The Record Group Concept: A Critique

Abstract

Archivist of the United States, R. D. W. Connor, issued on March i, 1940, a memorandum setting up a special committee for the study of the adequacy of finding aids in existence at the National Archives.1 The Archivist cited the types of finding aids he wished to have examined; these included historical summaries, reports, and recommendations on transfer, to mention but a few. The memorandum did not expressly refer to a need for studying the organization of the holdings of the National Archives. Yet the committee, designated as the Finding Mediums Committee, did not limit itself to an examination of finding aids; and its findings resulted in changes more drastic than the Archivist might have anticipated. For one thing, the final report of the committee prompted a major reorganization of the National Archives, the most important feature of which was the abolition of the Divisions of Classification and Cataloging. But perhaps the more significant and original contribution of the committee, not merely to the National Archives but to archival science in general, was the concept of record groups. Indeed, the committee could not have avoided considering the issue of the organization of the holdings. In the words of Solon J. Buck, a member of the committee, we have to know what an archival group is before making a preliminary checklist.2 It is difficult today to imagine how the National Archives could have operated accessioned, cataloged, classified, inventoried, performed reference…