Visiting Archives: The Arthur and Elizabeth Schlesinger Library on the History of Women in America at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study

I just had the opportunity to undertake an exploratory trip to the Arthur and Elizabeth Schlesinger Library at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study (Harvard campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts), and thought it would be worthwhile to report on it here!



Named for the prominent American Presidential Historian and his wife, the library and archive houses a remarkable collection of personal and organisational papers, searchable under either the general Harvard library catalog, or the more specific archival collections finding aid catalog (which permits in-text searching of key names and terms) [be sure to limit searches on both databases to the Schlesinger library so as not to return Harvard-wide results].


Portrait of Arthur Schlesinger hanging in the hall of the Schlesinger library.

The Schlesinger library is located at the intersection of Brattle and James streets; the main entrance is on the Radcliffe Yard side. Their holdings are consultable Monday through Friday, 9:30am to 5pm, in spacious and bright Carol. K. Pforzheimer Reading Room. Upon arrivial you have to present photo identification and register some personal and affiliation information at the welcome desk.



Researchers are permitted to photograph manuscript collections for note taking, although there are restrictions as to the quantity of photographs permitted from any one collection. Flatbed scanners are not permitted. Also available on-site are microfilm readers which scan directly to PDF - a godsend for researchers who wish to have the originals on hand for later verification.

The library staff was extremely kind and helpful, both in person and via email prior to the visit, which went towards ensuring I was able to make the most of this preliminary visit. The depth of the material available was much greater than anticipated - I would strongly recommend that anyone with topics pertaining to American history or perspectives, or American women, even as a tangential part of their research, consider examining this library's collection, as it is more than likely some collections will have valuable sources for your research.

On a practical note, several good lunch options exist in the vicinity of the Schlesinger library. Directly across Radcliffe Yard, in the basement of the Longfellow building, is a small Harvard cafeteria with a daily entree, a salad bar, several soup options, and a sandwich construction area, not to mention bagels and muffins; for about $7 you can get a complete lunch. Down Brattle Street, towards Harvard Square, there is Market in the Square, a semi-gourmet 24-hour deli with seating on premises. And just a few feet beyond that are the numerous options of Harvard Square.

Visiting Archives: The Jimmy Carter Library and Museum in Atlanta, Georgia

A recent project took me to the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library in Atlanta, Georgia, and I thought this might be a good time to launch a second series on the IHP blog: archive visit notes. Hopefully the information in the posts will help researchers to get better acclimated with various archives before they go, or even help them to discover new archives!



I contacted the Jimmy Carter Library in advance of my visit by the form available on their website. The research room director responded with some information about their holdings which became clearer on-site, as well as with a list of local housing options.

From Geneva I checked the National Archives and Records Administration Archival Research Catalog (ARC), limiting all results (possible under “Search Options”) to the Jimmy Carter Library, for relevant records – the order in which they were returned did not make much sense to me at the time. Upon arriving the research room director ran a search for me, one which was classified by series and thus gave a better idea of the hierarchy of files – to those heading to a NARA archive I would recommend sorting your catalog search results by “Hierarchy” – knowing the record group certainly helps in a first sorting of which sources might be useful and which will likely not be so useful.

A source which is not noted on the Jimmy Carter Library website, but which was extremely valuable, was their CREST database (housed on an in-room computer, not accessible remotely). The CREST database mostly houses once-sensitive documents which have been reviewed and either declassified or sanitized (redacted). The advantage – and disadvantage – of all things digitized is that it is key-word searchable. This works well if you are looking for person names or agency names. However, if you have a less concrete subject, you will likely want to run the search several times, with varying key words, in order to best cover all your bases. As in real life, official titles or names were not always used in cabled correspondence, meaning a thorough search of the CREST database takes some good detective work. The CREST database documents each have unique identifying numbers which can be deconstructed, leading you back to potential files of interest – it can serve as another search tool.

Once on site, you also have the possibility to consult extensive finding aids for their series mentioned online, such as the White House Central Files, or the files of the First Lady’s Office. While the row of binders certainly looks daunting, they are actually a bit wanting in information – often the descriptions are vague, the type with official department titles but little indication of the content – that it serves the researcher best to order any box which might look interesting for their research.

In order to access the archive, I had to fill out a contact form and provide identification (a passport suffices). This in turn permitted me to receive a researcher card, valid at the Carter library for one year.

Prior to entering the archive, researchers are given keys to lockers just outside the reading room for all bags, coats, and nonessentials. Upon entering, researchers have to sign in and present any paper they wish to bring in (or when exiting, what they wish to bring out) to the research room supervisor in order to ensure documents are not being added or pilfered. There are no set pull times for files – one fills out a short request form, and usually in less than five minutes they are available for consultation.

The reading room itself is well stocked with reference works for the period of the Carter presidency, as well as the latest volumes concentrating on the Carter presidency. In addition to the document finding aids, there are extensive finding aids for audio and visual material (generally these results are available on the ARC catalog as well).

Researchers are permitted to photograph all documents (without flash, of course), as well as make copies (or print copies if they are in the CREST database). Copies, however, are fee-bearing.

In terms of accessing documents, as the Carter presidency was less than 30 years ago, there are still lots of documents which are classified. Even some that have passed the 30 year limit are still classified, due to too few staff to review such material. Therefore, I would recommend if the Carter archives were to be consulted for a major work (like a dissertation) in the next few years, that a minimum of two visits be planned - a first one to survey and examine what is already available, and a second one at least three or four months later, in case any access reviews or FOIAs need to be ordered.

The Jimmy Carter Presidential Library is part of the Carter Center complex, which in turn was formerly the Augustus Hurt Plantation.



In addition to the offices of the Carter Center and the archives, the property houses an actual library, a public museum, and a gift shop. There is a cafeteria (adorned with photos of Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter feasting all around the world) where researchers are entitled to a complete lunch for $4 (open 11am to 3pm). Between the archives and the museum/gift shop/cafeteria entrance is a small rose garden which is nice on a clear day.





Overall, the Carter archive was very welcoming to researchers, from the receptionist to the multitude of research room staff. A plus for those planning to spend multiple days there is that their chairs are superbly ergonomic! I look forward to returning sometime in the near future.

Digitized archives

A recent article in the New York Times talks about some recent grants by the Levy Foundation to private organisations or institutions to digitize their archives. It emphasizes the positive, that such digitization is unearthing works which were previously uncataloged.

If you are a researcher that had worked with both paper and digital archives, what are your thoughts? Is it possible to conduct comprehensive research from digital archives alone, or must one imperatively see the paper in person?

Preservation of Sources

This past weekend's New York Times had an interesting editorial on the challenges historians of the Bush (43) administration are likely to face: missing sources.

True to its mania for secrecy, the Bush administration is leaving behind vast gaps in the most sensitive White House e-mail records, and with lawyers and public interest groups in hot pursuit of information that deserves to be part of the permanent historical record.

As noted, this is not a phenomenon unique to the Bush administraiton - every administration has secrets they would like to keep - but the fact that this administration's dealings, unlike its predecessors, was largely conducted by email - creating correspondence 50 times more voluminous than that of the Clinton administration - means that the gaps might not be evident until the missing information is permanently lost.

The editorial goes on to note the public should thank the historians and archivists suing the Bush administration for access to documents which might track the misdeeds of the administration, and calls upon President-elect Obama to open up records previously shielded by "political interference."

For me, the article raised the question: what role for historians? Do we merely interpret the record, or can we have a role in preserving it as well?

Read the article in its entirety here.

Citing Archival Sources: best practices?

One thing i’ve always had a love-hate relationship with is the proper way to cite archival sources in footnotes and in the Works Cited list. As most of my personal research is conducted from archives, this is something very near and dear to my heart and something which would be great to have clarified.

The school library’s references sheets are silent on the subject. And one open-source ‘Endnote’-type program I used for a while, Zotero (for use with Firefox only), is insufficient. Here is what the entry box looks like:

Some of the criteria are great – number of pages is generally a good reference to have if all the documents are blending into one, an idea of the thickness of the source is easier for later retrieval. But having only one entry for author, and none for, say in the case of correspondence, the name of the recipient, is not entirely helpful. More important, there are not enough spots to mention both the specifics of one document – for example, a letter – AND the identifying information of the folder in which it is kept.

The Turabian (Chicago Style) Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, 7th edition is not entirely helpful. Section 17.6, on the usage of “Unpublished Sources” in the Notes-Bibliography Style, highlights Manuscript Collections (17.6.4):

“If possible, identify the author and date of each item, the title or type of document, the name of the collection, and the name of the depository. In a note, begin with the author’s name; if a document has a title but no author, or the title is more important than the author, list the title first.”

One such example?

“5. George Creel to Colonel House, September 25, 1918, Edward M. House Papers, Yale University Library, New Haven, CT.”

A bit more satisfactory, but still not perfect. For instance, in my undergraduate thesis on the ILO, a specific change of venue was crucial to the story I was trying to tell. Therefore, in citing the letter, I included the place where the letter was sent from, and to:

[1] Letter of M. Viple in Geneva to E.J. Phelan in Montréal, 9 July 1942, Z 1/1/1/11 (J.1).
[it was specified in my Works Cited as to where the archival collection was located]

The date information, though not listed in the Chicago manuals, did make it much easier for the reader to follow the vicissitudes of my narrative. In my current research for my mémoire, certain letters have numbered pages; i’m contemplating even citing the page of the handwritten document – is this excessive, or just helpful?

How do you cite your archival sources? Like me, were there any bits of information that you find/found pertinent to include, but which aren’t necessarily listed in the Chicago guide?