Remnants of Jenkinson: observations on settler archival theory in Canadian archival appraisal discourse

ABSTRACT

This paper aims to critically reflect on Jenkinson’s archival appraisal methods and concepts and whether they may still influence practice within the Canadian archival context and, if so, is that influence reconcilable within the evolving archival landscape? The Manual provided a concrete set of guidelines created in a particular time period, within a specific societal context, under specific circumstances that no longer reflect postcolonial realities and decolonization efforts. The 2015 Truth and Reconciliation Calls to Action and the subsequent response work by the Steering Committee on Canada’s Archives indicate that the profession is necessarily evolving with the aim of an inclusive, community-based approach to archival appraisal and practice. A contributing element to these changes to praxis must be a confrontation of all colonial and settler archival theory, such as Jenkinson’s writing, that is often presented as foundational within archival education, and as a mainstay in our professional mythology.

KEYWORDS:

• Appraisal
• reconciliation
• Hilary Jenkinson

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. See Millar, “Discharging our Debt,” 103–46.

2. See Cox, “The end of collecting”; Eastwood, “Reflections”; and Cook, “The Archive(s).”

3. UN General Assembly, United Nations Declaration; and Orentlicher, Rights, Impunity: Report of the Independent Expert.

4. Cook, “Evidence,” 99.

5. The authors directed their discussion in this paper as part of their own self-reflexive work towards identifying and unlearning colonial issues that exist in various forms of their understanding of traditional archival theory. To initiate this, they rooted their discussion in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action and the goals of the Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Taskforce of the Steering Committee on Canada’s Archives, and A Reconciliation Framework for Canadian Archives, all of which support the actions and discourse that many Canadian archival repositories and archivists are undertaking as part of truth acknowledging and reconciliation. Admittedly, however, the route we took for this particular paper does not examine the power structures and issues in truth and reconciliation processes in general, due in part because these issues are beyond the space and scope of this paper.

We recognize that truth acknowledging, and actual reconciliation and repatriation is an ever-evolving process without an end, necessarily so when parts of the reconciliation processes employ the same colonial structures that continue to oppress Indigenous people today it is problematic. We are committed to listening, learning, and being ever vigilant and critical in our professional capacities and private lives.

6. The Indian Act, 1876; The White Paper, 1969; Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, “What We Have Learned.” In response to the Northwest Resistance (1885), the government implemented the pass system as an attempt to control the movement and gathering of Indigenous people. Although not a law, the pass system was originally documented in the 1885 “Memorandum on the Future Management of Indians,” written by Hayter Reed, assistant commissioner of Indian Affairs. The system required Indigenous persons to obtain a pass to gain permission to leave their reserve. The pass also stated where they could travel to and with whom. A copy of the text of this memorandum is available through the University of Saskatchewan Indigenous Studies Research Portal: http://iportal.usask.ca/index.php?sid=168308311&id=33613&t=details.

7. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, “What We Have Learned,” 5.

8. Ibid.

9. At time of publication, the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation has listed in the National Student Memorial, 4,130 deaths of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis children as a result of residential schools. The number of deaths of children in residential schools however is known to be significantly higher. Former TRC Commissioner Murray Sinclair stated in June 2021 that he estimated the number of deaths to be 6,000 children, if not more. Due to the deliberate lack of record keeping by school authorities as well as existing records still being withheld from Indigenous communities by church bodies, the exact number is not yet known. More information can be found at: National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation, National Student Memorial.

10. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, “What We Have Learned,”6.

11. Ibid, 8.

12. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, “Truth and Reconciliation,” 8.

13. Ibid.

14. Steering Committee on Canada’s Archives, “A Reconciliation Framework,” 2.

15. Ibid.

16. Sections of “A Reconciliation Framework for Canadian Archives (Draft for Public Review)” that refer specifically to appraisal are: Objective 2. Governance and Management Structures, Strategy 2: Develop culturally appropriate policies and procedures for Indigenous-related archival materials; Objective 4. Ownership, Control and Possession, Strategy 5: Create opportunities for collaborative custodianship of archival materials where appropriate; and Objective 5. Access, Strategy 2: Collaboratively develop culturally appropriate access and tools.

17. Steering Committee on Canada’s Archives, “A Reconciliation Framework,” 10–12.

18. Ibid., 19–20.

19. Ibid., 14.

20. Jenkinson, “A Manual,” 123–24.

21. See, Cook, “What is past,” 17–37.

22. Ibid., 130.

23. Cumming and Picot, “Reinventing appraisal,” 136.

24. Ibid., 142.

25. Millar, “Discharging our debt,” 108.

26. Ibid., 111.

27. Ibid., 110.

28. Jenkinson, “A Manual,” 21.

29. Hackney, “The initial shock,” 4.

30. See Johnson, and Jenkinson, English court hand; and Jenkinson, Palaeography.

31. See Jenkinson’s comparison of archival work to palaeontology: Jenkinson, “A Manual,” 124; Jenkinson’s objections to selection of archival material because there are “reasons to holding those difficulties to be insuperable”: Ibid., 128; and Jenkinson’s veneration of past archives as “unimpeachable” and a guide for modern archives: Ibid., 130.

32. Gilliland, “Neutrality,” 194.

33. Cifor, “Affecting relations,” 9.

34. Ibid.

35. Ibid.

36. McCracken. “Challenging,” 186; and Milton and Reynaud, “Archives, Museums,” 524–45.

37. McCracken, “Challenging,” 195.

38. In referring to “Indigenous knowledge” the authors recognize that Indigenous memory, record keeping, and knowledge structures are diverse and complex systems originating from many different nations and are not homogeneous.

39. Hunt, “Nikîkîwân,” 38.

40. See note 34, 13.

41. Ibid., 14–18. Cifor discusses how the concept of participatory appraisal has achieved some success in organizations including the Lesbian Herstory Archives (LHA).

42. See note 38, 184.

43. Ibid., 185.

44. Ibid., 194.

45. Pollard, “The Appraisal,” 139.

46. Fisher, “In Search,” 3.

47. Pollard, “The Appraisal,” 149.

48. See note 33, 197.

49. Cook, “The archive(s),” 623.

50. See note 4, 178.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Shannon Hodge

Shannon Hodge is a settler living and working on the traditional, unceded, and unsurrendered lands of the Algonquin nation. She spent the majority of her archival career working in community and immigrant archives, supporting community members in the participatory appraisal, arrangement and description, and use of their own materials. Her interests lay primarily in the use of archival material in historical teaching as a tool in defining community identities and memory as well as the ways these materials can be better used in cross-cultural understanding and acts of reconciliation. She is currently the Corporate Archivist at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, as well as an Adjunct Professor in the Department of History.

Sarah Nantel

Sarah Nantel is currently working and living in Tiohtiá:ke/Montreal, situated on the traditional territory of the Kanien’kehà:ka, a place which has long served as a site of meeting and exchange amongst many First Nations including the Kanien’kehá:ka of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, Huron/Wendat, Abenaki, and Anishinaabeg. She is the founder and owner of Expert Archive Consulting, a consulting firm comprised of a team of dedicated and specialized information professionals. She has eleven years of cumulative experience working in the heritage sector in the areas of archives and records management, writing, curation and communications. This experience is in both the public and private sectors. Her interests lie in participatory archiving and community archives. She is currently working in Indigenous Corporate Archives.

Chris Trainor

Chris Trainor is a settler who is privileged to live, work and play on the traditional, unceded, and unsurrendered lands of the Algonquin nation. He has worked in a variety of roles centring on archives and records management. He has worked in post-secondary archival institutions, law archives, indigenous research, and corporate records. From these seemingly different roles, he has gained a broader perspective on what constitutes a record for different communities, and the importance of individuals’ subjective points of view when it comes to processing records. His current research interests are on how to broaden the archival field by integrating a more interdisciplinary approach to how we carry out archival processes, such as appraisal. In particular, the incorporation of the participatory approach, and sociological reflexivity into how we make decisions.