Hi All, Finally a research method I know something about -- archival work. While I believe the issues with digital archiving are very serious and very difficult, we would be wise to remember the following about extant paper archives: 1. They contain only a small fragment of the paper documents that once existed. They are in no way comprehensive and reflect only a small slice of the history that occurred. 2. They are often taken as evidence of events, or pointing to external events -- but in fact they are events in themselves. (In other words, you've got to interpret the document as much as the event or fact it purports to describe). 3. Archives are always dependent on archivists, who rarely have the same politics or research interests as scholars. This is not because archivists are in another universe but rather because the person who got the collection back in 1920 and did the massive amount of work required to organize it lived in the 1920s, and we confront his or her work in the present. For my own research, the categories are almost always completely wrong. 4. It would seem to me that these issue will be relevant for thinking about digital archives as well. Best, --J