After several years of vacillating, last week I finally joined the Australian Society of Archivists as an Associate member. The decision not to apply for Professional Membership immediately was partly financial and partly because I see Associate Membership as a first step into the organisation.

While investigating my options, I noted the following. Professional Membership is ‘generally available to university graduates’ (or those with appropriate experience) who are or have been ‘an archivist employed in a recognised archives institution’, which is defined thus:

“archival institution” means the national archives, state archives offices or archives (however designated), university archives and any other institution or organisation or any discrete section of an institution or organisation devoted as its sole or a major part of its function to the care and custody of archives (which is deemed to include the appraisal and selection of records for permanent retention) according to accepted standards of archival practice and administration. [https://www.archivists.org.au/page/Membership/Member_Categories/Professional/]

What of other archival organisations? Here is how the Society of American Archivists (SAA) defines an archivist:

n. ~ 1. An individual responsible for appraising, acquiring, arranging, describing, preserving, and providing access to records of enduring value, according to the principles of provenance, original order, and collective control to protect the materials’ authenticity and context. – 2. An individual with responsibility for management and oversight of an archival repository or of records of enduring value. [http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/a/archivist]

The SAA notes that some archivists in large repositories might not have all the responsibilities listed, and that one can be a teaching archivist who ‘may not be currently responsible for collections but is familiar with the theory and practice of archival functions’. But there is no apparent acknowledgement that archivists might work for organisations that are (for example) responsible for describing records without being a repository for those records.

The Wikipedia entry for ‘Archivist’ is similarly focused on the custodial; and Googling ‘define:archivist‘ brings up a single definition: ‘a person who maintains and is in charge of archives’.

The Archives and Records Association UK & Ireland is a little less obviously custodial in its perspective, with Full Membership being for ‘individuals who are occupied or qualified in the administration or conservation of archives, or in records management, or in related activities’ [http://www.archives.org.uk/membership/membership-frequently-asked-questions.html#what-category], though that ‘related activities’ is a little like ‘other duties as required’ on a position description. It is open to other possibilities, but does not embrace them or explore what they might be.

As for the International Council on Archives (ICA), they are, in keeping with their name, more concerned with ‘archive’ and ‘archives’ as terms than ‘archivist’. They include this reminder:

It should be remembered that around the globe there are many volunteers and other enthusiastic individuals who care for archives but would not realise that they are in essence archivists.

I have encountered many such people in my work – people responsible for collections of records who do not consider themselves archivists – and am encouraged to see this acknowledged by the ICA. What is less encouraging is that people who do consider themselves archivists remain marginalised by the dominance of custodial definitions in use by the profession.

By some of the definitions above I do not qualify as a ‘professional archivist’. The eScholarship Research Centre (ESRC) – where I have worked for nearly six years – started as the Australian Science Archives Project in 1985. Since 2008 I have worked on archival collections held by many repositories, and have produced numerous finding aids. I have worked with and developed archival software, engaged with and used archival standards, trained people looking after archives, written for archival journals and been a consultant for governments. My current job title is Senior Research Archivist, and I am Lead Archivist on the national Find & Connect web resource project.

But, given the ‘care and custody of archives’ is not a ‘sole or a major part of its function’, by my reading the ESRC does not qualify as an ‘archival institution’ under the ASA’s definition. As I don’t work in a repository or as a ‘teaching archivist’ I am sidelined by the SAA. Wikipedia, though it can be edited, doesn’t currently speak to my role. And, though the ICA is right to include people who don’t consider themselves archivists, their statement could also be flipped to create a second perspective:

It should also be remembered that around the globe there are many experienced, trained and professional archivists who do not work for institutions dedicated to the care and preservation of archival records, but who are also archivists.

So in answer to the question ‘am I an archivist?’ I say: absolutely. What is more, it is time our profession reconsider some of its definitions to better include post-custodial and non-custodial practice under the term ‘archivist’. While repositories and collecting institutions remain the dominant form of employment there are many other possibilities, including people working with archival theory, standards and tools as archival consultants, or on cross-institutional finding aids, online virtual collections, aggregation services and more. We curate ‘fourth dimension’ archival resources (like the Find & Connect web resource mentioned above); and we work with records creators on post-custodial models of preservation and access.

There are other benefits to expanding these definitions. All are currently – to my mind – inward looking, focused primarily on custody and care, under the shadow of the mass of records which need to be appraised, described and administered. In SAA’s view, the prime directive is protecting ‘the materials’ authenticity and context’. There is no doubt these issues are ever-present for those working in repositories. But the way we define our profession, the way we define what it is to be an archivist, needs to have at least one eye (if not both) looking outward to our relevance in broader society.

We preserve and describe records to make them accessible, discoverable and understandable to communities. We seek to make societal knowledge available in sustainable ways using physical and digital tools and technologies. We assist the general public (including, but certainly not limited to, researchers) in exploring the past through physical and digital documentary evidence. We support people in uncovering and interpreting the archival traces of their personal narratives and histories. To do all this requires appraisal, custody, preservation and description, certainly. But these are the beginning, not the end point.

I don’t work in a repository, but that is what I do. That’s why I am an archivist.