prenowitz, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.google scholar
  9. Donato, M.P. (2017). A science of facts? CLassifying and using records in the French Imperial Archives under Napoleon. History of Humanities, 2(1), 79-100.google scholar
  10. Duff, W. M., YakeL, E., ve Tibbo, H. (2013). ArchivaL reference knowledge. The American Archivist, 76(i), 68-94. google scholar
  11. Duchein, M. (1992). The history of European archives and the development of the archival profession in Europe. The American Archivist, 55(1), 14-25. google scholar
  12. Duranti, L. (1994). The concept of appraisal and archivaL theory. The American Archivist, 57(2), 328-344. google scholar
  13. Erb, A. (2017). Petitioners, servants, cLlaimants: Archives usage and historiography in AnhaLt from Early Modern Times to 1848. History of Humanities, 2(1), 131-151. google scholar
  14. EskiLdsen, K.R. (2013). Inventing the archive: testimony and virtue in modern historiography. History of the Human Sciences, 26(4), 8-26. google scholar
  15. FoucauLt, M. (1995). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Vintage Books.google scholar
  16. Friedrich, M. (2013). Die Geburt des Archivs: Eine Wissensgeschichte. OLdenbourg VerLag. google scholar
  17. Friedrich, M. (2016). The rise of archival consciousness in provincial France: French feudal records and eighteenth-century Seigneurial Society. Past & Present, 230 (suppl. 11), 49-70. google scholar
  18. Friedrich, M. (2016). Being an archivist in provinciaL enLightened France: The case of Pierre CamiLLe Le Moine (1723-1800). European History Quarterly, 46(3), 568-589. google scholar
  19. Friedrich, M., MüLLer, P., ve Riordan, M. (2017). Practices of historicaL research in archives and Libraries from the eighteenth to the nineteenth centurY. History of Humanities, 2(1), 3-13. google scholar
  20. GiLLiLand, A. J. (2014). Conceptualizing 21st-century archives. SocietY of American Archivists. google scholar
  21. GiLLiLand, A. J. (2017). ArchivaL and recordkeeping traditions in the muLtiverse and their importance for researching situations and situating research. In: A.J GilliLand, S. McKemmish, ve A. J. Lau (Eds.), Research in the Archival Multiverse (ss. 31-73). Monash University PubLishing. google scholar
  22. Iggers, G. (2005). Historiography in the twentieth century: From scientific objectivity to the postmodern challenge. Wesleyan University Press. google scholar
  23. Jimerson, R.C. (2006). American historians and European archival theory: The collaboration of J.F. Jameson and Waldo G. Leland. Archival Science, 6(3-4), 299-312. google scholar
  24. Jimerson, R. (2007). Archives for the people, archives for justice. SocietY of American Archivists. google scholar
  25. KeteLaar, E. (2001). Tacit narratives: The meanings of archives. Archival Science, 1(2), 131-141. google scholar
  26. KeteLaar, E. (2007). Muniments and monuments: The dawn of archives as cuLturaL patrimonY. Archival Science, 7(4), 343-357. google scholar
  27. Kriese, S. (2023). Paul FridoLin Kehrs PLanungen für die Forschungsarbeit im Archiv: Zum BerufsbiLd der PreuBischen Staatsarchivare in der Weimarer RepubLik. In T. TöLLe, S. Schmidt, J. von Seggern & M. Friedrich (Hrsg.), Archivare zwischen Kaiserreich und Weimarer Republik: Institutionen, Schriftgut, GeschichtskuLtur (pp. 267-302). Hamburg UniversitY Press. google scholar
  28. LingeLbach, G. (2011). The institutionaLization and professionaLization of history in Europe and the United States. In: S. MacintYre, J. Maiguashca, and A. Pok (Eds.), The Oxford History of Historical Writing (1945 to Present) (pp. 78-96), Volüme 4, Oxford UniversitY Press. google scholar
  29. MaLbin, S. L. (1997). The reference interview in archivaL Literature. College & Research Libraries, 58(1), 69-80. google scholar
  30. McCausLand, S. (2010). The archives reading room: Past, present and future. Paper presented at the fifth International Conference on History of Records and Archives (I-CHORA). London, 1 July, 2010. google scholar
  31. Menk, G. (2014). ALbert Brackmann und Marburg - Personelle und politische Hintergründe seiner zweiten Marburger Jahre (19201922). İn V. Hirsch, K. Uhde, I. Ch. Becker & D. Haffer (Eds.), Archiv - Recht - Geschichte: Festschrift für Rainer Polley (pp. 113-157. VeröffentLichungen der ArchivschuLe Marburg.google scholar
  32. Millar, L.A. (2017). Archives: Principles and practices. Facet PubLishing. google scholar
  33. Müller, S., Feith, J. A., ve Fruin, R. (1940). Manual for the arrangement and description of archives (A.H. Leavitt, Trans. from the Dutch). H. W. WiLson CompanY. (OriginaL work pubLished 1898). google scholar
  34. Müller, P. (2009). Doing historicaL research in the earlynineteenth century. LeopoLd Ranke, the archive policy, and the reLazioni of the Venetian RepubLic. Storia della storiografia, 56, 81-103. google scholar
  35. Müller, P. (2013). Archives and history: Towards a history of ‘the use of state archives’ in the 19th centurY. History of the Human Sciences, 26(4), 27-49.google scholar
  36. Müller, P. (2014). Die neue Geschichte aus dem aLten Archiv. Geschichtsforschung und ArkanpoLitik in MitteLeuropa, ca. 1800-ca. 1850. Historische Zeitschrift, 299(1), 36-69. google scholar
  37. Müller, P. (2019). Histoire, archives et politique en Mitteleuropa (1800-1850). Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales, 74(3/4), 625-656). google scholar
  38. Neck, R. (1970-1971). The Haus-, Hof-und Staatsarchiv: Its History, HoLdings, and Use. Austrian History Yearbook, 6-7, 3-16. google scholar
  39. Nesmith, T. (2005). Reopening archives: Bringing new contextuaLities into archivaL theorY and practice. Archivaria, 60, 259-274. google scholar
  40. Nora, P. (1996). Realms of memory: Rethinking the French past (A. GoLdhammer, Trans.; L.D. Kritzman, Ed.). VoL. 1, CoLumbia University Press. google scholar
  41. Ottner, C. (2014). HistoricaL research and cultural history in nineteenth-century Austria: The archivist Joseph Chmel (1798-1858). Austrian History Yearbook, 45, 115-133. google scholar
  42. PâBler, U. (2017). Lapsed into history: JDE PreuB, the Prussian Academy of Sciences, and the struggle for access to state archives in midnineteenth-century Berlin. History of Humanities, 2(1), 153-171. google scholar
  43. Procter, M. (2006). ConsoLidation and separation: British archives and American historians at the turn of the twentieth centurY. Archival Science, 6(3-4), 361-379. google scholar
  44. Ranke, L. von. (2010). The theory and practice of history (G. Iggers ve K. von MoLtke, Eds.). RoutLedge.google scholar
  45. SaffadY, W. (1974). Reference service to researchers in archives. RQ, 14/2, 139-144. google scholar
  46. Saxer, D. (2014). Die Scharfung des Quellenblichs: ForschungspraKtiKen in der Geschichtswissenschaft 1840-1914. WaLter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG. google scholar
  47. Schwartz, J. M., ve Cook, T. (2002). Archives, records, and power: The making of modern memory. Archival Science, 2(1-2), 1-19. google scholar
  48. SoLL, J. (2007). How to manage an information state: Jean-Baptiste Colbert’s archives and the education of his son. Archival Science, 7(4), 331-342. google scholar
  49. Steedman, C. (2011). After the archive. Comparative Critical Studies, 8(2-3), 321-340. google scholar
  50. StegLich, S. (2021). The archive as chronotopos in the nineteenth centurY: Ttoward a history of archival times. History and Theory, 60(2), 234-248. google scholar
  51. The Austrian State Archives. (2025, December 12). Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv - history. https://www.statearchives.gv.at/tasks-and-organisation/haus-hof-und-staatsarchiv-information-in-brief/haus-hof-und-staatsarchiv-history.htmlgoogle scholar
  52. Webster, C. K. (1929). Some early appLications from American historians to use the British archives. The Journal of Modern History, 1(3), 416-419. google scholar
  53. Verschaffel, T. (2010). Archives: Their organization and use. I. Porciani & L. Raphael (Eds.), Atlas of European historiography. The making of a profession 1800-2005 (ss. 6-7). PaLgrave. google scholar
  54. YakeL, E. (2000). Thinking inside and outside the boxes: Archival reference services at the turn of the century”. Archivaria, 49, 140-160. google scholar